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?

Of course Reeves is keeping the two child cap, it's business as usual when she takes the reins.

The full time workers on a low wage claiming benefits are unlikely to be contributing much, if any, tax.

Many people work part time because they can claim top up benefits.

If private companies paid their workers more I agree, they would pay more tax, but successive governments, started by Labour, introduced an effective subsidy for companies to pay workers lower wages. If any government was brave enough to remove that subsidy, then those companies would have to pay more, or not have workers.

Would you distinguish between worthy and not worthy unearned income? If I worked all my life and put away savings instead of buying cars or holidays, then lived off the interest, why should I pay tax on my income, when somebody earning the same who blew it all on having fun will potentially have less to live on, but will be subsidised by the state (partly from the taxes I'd pay on my saved income)? What if I took those savings and invested them in shares, then lived off the dividends - why should I pay more tax for being careful and planning to not be a financial burden on the state? How about if I built a business, sacrificed time and effort, and then sold that business and lived on the £££ I'd sold it for? The profit would have already been taxed, so why would I pay double tax on any income I took from that pot? That's called the politics of envy, and it's not a good look.

However in the child with CP needed tube feeding or was asphyxiating etc that would qualify even if very young etc alls having things like fits etc or becoming cyanotic or having things like cellulitis or more infections generally. Also physio and ot exercises etc . The health visitor or child development team should help with this.

Shall we just get the untrained adult child of a GP to act as your doctor? If the training their parents recieved 25 years ago was so good, they'll have enjoyed the benefits of it.

I don’t think that’s “all fine”
at all. The problem isn’t her complaining, the problem is that she’s had 6 children and is living off the state. I’m all for SAHM, when their partner is funding it, not the taxpayer.

I don’t think learning and passing on basics re diet and brushing teeth is the same as medical qualifications; do you?

Well the OP you so revere doesn't want money being spent on treating the children of single mothers in hospital, so let's hope there is some similarity.

Tooth brushing, diet and basic care equals medical training?

It absolutely doesn't. But, tbf, I think the success of the sure start centres was creating an artificial community with a focus on childcare that filled the gap of decimated wider families. Obviously that's as helpful to the current generation of parents as meals on wheels is to the elderly. It needs to be there to work.

I meant 'all fine' as in, she had the kids despite not being able to financially support them so they're here now and have to be housed and provided for, primarily by the state.

So it's 'not fine' that she made those decisions but I don't think the kids should be punished for it.

But at least some acknowledgement of how nice her life is thanks to the state would be nice.

But there isn't, no self-awareness at all. Just the entitlement and complaints of public services not being up to scratch in her opinion. When she's just draining 'the system' at every turn and complaining this is the first year in many that she and can afford a holiday abroad with all the kids instead of the 3/4 UK holidays they usually have per year.

The extra income is coming from her YouTube channel where she makes a few hundred a month exploiting her DC and complaining about housing, the NHS and schools.

I agree with you about the social housing in central London being for key-workers or others who need to be there.
We started off with our family in London but moved two hours away when they left home and since retirement have moved back, to outer London to be near to our children.
Most people can move if they need to, relatives can move about at different ages to be near family, nobody really needs to stay exactly where they started.
If people genuinely need to work in central London and need social housing they should have first call on it. But if more of us move away from the centre there should be less need for key workers there over time.

The problem with making people move is that they lose informal support that sometimes means public services have to step in.
As someone earlier on the thread pointed out, parents who struggled often used to have help of extended family who met the gaps. My MIL often fed some of her in-laws kids who were fairly neglected. People who are carers can often manage at home if they have nearby family to help, but may not if that is withdrawn.
My own parents lived at home until they died, but may not have managed to if my sister had not lived nearby.
People call to families to take responsibility, but destroy the ability of families to do exactly this.

The point is the people who are taught to brush their bloody kids teeth and other basics are the parents of the ( now) adults who apparently don't know how to do these things and therefore don't do them for their own kids. Why don't they know if their own parents were taught by surestart? Knowledge should've been passed down

.And what I remember from the surestart scheme it was rarely the people who needed to attend these classes etc that did even back then. It was parents with a bit of aspiration who took advantage of the stuff available for their kids and the ones who needed help didn't get involved

The expectation from the entitled to be automatically be given council housing, subsidised childcare, free social care and a whole lot more is to me quite staggering.

I agree with other PP who can see that no government, whether it is Tory or Labour can pay for it all for everyone.

It seems knowledge about entitlements is clear but some refuse to acknowledge nor accept their responsibilities.

Very different from when I was growing up, one of three children, in a one parent family in the 70's. She budgeted, scrimped and saved. There was no real handouts from the government or anyone else for my mother except from her best friend and my grandparents.

But at school we did get the free (cold/tepid/warm/sour) milk...🥛🤮

This!

Then people wonder why there's more state dependancy.

This suggestion below from a PP...
people genuinely need to work in central London and need social housing they should have first call on it.

This idea ignores that London has established communities like everywhere else, including older and disabled people. Also the London housing problem isn't confined to central London. It's a problem across London.

Not only London either. It's beginning to happen elsewhere too. Manchester, Birmingham, and other places including rural areas.

