Turn on thread page Beta

Why are there no legal protections for the homeless in winter? watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Haddock)
    I was only 8 years old when Blair came to power so perhaps I'm not in the best place to comment, but I think you're right. The crisis of 2008 was obviously a turning point, but that was 10 years ago now. Can anyone really stand up and say, honestly, that it feels like we've made 10 years' worth of progress? Of course Labour weren't perfect, but I don't remember the public mood ever being this miserable, this divisive, this hopeless.
    I guess i remember it better than you, being slightly older. I remember a time of anger. People angry at Blair and the government for putting us to war, for taking away personal freedoms, for the feeling that we were blindly following America into anything and everything they wanted. Anger at the insanely generous benefits state which rewarded laziness on a level never seen before or since.A government so fixated on everyone attending university that it saturated the graduate job market to make most degrees worthless.

    A million people marched through London in February 2003 in protest against the government and their war. That is anger.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    I guess i remember it better than you, being slightly older. I remember a time of anger. People angry at Blair and the government for putting us to war, for taking away personal freedoms, for the feeling that we were blindly following America into anything and everything they wanted. Anger at the insanely generous benefits state which rewarded laziness on a level never seen before or since.A government so fixated on everyone attending university that it saturated the graduate job market to make most degrees worthless.

    A million people marched through London in February 2003 in protest against the government and their war. That is anger.
    Sure people were angry. But I think the fact people even bothered to protest is a sign that there was at least some kind of optimism there. Our problems were fixable, short term. The future wasn't fundamentally broken. Now that anger has been replaced by despair. After 8 years of cuts the idea that the country's biggest grievance was that our government was too generous seems almost laughable now.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Haddock)
    Sure people were angry. But I think the fact people even bothered to protest is a sign that there was at least some kind of optimism there. Our problems were fixable, short term. The future wasn't fundamentally broken. Now that anger has been replaced by despair.
    I think you're seriously over-emphasizing this despair. I just don't see it as much as I saw the anger back in the early 00s.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    I think you're seriously over-emphasizing this despair. I just don't see it as much as I saw the anger back in the early 00s.
    Where exactly have you been since the EU referendum? The result was clearly down to anger at the government, if it denying the state of anger and despair now is pathetic. Did you not forget how angry everyone was at Theresa May bending over backwards for Trump?

    People felt empowered and hopeful in the early 2000s, a striving economy, we were proud of our international aid, we had rising living standards, huge boosts for business. Now people have just given up, their anger is clearly channeled in the EU referendum and 2017 election but there’s no hope, people don’t feel empowered, people are ashamed and emabrssed by our government.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zxyn)
    People felt empowered and hopeful in the early 2000s, a striving economy, we were proud of our international aid, we had rising living standards, huge boosts for business. Now people have just given up, their anger is clearly channeled in the EU referendum and 2017 election but there’s no hope, people don’t feel empowered, people are ashamed and emabrssed by our government.
    Are you speaking from personal experience? How old were you in the early 2000s?

    The experiences you mention do not align with those I encountered.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zxyn)
    Where exactly have you been since the EU referendum? The result was clearly down to anger at the government, if it denying the state of anger and despair now is pathetic. Did you not forget how angry everyone was at Theresa May bending over backwards for Trump?

    People felt empowered and hopeful in the early 2000s, a striving economy, we were proud of our international aid, we had rising living standards, huge boosts for business. Now people have just given up, their anger is clearly channeled in the EU referendum and 2017 election but there’s no hope, people don’t feel empowered, people are ashamed and emabrssed by our government.
    Mate, aren't you 18?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Haddock)
    Sure people were angry. But I think the fact people even bothered to protest is a sign that there was at least some kind of optimism there. Our problems were fixable, short term. The future wasn't fundamentally broken. Now that anger has been replaced by despair. After 8 years of cuts the idea that the country's biggest grievance was that our government was too generous seems almost laughable now.
    See the news that Osbourne's deficit reduction goals were finally met go completely ignored.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-a8234341.html

    That would be unthinkable couple of years ago! The Tories would be making big poltcial capital out of it and Labour slugs would be demanding that the surplus was not big enough and we needed more austerity.

