Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Politics
Original poster

We are the sort of 'decent hard working' family the Tories love

26 replies

OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 11:23

We have both always worked - I took the minimum mat leave because we couldn't afford more. We own our own house. We hace savings and pensions. We have lived our lives the way that the Tories approve of. DH went to university as a mature student when he was made redundant - didn't sit around feeling sorry for himself, but got on and did something. Hurrah!

DH is now finally earning some decent money and our joint income is a good one - we can afford to move into the bigger house we've needed for years. Hurrah again!

Problem is his new job is in teaching. In a special school that is expensive too run. Wonder how long it will last when the Tories start cutting .

If he loses his job we're back to scraping along the bottom of the barrel economically.

OP posts:
Alibabaandthe40nappies · 04/05/2010 11:28

Orm that is a bit blinkered I think. There will be cuts whoever gets in.

It's naive to think that if Labour get in again that there won't be cuts, of course there will. Possibly worse cuts if the deficit is allowed to get bigger before it gets smaller.

Congratulations on your improved circumstances and the new house though Are you persuing the plan of moving your parents in?

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 11:31

Nope. They aren't having any of it But are thinking of buying a flat or retirement property in Wells - no nearer us but at least no massive garden to look after and no hills to climb just to get to the greenhouse.

There will be cuts under any colour of government but the tories are ideologically committed to reducing the size of the state.

OP posts:
Alibabaandthe40nappies · 04/05/2010 11:35

Ah you'll all be happier left to your own devices, I know I couldn't live with my parents again!

Tories are idealogically committed to a smaller state, which I agree with. I think there are lots of things that could, and should, go before school budgets though.

mumblechum · 04/05/2010 11:43

But what does that actually mean, "a smaller state"?

I have trouble trusting dc. Well, all of them really.

longfingernails · 04/05/2010 11:44

You will be pleased to know that the Tories have proposed a moratorium on the closure of special schools.

Congratulations - your DH's job is safe.

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 11:47

A smaller state means I guess that more of us will be left to sink or swim. DH's school is an easy target as the children don't often end up with any GCSEs and it costs a lot to run. But it's contribution to their lives is huge.

OP posts:
Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 11:49

Is that so longfingernails? I didn't know that. But proposing isn't the same as confirming.

And it's not just DH that I am concerned about. I don't want a smaller state if that means people worse off than us become even worse off.

OP posts:
Alibabaandthe40nappies · 04/05/2010 11:52

mumblechum - it means the state being less involved with people's lives. So anyone who is a 'Local Government 5-a-day Co-ordinator' (which is an actual job I saw advertised) perhaps ought to start looking for another job.

Idealogically it means a belief in taxation being as low as possible while still providing essential services, rather than as high as possible and finding ever more inventive ways of spending it. And it means a simplified tax system and therefore less penpushers in Whitehall that need to be paid for out of the public purse.

pagwatch · 04/05/2010 11:52

Orm
DS2 is in just such a school. Actuallythe tories wish to maintain special schools and stop any further closures so rather strangely I am more confident abouts DS2s school under the tories than I am under labour who wish to persue inclusion for all.

Inclusion for all is a fabulous notion in theory but would be a big fucking disaster for my son. So on this one issue - a very important issue to my son - I am grateful thatthe tories may be in charge.

But the fucked economy does mean that his school is facing cuts to things like residential support and outings next year. Which is a pisser indeed

pagwatch · 04/05/2010 11:54

Orm..
Specail schools are a big thing for Cameron. I am inclined to believe this is one that they mean.
And with labour opposed to special schools anyway I think DS2s school is fucked if labour get back in

Alibabaandthe40nappies · 04/05/2010 11:54

Public sector is huge at the moment, it accounts for around 50% of GDP at the moment, rising to over 70% is some areas including Wales and Northern Ireland. That is unsustainable.

sfxmum · 04/05/2010 12:06

this is a hard one I worked in SN in this country from 93 to 2005 the changes have been huge, some not great but many for the better,
it is not a popular area to work in and much less for government to spend in

I recall extreme under staffing and very poorly prepared staff, very low standards
much of that has changed

one of my concerns regarding the 'big society' approach in this area is that many people have many different ideas how best to educate and support SN, not all strictly evidence based

Bonsoir · 04/05/2010 12:12

"A smaller state means I guess that more of us will be left to sink or swim."

