Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[beninho]

First topic message reminder :

https://officiating.worldrugby.org/?module=3&section=36&subsection=129&language=en

"It is not mandatory for the team receiving the challenge to face it."

How many effing times. If they don't face it up silently and respectfully they get massive media criticism.

No they don't!

This is getting crazy!

[dynamark]

If you see me wearing slippers\(or in primark) you have permission to shoot me.
Ambition is a funny thing you look around maybe 12 year old and see stuff to aspire to
Yesterday I drove past a house where one of my schoolmates lived pretty rough council estate and he now lives in Hong Kong running a large chemical company 3 kids all private school/uni doing great through his own application it can be done and that has to be the way to go.

[super_realist]

That b@stard is wearing trousers.  Who the hell owns, let alone wears trousers?  

Everyone I imagine. Virtually no one wears slippers though, and no one is dim enough to forget to take them off unless they have alzheimers.

How have you managed to reach that conclusion?  Exhaustive empirical research?

My gran (very much of sound mind at the time) once forgot to take off her slippers and then came with us on a day trip to Aberdeen (it was the 80's and there was only four TV channels and no internet so going to Aberdeen for a day out didn't seem an entirely strange concept).  Stuck out like a sore thumb on Union Street as she was by far the most stylish person.

How have I worked it out? How about an absence or serious reduction in the availability of slippers for sale in shops?

Why would anyone want to wear footwear in your own house?

[superflyweight]

My kids leave lego and other sharp toys which have a quality of being invisible to the naked eye until stepped upon strewn around unlikely locations in our house. They employ tactics similar to those employed by the Viet Cong in the jungles of Vietnam and slippers are very much my napalm in the ongoing struggle against permanently disfigured feet.

[McLaren]

If you see me wearing slippers\(or in primark) you have permission to shoot me.
Ambition is a funny thing you look around maybe 12 year old and see stuff to aspire to
Yesterday I drove past a house where one  of my schoolmates lived pretty rough council estate and he now lives in Hong Kong running a large chemical company 3 kids all private school/uni doing great through his own application it can be done and that has to be the way  to go.

Dyna

What has that got to do with anything?

[super_realist]

We were talking about ambition the other day Mac and that not everyone is born equal, but that it wasn't necessarily a bad thing or something which could ever reasonably be expected to occur.

[beninho]

I brought the wife a pay of slipper boot things, it keeps her feet warm. We have tiles in the kitchen and wooden floor. Not always warm. I though, do not own or wear any. I know people who do. Some pretty young. Anyway, who fricken cares about slippers?

Unsure, what the people are not all equal thing. Its pretty obvious isn't it. People don't start life on the same footing. Sone go up from being down,sone go down. Sone stay pretty much the same. Unfortunately some have no chance from the off. Life can generally be a bit sh&t for lot of people.

[super_realist]

Who has no chance in a western democracy?

[beninho]

I'm unsure about your question, but will respond with a further question.

Do you believe that everyone born in the uk, has the chance if a successful life?

[super_realist]

I'm unsure about your question, but will respond with a further question.

Do you believe that everyone born in the uk, has the chance if a successful life?

It might be more difficult for some than others, but I've certainly known plenty people from pretty poor backgrounds who have done very well, just as I know plenty wealthy people who have achieved nothing.
Armed with a bit of knowledge and sufficient resolve someone from the poorest background can succeed.

[beninho]

Its not necessarily the poverty background, though this clearly has impacts on people.

Its just generally from parents or family members. Parents who are drink or drug addicts, other health issues, pressure put on from a young age. You read about children dieing at young ages. Brought up in care. Vuctims of child abuse ior secual abuse. Children with severe physical and or mental health issues. Cobstant moving and no stability.

As I say,unfortunately a lot of children are born into sht and won't get out.

[super_realist]

Like I said, it is more difficult for some than others, but it's rather insulting to those from those backgrounds you mention who have managed to do well. They have proven that their backgrounds are no limit to their success.
I'd agree that those with extreme physical or mental issues may not manage to get the success they might want, but that would be the same regardless of their background, however barring health issues people from any background absolutely can and do succeed.

[beninho]

My point isn't some will not be fine, its that some will not have the chance. Not everyone can. Fair play to those who move on with life. Unfortunately, some children are killed by their parents and are born into a nightmare. As I say, some are born into sht and won't get out of it.

Its just a fact of life. Unfortunately.

Not really sure what there is to argue.

[super_realist]

My point isn't some will not be fine, its that some will not have the chance. Not everyone can. Fair play to those who move on with life. Unfortunately, some children are killed by their parents and are born into a nightmare. As I say, some are born into sht and won't get out of it.

Its just a fact of life. Unfortunately.

Not really sure what there is to argue.

If you look at extremities then sure, you can probably make a point for anything if you look hard enough and are pedantic enough. Doesn't mean that for the majority of people in first world countries the opportunity to succeed is there for those who want it regardless of background and this ought to be recognised rather than people looking for reasons not to succeed. I concede though that in modern Britain the common thing among those failing is to look for others to blame, rather than take personal responsibility. For example many fat people will blame society rather than themselves.