    No one gives a **** about "balancing the books" anymore. Well anyone except economically illiterate tories (and Chris Leslie). My life has not improved as a result of balancing the books -___-


    (Original post by Reue)
    Are you speaking from personal experience? How old were you in the early 2000s?

    The experiences you mention do not align with those I encountered.
    I remember everyone hating welfare sponges and how Labour was soft on crime and immigrants. Needed more ugenics and border forces. Poedophiles ran free and and a darky was always close to stealing your purse. It was before the 2008 financial crisis though so the economy was doing alright for a resonable amount of people, by capatalism's standards. Third way neoloberlaism ensured the NHS actually had enough money. General anger at the government was from the left and right. The right are to racist and socially concervative to ever get on board with New Labour's liberalism, not to mention their disqusting funding of the welfare state. The left saw New Labour as too much of a capitualtion to thatcherism. Everyone else though, even taking into account the anger of the irag war, were perfectly willing to vote Labour as they were personally doing alright.

    There was no economic crisis causing the "squeezed middle" to drop back into the sea of ****, or causing those already in sea of **** to start dieing prematurley. The old order collapsed basically. You can;t do what New Labour did anymore, which was to tax a free market financial based capatalism to adequatly provide for the welfare state in a paternalistic way. We are at a tipping point where something will change.


    I don't know about other people but my parents were also really angry at the respone to foot and mouth desease. Mass killing all the live stock and closing down the country side for what isn't really that dangerouse of a desease.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    Mate, aren't you 18?
    Can a 3yr old not be proud of their international aid contribution in 2003?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Ok; how many extra £000s worth of tax are you willing to pay?
    Theres no need to be so simplistic.

    You can fund important stuff by getting rid of unimportant stuff or making things more efficient.

    I'm not gonna go into how I would change society to accommodate homeless people (unless you want me to), but generally, the world isn't black and white, so you can't just say 'oh, what would you cut' or 'oh, how much more are you willing to pay'.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HighOnGoofballs)
    Theres no need to be so simplistic.

    You can fund important stuff by getting rid of unimportant stuff or making things more efficient.

    I'm not gonna go into how I would change society to accommodate homeless people (unless you want me to), but generally, the world isn't black and white, so you can't just say 'oh, what would you cut' or 'oh, how much more are you willing to pay'.
    Something unimportant to you may be very important to others. And I suspect central government had already worked on efficiencies.. certainly my local council has scrapped the barrel already.

    You say it's not so black and white.. yet that's exactly how you've portrayed it with your 'getting rid of unimportant stuff or making things more efficient'.

    Major spending increases can only really come from one of two ways; increase taxes or decrease spending in other areas. So which areas would you cut back spending on?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reue)
    Something unimportant to you may be very important to others. And I suspect central government had already worked on efficiencies.. certainly my local council has scrapped the barrel already.

    You say it's not so black and white.. yet that's exactly how you've portrayed it with your 'getting rid of unimportant stuff or making things more efficient'.

    Major spending increases can only really come from one of two ways; increase taxes or decrease spending in other areas. So which areas would you cut back spending on?
    We must judge different degrees of importance. We must ask ourselves what is objectively MORE important? Poeple dying or some arbitrary 'thing'. Frankly, the fact that we have homeless people are dying outside during the winter is a disgrace considering we are the 5th richest country in the world.

    Moreover, governments are inherently inefficient.

    To deny that is to simply lie. Due to their excessive regulations and widespread areas of interest, it's inevitable. They may be working on these inefficiencies, but you can only go so far - it's simply not enough given the context of a welfare state.

    The inner workings of the NHS are nothing short of a nightmare. Doctors, who cost 250k to train, are leaving at insane rates abroad. The benefits system is a Trainwreck. Homeless people are dying in the streets due to cold. Wealth inequality in on the rise. Pay freezes in government jobs. The list goes on and there are primarily government failures. And alas, you claim this so called 'benevolent' government is 'working on it'. It's a laughable claim at best.