Orm - that's a very narrow view of how the economy works. Where does the money for a large state come from?

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 12:40

That is of course the million-pound question (or possibly several billion pounds). And it needs to be addressed. But that doesn't alter the fact that many vulnerable people will suffer.

OP posts:
Bonsoir · 04/05/2010 12:43

The money comes from private enterprise - business. Overtax business, and it cannot grow, and you no longer raise enough tax to pay for that huge nanny state...

expatinscotland · 04/05/2010 12:46

'Idealogically it means a belief in taxation being as low as possible while still providing essential services, '

In reality, it'll wind up the way it does in America: where you get to buy your own health care or die or go bankrupt over cancer and, in many areas, have to home educate or send your kids the private school or they face some very real risks of, at the least, coming out not very educated.

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 12:47

I know the arguments. And I know that you are quite correct. But the fact remains that a party who is idealogically opposed to state intervention and the 'nanny' state is going to be far more proactive and possibly less cautious in trimming the fat than one that isn't. And from my POV, that is a concern.

OP posts:
Bonsoir · 04/05/2010 12:50

All European economies have massive nanny state machines. Tories aren't "ideologically opposed" to a large state - the large state is here for good. It's just a little bit smaller when the Tories are in...

It's incredibly unhealthy to have whole towns or cities dependent on the state for jobs - 75% of jobs in Newcastle are public sector jobs. That's unsustainable.

sfxmum · 04/05/2010 12:55

also worth noting that when the Care in the Community started taking effect in the late 80's early 90's things often went quite wrong

although I strongly believe it is best for people to come out of huge institutions into a normalised life in the community, the way it was done was traumatic, many hospitals were prime real estate, they were sold to developers, and there just wasn't a proper infrastructure to look after or provide appropriate support for the former inmates, many many awful things happened

this was a legacy of the Tories which took huge investment from the government to sort out, or try to sort out
it is expensive, it is hard to manage it is also, least we forget, often staffed by immigrants - no one talks about it

but mind care in SN and care for elderly is not a problem which will go away

it is true that private orgs and charities provide services in this area but it is nowhere enough

simple overview
care in the community

smallwhitecat · 04/05/2010 12:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TooPragmatic · 04/05/2010 13:00

Orm,

"But the fact remains that a party who is idealogically opposed to state intervention and the 'nanny' state is going to be far more proactive and possibly less cautious in trimming the fat than one that isn't. And from my POV, that is a concern."

Interesting. I agree 100% with your first sentence. But from my POV, that is why I'm likely voting Tory. That's why I love politics. Two people observe the same thing and each identify the same issues but come to different conclusions.

compo · 04/05/2010 13:17

Can I ask you a personal question Orm?

When your dh got made redundant how did he afford to become a mature student? Did you have savings to pay the uni fees?

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 13:21

He went to university back in 1992 so fees were still paid then. The first year he had to pay for himself as he'd started and abandoned a course when he was 17 so he's 'used up' a years worth of grant. Our car insurance paid up on a claim we'd more or less given up on just in time to pay the fees so we were lucky.

I was working. I got a better paid job to support us. And he worked in the holidays and weekends. We got by. I think it was easier then.

OP posts:
compo · 04/05/2010 13:25

Oh sorry thought you meant he'd studied recently
I was thinking of going back to uni but costs too much now !

Original poster
OrmRenewed · 04/05/2010 13:26

I'm sure we'd find it harder now

It wasn't easy but at least we had no children.

OP posts: