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?

We seem to have introduced a new daily mile at primary. Dd asked to wear trainers (no uniform) every day rather than sandals so I’m guessing it’s new

Do others have this?

"A government big enough to give you everything that you want is a government big enough to take away everything you have."

People want government support when it suits them and not when it doesn't.

I agree, the last primary school that my GD attended had multiple choice homework on her notebook. She didn't think about the answer, just pressed and had another go if she got it wrong. This sort of pointless homework doesn't achieve anything at all and the teacher has no idea of what she actually knows.
Our new primary gives well thought-out sheets for homework and we know that they are checked and marked. If she forgets to take it in we are reminded. The staff are continually assessing the childrens' work and know when they are not understanding or are falling behind.

Many people do care for their relatives - unpaid carers save the country billions of pounds.

But, many people now have children later and are expected to work longer, how does that work with having elderly relatives move in if they have significant care needs? What if the elderly relative refuses to move away from friends - many people have moved away from their home town - have to 'get on your bike' and go to where the jobs are, right?

Quite the contrary, child benefit used to be universal, when I was little there were school dentists, opticians, not nurses etc. free school milk. I think we’ve left with Sweet FA for our taxes compared with my childhood. Plus those things were all preventative health care which saves a fortune in the long run.

For the billionth time, read the full thread for details of "toothbrush gate". It's not coming from lazy parents it was part of a suggested wider initiative by Keir Starmer to partly address the lack of affordable dental treatment across the board.

Where I was brought up there was plenty of social housing (in the 50's, in a deprived area). However this wasn't just family houses but also smaller low rise or single storey accomodation for the elderly. This meant that elderly people who didn't need a full house could move from their home as soon as one of these units became available and they were happy to do so. Obviously this was immediately post-war and people did not regard a large social housing property as a home for life, but what they actually needed at that time.

There simply isn't enough social housing now to enable people to live in a property that is too large for them. I speak as one whose DIL's mother is still occupying a valuable Victorian 3-bed house (worth well over £1m) that the council would like to sell so that they could build or convert more accommodation for families.

I've seen people post on Mumsnet that they could afford to buy a house but prefer to stay in social housing - is this the right thing to do, in view of the chronic shortage of housing for people in real need?

Well yes, you're absolutely right, but where is the profit for private investors in that?

I've seen people post on Mumsnet that they could afford to buy a house but prefer to stay in social housing - is this the right thing to do, in view of the chronic shortage of housing for people in real need?

Do you remember the case of the notorious RMT chief, Bob Crowe, who refused to move out of his London council flat even though he was on well over £100K (about 10 years back so you can add on inflation!).

The huge problem with social housing is: who is it for? If it's for people who cannot afford to rent or buy privately then that has one set of implications (and I would say moving on when your income increases is one of them).

If not, and you are allowed to continue in your council accommodation for years as you become increasingly affluent, like Bob Crowe, then of course we'll never have enough housing stock for those who need it.

I think that's the fundamental problem - we need to decide what it's for. My personal view is it's for those with no other options, and only temporarily.* Otherwise the whole ruddy country would need to be built over!!

*Yes, I know...how do you get the Bob Crowes of this world to move on? What would be the incentive, for some selfish people, to just stay on in their social housing indefinitely.

If not, and you are allowed to continue in your council accommodation for years as you become increasingly affluent, like Bob Crowe, then of course we'll never have enough housing stock for those who need it.

We would if we stopped selling it off at knockdown prices. At least Bob Crowe didn’t buy his council property which would have taken it out of social housing use permanently.

Haven’t RTFT but I agree. It’s like people are begging the state to have control over nearly every aspect of their lives. Bit North Korea-ish

I think that the reality is that due to big business and lesser bargaining power individuals do need a protective state. The reality is that many people are forced onto minimal hour contracts and are picked up and left off by large corporations. Quite frankly capitalism has never been has powerful as it is now and the need of people for state support is due to that. Business should be paying a proper wage and also remitting taxes to the counties in which that money is raised.

Services are crucial to support people because the alternative is more crime and overflowing prisons that already cost fortunes. I would rather put that money into education. If things carry on we will have riots in 20 years time and general lawlessness.

With the advent of A1 some people’s existence will be redundant and they will be on the rubbish heap.

So I think that all those on larger salaries can pay more tax as an uplift of 1% won’t hurt. But we need to create closer relationships with all other countries to stop the exploitation of different tax regimes by big corporate who seem to be running governments these days.