    Personally, I don't have the solutions to all the countries problems, but I would introduce a flat negative income tax and get rid of the minimum wage to decrease unemployment. I would private aspects of the NHS and introduce deposit schemes. I would heavily reduce the funding to the benefits system. I encourage devolution putting more power and resources to local governments.

    This stuff alone would solve a lot of problems (and create new ones) but all in all, I think it would be a positive step in making the UK a better place to live. There would certainly be no homeless dying the streets due to cold weather I can tell you that much.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    Mate, aren't you 18?
    Mate, have you never read a book, seen documentaries or had discussions with older people?

    Also I’m 19.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    That's a fair point. And it is widely recognised that mental health and adult social services have been cut to the bare bones, the result being an increase in homelessness and A+E and the police being left to mop up issues that they were never intended to deal with. I don't know if you remember what public services were like after 13 years of Tory rule in the 80s and 90s, but it wasn't far off what we have now. I remember there was a big stink over the fact that many operations in hospital had waiting lists of 18+ months. Labour reduced that to 18 weeks which was the norm until a year or so ago. I am not saying Labour are perfect, but things seemed to be much better during the Labour years than the last 8 years. I am struggling to think of anything the Tories have done in the last 8 years that is good. Can you?
    Oh, easily. Highest employment level in UK history, moving hundreds of thousands of the lowest paid out of paying income tax, having some of the fastest growth levels among major advanced economies, improving educational standards in schools, driving forward incredibly complex policies like Universal Credit, defending the integrity of the United Kingdom when the Scottish referendum happened in 2014, meeting our commitments on overseas aid, a real focus on employability, free schools, crime cut to the lowest levels since records began, the highest real-terms health budget in history, freezing fuel duty... I could go on.

    Waiting times increased when Tony Blair first came into office: it was a good couple of years before they fell below what was inherited.

    The idea that spending on mental health has been cut is simply wrong when you look at the figures being invested within the NHS. Moreover, there has been in recent years a specific direction to have parity of esteem between mental and physical health: which was certainly neglected until recently. That's a very positive move and one that I think will pay dividends.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L i b)
    Oh, easily. Highest employment level in UK history, moving hundreds of thousands of the lowest paid out of paying income tax, having some of the fastest growth levels among major advanced economies, improving educational standards in schools, driving forward incredibly complex policies like Universal Credit, defending the integrity of the United Kingdom when the Scottish referendum happened in 2014, meeting our commitments on overseas aid, a real focus on employability, free schools, crime cut to the lowest levels since records began, the highest real-terms health budget in history, freezing fuel duty... I could go on.

    Waiting times increased when Tony Blair first came into office: it was a good couple of years before they fell below what was inherited.

    The idea that spending on mental health has been cut is simply wrong when you look at the figures being invested within the NHS. Moreover, there has been in recent years a specific direction to have parity of esteem between mental and physical health: which was certainly neglected until recently. That's a very positive move and one that I think will pay dividends.
    Agreed on employment although I am not sure how much of that is down to government. They have created this thing called apprenticeships which is basically where the government pays the salary of an employee. Labour did a similar thing by insisting people went into training or education and suddenly the unemployment figures dropped.

    It was the Lib Dem policy of raising the base rate of tax. Similarly the Lib Dems introduced free school meals for reception, Y1 and Y2 kids. They also raised the savings threshold. At the time the Tories bitterly contested all of these measures but are now happy to pass them off as their own ideas.

    As for education. I have just entered education as a teacher. I would categorically say things have improved since the 90s when I was at school - but in the last 8 years? I don't think so. I teach computing. Gove has done away with ICT. As a result students can only take computer science at GCSE. Only the brightest students have the ability to take this subject. The result is that most students now leave school with no computing qualification. Progressive in modern Britain? I think not. The latest tranche of new exams also do away with coursework. Great for students who can remember useless facts, but hopeless for those more able in applying those facts. What do we want out of our education system? Students who can think? Or students who can remember facts in order to take exams. My Y11s aren't learning anything other than how to take their exam because that is all that matters.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.