People think vulnerable groups should be displaced away from their families and support systems??

I also doubt the areas they're displaced to will be so happy about extra pressure on local social care and housing and other support services.

A PP linked high immigration to adding to housing pressures and lowering wages. Immigration is a difficult debate and there's various different reasons why people come here. Not all are low waged. One of my neighbours came here a couple of years ago and is in a relatively highly paid job and has a mortgage.

However the PP's post could apply equally to displaced Londoners (and people from other parts of the UK where housing has been allowed to become unaffordable).

What do people think happens if there's mass displacement from London, the SE, and other unaffordable housing areas? How many threads have there been on MN from people upset about 'blow ins' adding pressure on local housing, jobs, and public services?

Mass displacement just moves the problem elsewhere. Housing becomes more unaffordable there too, and it increases competition for jobs (especially as many of the cheaper housing areas are cheaper because of limited job opportunities and jobs that are available are often mostly low paid)

@Rudicoolcat Total straw manning there. Have a rant though about things that simply are not true.

@Samlewis96 I think the issue is more complex. People used to be able to take their kids for free to NHS dentists. That is not always the case now as it is so hard to get on a list.
When parents have problems getting their child to let them brush their teeth, they have no one to ask for advice. And some parents just give up or blame it on SEN. It is far more complex than just buying a toothbrush.

as a Pp said, quite rightly - those who really need dentist appts are the least likely to be trying to get them. Sad but true.

it’s extremely easy to google tooth brushing.

And this is common sense. Surely I am not the only mum when life has been hectic who has put off going to the Dr because life is too hectic to deal with one more thing?
When people are disadvantaged and struggling to cope with everyday life, you need to make it easy for them to get medical help they need. Instead we make it very difficult. It took a lot of work for me to find an NHS dentist who would see us after the pandemic (we were all thrown off previous dentist list even though they were only seeing emergency patients). I had to ring 111 and ring so many dentists they suggested. Someone struggling to cope may intend to do that, and then never get round to it.

@ShyPoet
No offence but the reality is my mother really struggled to raise her children when left alone, without the benefits from government that are available today and she just had to manage and only could with help from best friend and grandparents. Not 'straw manning'...🤷🏼‍♀️, only stating fact.

think the days of people thinking having DC will get them a council house are long gone but still, many people do have kids that they can't afford to support and do rely on the state to do so.

I don't think it's exactly that people have kids to get council housing (although it does protect against street homelessness, not that temporary accommodation is often much better). I've had a really busy day and I'm tired so I don't think I can explain what I want to say properly (even to myself).

Often the child is unplanned but other times, especially for people from disadvantaged backgrounds or communities, having children is sometimes the only realistic aspiration. To achieve a feeling of purpose in life and a sense of self worth (especially as society does often negatively judge the childless and the childfree).

Also, every circumstance is different. Unplanned life events happen. Lots of families support their kids fine but then something happens. Illness, bereavement, job loss, DV, one parent disappearing and not paying child support.

This below from a PP
the problem is that she’s had 6 children and is living off the state

If there were good and better funded public services, support schemes, and opportunities (work, education, and training), and SH, people would have more options and more chance to support themselves and their children.

Improve the child support system too.

Also although not directly related, SH needs to include the childfree. They're taxpayers and have equal need and right to decent homes.

The bedroom tax thing. Possibly could encourage people to have more children to avoid it? Perhaps not but it's still an unhelpful policy. Massively negatively affected the childfree, disabled, and older people. Downsizers get high priority for smaller properties (which the childfree need), and older and disabled people often need extra space so downsizing isn't practical.

Of course dentists should be readily available, absolutely. But before my dentist shut down they had started taking deposits because of how many people just didn’t show up. That’s the issue - everyone wants the systems in place but too many entitled people abuse the systems and then it makes them impossible to run. You see threads on here all the time where the OP has an issue that pharmacies are now able to deal with and they STILL clog up the GP rather than go elsewhere.

I just despair at everything tbh. I can’t see a way out of this entire mess that’s going on around me - no one seems to have any plans or ideas, there is so much govt money wasted on crap and neither party has any actual sensible ideas about anything. Meanwhile children just aren’t being looked after.

i get your point re it being hard if you’re struggling to cope, but how many people do have children whilst struggling to cope? Is that morally alright? What about the children?

I suggested during Covid on one thread that the govt start putting out basic infomercial type videos every week at 6pm for people who just didn’t understand/claimed not to understand basic hygiene. Things like that are pretty easy to organise / yes it’s a bit nanny state-ish but at least it would get through to people who have the will to try.

That’s the thing - I do wonder how much more people would bother to actually push themselves out of a shitty life if there was more incentive. I mean it takes a lot of grit, absolutely, but if you’ve got money for booze, fags and a PlayStation and you’ve got your flat then why would you? And people can’t be happy like that - it’s not healthy and it’s just ruining someone’s own life.

what do people do in countries who don’t have this infrastructure in place?

hats off to your mother.

My mother was a single mother in the late sixties whose family had cut her off. She had to manage. We lived in slums, it was Dickensian. It was less than ideal. I want better for children today.

@Giraffesandbottoms They die or end up living on the street barely surviving through charity.