To think the level of state involvement many posters expect is bonkers?

[FaeryRing]

It seems like there is nothing the state shouldn’t be responsible for any more! Feeding your kids, getting them to school, hiring ‘behaviour specialists’ for every classroom because parents don’t want to discipline their own children, giving you money towards virtually anything you ask for because it’s not fair you have to pay for anything yourself.. I find it absolutely wild and don’t think it’s at all realistic or representative of what most adults believe?

As I said you chose the US not me.

I was thinking of other cultural and social differences and better health / lower obesity rates

I agree. I know politicians do not think through how this would work practically, and it does need to be thought through. But public health measures save money. They stop people turning up at A and E or at emergency dentists with abscesses and rotten teeth needing urgent treatment. They improve physical health - tooth decay is linked to poorer cardiac health.
Good public health measures save money. Having a healthy population who can study and work and parent well is much better for the individuals and the economy.

@EasternStandard I have repeatedly said I quoted two examples, one in the US.
I have also repeatedly asked for examples of where advocating people take personal responsibility has made any difference to the publics health and/or parenting.
You have repeatedly not provided any. So I assume you do not have any.

There’s a whole range of cultures out there. They’re not all exactly the same as the UK

When I look at obesity threads on here the lacking quality does seem to be responsibility for own choices. I think we lag on that compared to some countries with better health and lower obesity.

I also think we might be particularly poor when it comes to basic stuff like tooth brushing going by below posts. Sadly

And parenting in those cases is not meeting basic requirement for care and responsibility

Shouting - take personal responsibility can make is feel morally superior but changes nothing.
Take the example of toothbrushing for children. The state is not involved in this at all. It literally is parents responsibility. The only involvement the state has in tooth brushing for children is that those who look after children and parents may say to the parent that children should brush their teeth e.g. GP, dentist, HV, teachers. But state involvement in most areas is extremely minimal. And look at where that has got us? Increasing dental decay amongst young children's teeth.

The state used to be more involved. Sure Start would run initiatives to promote toothbrushing amongst young children. And NHS dentists were easy to get and parents would be strongly encouraged to take their children for regular check ups.

Minimal state intervention does not work. You do have to be careful with state intervention not to disempower people so they take less responsibility than they currently do. But that is about designing decent evidence based public health programmes.

I've had a quick skim back over some of pages I've missed here.

People seem to have contradictory expectations. They complain about costs to the state and yesterday were talking about the need for family to 'step up' and care for older relatives. Then they say people should all move away for work or housing.

How do people care for family, as some PP have said they should do, if they've had to move away for work or housing?

People are told to move away to big cities for work, but at the same time there's countless threads on MN where people unable to afford to live in those cities (often despite being in work) are told to move somewhere cheaper...

Cities have larger populations, so massive housing demand. They tend to be the most expensive places for housing (for example, London, Manchester, and Birmingham have the highest homeless rates in the UK).

People can't win!

It's ridiculous. What's needed is better work opportunities, and separately more social housing, everywhere. Also better public transport in rural areas.

(Agree with your posts @ShyPoet @L4815162342 and @qwertyqwertyqwertyqwerty )

@EasternStandard But we live in a certain culture. We can not suddenly impose on Britain say Japan's culture.
So how do you think we should change things so say obesity is less common?
That is the point I am trying to make. If you just want to rant about how fat, unhealthy and terrible parents lots of people are - go ahead.
I am not interested. I am interested in what can be done to improve people's lives, parenting and public health.

As an eyrs teacher of more than 15 years, the SEN childen come in either trained, or the parents are supportive and the children train relatively quickly (although they still need taking). The ones not trained, with lazy parents trying to keep nappies on them, are not the SEN children. And before anyone comes at me with 'you don't know, hidden SEN, etc' I do know. I've been doing this long enough to know when SEN is an issue and when it's not.
Majority are lazy parents who can't be bothered to put up with a few accidents and expect nursery/school to do it for them.

I actually think we are at the limit if what the state will provide. The govt has got us in massive debt and spend alot more than they get in despite record taxes. And part of spending is massive interest payments on the debt. I think people agreed going to have to become much more self reliant in the coming decades including things like making the state pension means tested. We are in for a rocky road!

I’m not ‘ranting’ about anything.