Right so single and childfeee people (despite paying tax the same as everyone else, and using less public services, for example schools) don't get homes?

According to many people on this thread there's lots of irresponsible parents having children they can't afford or can't parent.

Yet you seem to be advocating for the system that encourages having children regardless of ability to care for them, and that punishes childless and childfree people!

If you want everyone to downsize as soon as their kids leave home, then there needs to be an urgent & massive build of 1 and 2 bedroom social homes. Because right now there's a massive shortage.

The other issue is that, due to the unaffordability of housing but also life circumstances that happen (marriage breakdown, DV, older person needing family carer) often adult DC need to move back home.

Also PP have pointed out that many older people have mobility issues, so if it's a flat they need ground floor and space for medical equipment.

You do not need a ground floor flat if you are elderly. You do need a working lift and a safe environment.
Moving people into a flat as soon as their children leave home would require a building programme.

Ive just had my HA turn up with no notice FOUR MONTHS after the electric check to fit an isolator Now thats done the fuse box will be changed so they want to turn the electric off on another date for four hours. My flat is bloody hot already, Im not having the fridge freezer off for hours in the heat. The flat is too hot where THEY have over insulated it. They have had FOUR MONTHS where the weather was cooler to do this. Typical fucking housing association.

@Againname I even had a thread on it. This is where i was told i shouldnt be in social housing because i dont have living proof that ive had sex without contraception.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/childfree-mumsnetters/4825473-child-free-people-being-told-they-deserve-less-yet-being-expected-to-do-more

"A government big enough to give you everything that you want is a government big enough to take away everything you have

They already did that in 2020 and 2021. And that was communism not socialism

A 5 year old with rotting teeth doesn’t have rotting teeth because he hasn’t seen a dentist. It’s because his parents haven’t brushed them 2 x a day and let them
eat/drink crap.

I've seen people post on Mumsnet that they could afford to buy a house but prefer to stay in social housing - is this the right thing to do, in view of the chronic shortage of housing for people in real need?

I can't know for sure but I suspect many are simply 'saving face'. Can't really afford to buy but because there's a stupid stigma around social housing some people might feel embarrassed to say they can't afford to buy.

The other thing is because Shit Happens sometimes, they'll be aware that if they give up their social home but later on lose their job or get ill or relationship breaks down, or some other unplanned event that leaves them needing to be 'dependant on the state', they could end up homeless. Especially with the attitudes of many on here who think only families with children should have social housing, so if the Shit Happens once their kids are adults they'd be fucked.

Impact of moving away from your settled community shouldn't be ignored either. PP complain about growing state dependancy but why do they think so many people are off sick depressed and anxious? Or needing state care?

Loads of people are made to move for work or housing away from family, friends, and neighbours (who often provide support, practical and emotional). So then more people are suffering from depression and anxiety, and older and disabled people have nobody to care for them (except the state). Being isolated is a big reason for that.

Why do people think there's so many social problems and disadvantage (that increases state dependancy)? If social housing is made into a 'poverty ghetto' it's bad for communities and leaves more people state dependant because everyone else moves away so there's no opportunities.

Better off social renters won't be on benefits so will be paying the full rent. It's not as if they're living there for free.

Bob Crowe strongly believed that social housing should be mixed, not 'poverty ghettos', and he understood the value of stable community. As a PP says he also didn't do Right to Buy. RTB is a major reason why there's now a shortage.

Anyway I don't think it's that many people who wouldn't buy if they genuinely can afford to. A few, maybe, but many people want to own. They'll have mortgage paid off when older so unlike renters won't have monthly cost of housing payment (rent) when retired. Also they'll have equity to free up cash if needed.

I actually know a family who're in the process of buying (not RTB). Currently in social housing but finally able to afford to buy.

Not the sodding point as you damn well know.

I see some people are still blaming tenants rather than the developers despite the example i posted about the Elephant and Castle and Heygate. Very telling

And FYI antibiotic use in pregnancy can impact tooth development in utero which can show up in milk teeth. Found this out when my son had poor dental health at primary age despite fastidious care on our part. When the dentist asked my history and I explained I'd had extensive antibiotic treatment for UTIs throughout my pregnancy, due to pre-eclampsia that reached crisis point and resulted in emergency induction at 35 weeks, she said that was the likely explanation.

So take your high horse elsewhere.

THIS! And believe me if i could afford to buy i would. To get away from some of their bloody contractors

Why not? It is related to poor parenting

@Againname And the Government have spent the last year moaning about the lower birth rate after years telling people they shouldnt have kids if they cant afford them.