I posted one line on cultural differences which you leapt on to Us. Although you seem to now acknowledge Japan is culturally and socially different with different outcomes. Which is what I posted.

As for what can be done in the U.K. to lower obesity idk, who has high rates and got them down? Once high it seems hard.

I’d say it does include the will to change in whatever it is and that is hard to foster

I'm no expert on Singapore but one thing I do know is that they have much, much higher availability of the equivalent of council/social housing than we do. It may not be luxurious but it is a priority for the state.

They also have a compulsory saving scheme so that a percentage of your salary goes into a mandatory account that you can only spend on healthcare (and maybe some other welfare state things)?

They're definitely not an example of an economy/society that leaves it up to the population to sort out housing and healthcare or to decide on appropriate levels/quality of it.

I fully agree. State support/interference will have to reduce as it's just unaffordable at current levels. You can't keep increasing taxes on a small proportion of the population as eventually you reach the tipping point.

If we want to maintain and grow the state support/interference, we need to be looking at spreading the tax burden which would mean something like increasing VAT and extending the scope of VAT, and also imposing NIC (or equivalent) on ALL income sources, including pensions.

I think the state should be giving out clear potty training advice and saying clearly that young children and most SEN children can be potty trained young. And perhaps schools should be saying that unless there is a diagnosed medical reason, they will not be changing nappies.

@taxguru If this is just about taxes, then ignoring public health and parenting is not the best approach. We know investment in early years saves money. Having people in prison and in care is incredibly expensive.

And being honest, I think the arguments for cutting taxes on this thread are economically illiterate. They are the kind that appeal to people who have no understanding of the economy and how to improve it.

The full state pension is means tested to a degree. It depends on how much NI you've paid in your lifetime. I for one will never qualify. So pension credit was introduced to reflect that there are a good number like me who won't qualify but will starve and be homeless in their dotage. If you have managed to squirrel away a bit, above a certain threshold pension credit is tapered if you qualify, in line with other benefits.

The elderly are expected to sell their homes to pay for residential care, which, despite inflated house prices, can eat up the price of an average home in a very short space of time. Those who need residential care are usually at a point where family, with the best will in the world, cannot keep them safe or adequately cared for even if they sacrifice their job to do so. Been there, done that and staring down the barrel if my second rodeo on that front.

And add to that the encouragement of children to move elsewhere for work and plenty of people are in a pretty pickle.

That's before you even look at the shambles of elderly care and the joys of fluctuating capacity where the rights of the elderly Trump their safeguarding because they're allowed to make unwise decisions.... welcome to the brick wall I've been banging my head against for approaching 6 months due to my elderly parents current situation.

Not every elderly person has come out if the property boom with a house to sell, even if they did work hard / try hard. Market crashes also impacted some who tried to make provision for themselves through private pensions only to see companies go to the wall taking their money with them.

Yet another big picture that people don't want to look at in its entirety.

I disagree: I don’t see any more literacy from arguments on higher state dependency. It’s high already and I’d say at the limits of being so.

How high would that state dependency be before you thought it problematic? In terms of the ratio

Plus if you do want to tax more to fund the state expenditure then where from and what impact does that have?

I didn't suggest cutting taxes. I actually said increasing taxes, but across the board, not just "someone else".

@MistressoftheDarkSide

The full state pension is means tested to a degree. It depends on how much NI you've paid in your lifetime.

No, it's bears no relationship at all to how much NIC you've paid.

It's based on "credits" and you can earn credits in numerous ways, such as being a carer for, say, a young child, being unemployed, being a low earner or part timer earning above the lowest NI earnings threshold but not earning enough to pay NIC, etc.

All the "earnings related" state pension schemes have been closed down, such as SERPS, S2P, etc., so there is no longer any relationship between paying NICs and your state pension.

@taxguru that only applies to young people. For anyone above mid twenties(?) it does still apply to the amount of pension we receive.

No. That’s why, as I’ve said repeatedly, I think people should be financially penalised for not doing basic shit like looking after the children they chose to have.

can’t be trusted to spend child benefits on stuff for your child? Get food vouchers and items instead.

This makes me incredibly sad and angry. How fucking dare people have children and not look after them.

Warm semi sour half pint bottles with a straw. Yes some of us really hated it.

Very interesting, thank you for sharing

You want to punish people?
It will simply make things worse.