[beninho]

I'm not talking about the majority of people. Though I would say are sizeable chunk, will struggle. I'm saying you can't say everyone has the chance to succeed, and that, probably a large number of kids are born into sht situations and gave sht lives due to it. Its unfortunate, but its a fact of life. Not everyone gets the same chance in life.

Nothing pedantic about it, just being a realist.

[westisbest]

What an utter disgrace.  

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51020104

Appearing on the BBC? Agree, disgrace.

Clearly wearing slippers is just to create a story. Who the hell owns, let alone wears slippers?

Me, for one, occasionally. Keeps the feet warm sometimes when I'm cold. Don't wear them outside though.

Had ACL surgery last October. I bought some slippers. Bloody comfy I must say.
I’d say quite a few folks wear slippers super. Obviously your not a fan.

[beninho]

Fat people? Your own personal hobbyhorse, but unsure what thats got to do with anything.  Strange. Anyway, do you not think experiences in formative years could impact people throughout later life?

[super_realist]

Fat people? Your own personal hobbyhorse, but unsure what thats got to do with anything.  Strange.

I thought your comprehension was better than Mac's. You seem to be wanting to excuse the lack of success of people by attributing it to the circumstances into which they have been born. I've said it might make it harder, but it's not an insurmountable barrier, just a lot harder than someone born into a more privileged position.
The bottom line  is that people have succeeded from the very depths of society, so there's a prescedent, and it therefore can be done.
I mentioned fat people because they've found themselves in a situation, and rather than find their own way out, they often look for others to blame as a reason to not take control.
Regardless of your background you can do well and the only ones who can't are the ones who are physically and mentally incapable of doing so. You mentioning children being killed by their parents is frankly weird.

[beninho]

I was talking about people being born into sht situations. Now being born into a situation where you have been killed by uour parents is pretty damn sht. My point, and it still stands, is that unfortunately, sone people are born into situations where they cannot escape it for whatever reason.

I don't live in the sunny uplands and think everyone can succeed with a bit of willpower and a teacher, thats bullsht.

I don't give 2 shts about fat people. Literally don't care.

[pedro]

If you tell people they can’t do it and that they basically are miserable, for sure it’ll be a self fulfilling prophecy.

[super_realist]

I was talking about people being born into sht situations. Now being born into a situation where you have been killed by uour parents is pretty damn sht. My point, and it still stands, is that unfortunately, sone people are born into situations where they cannot escape it for whatever reason.

I don't live in the sunny uplands and think everyone can succeed with a bit of willpower and a teacher, thats bullsht.

I don't give 2 shts about fat people. Literally don't care.

You're talking about a miniscule amount of people who "can't escape" It's absurd pedantry.

You are trying to blame people's circumstances for their lack of success, an insult to those who have proven you wrong. The analogy to fat people blaming others for their fatness is perfectly apt. If you don't succeed, blame your circumstances or someone else for your situation. That's your position. If you want to substitute "Fat" for poverty so that you understand the analogy better, go ahead. Doesn't change the fact you think that people can't succeed if they have grown up in a tough background.

I've never claimed everyone is equal, quite the opposite, just that it isn't a barrier to success. Might make it harder, doesn't make it impossible.

[navyblueshorts]

Its not necessarily the poverty background, though this clearly has impacts on people.

Its just generally from parents or family members. Parents who are drink or drug addicts, other health issues, pressure put on from a young age. You read about children dieing at young ages. Brought up in care. Vuctims of child abuse ior secual abuse. Children with severe physical and or mental health issues. Cobstant moving and no stability.

As I say,unfortunately a lot of children are born into sht and won't get out.

Maybe there's hope for some form of eugenics yet, then?

Seriously though, what did someone (Aristotle?) once say? 'Give me the child until he's 7 and I'll show you the man.'? It's hard to break any 'habit' if one doesn't disassociate from those that are a 'bad influence'; pretty difficult for a child and in a society that normally does everything (possibly correctly in most cases?) to keep children with parents.

[superflyweight]

I was talking about people being born into sht situations. Now being born into a situation where you have been killed by uour parents is pretty damn sht. My point, and it still stands, is that unfortunately, sone people are born into situations where they cannot escape it for whatever reason.

I don't live in the sunny uplands and think everyone can succeed with a bit of willpower and a teacher, thats bullsht.

I don't give 2 shts about fat people. Literally don't care.

You're talking about a miniscule amount of people who "can't escape" It's absurd pedantry.

You are trying to blame people's circumstances for their lack of success, an insult to those who have proven you wrong. The analogy to fat people blaming others for their fatness is perfectly apt. If you don't succeed, blame your circumstances or someone else for your situation. That's your position. If you want to substitute "Fat" for poverty so that you understand the analogy better, go ahead. Doesn't change the fact you think that people can't succeed if they have grown up in a tough background.

I've never claimed everyone is equal, quite the opposite, just that it isn't a barrier to success. Might make it harder, doesn't make it impossible.

But given that more people born into such situations are likely to fail rather than succeed, perhaps that suggests that it requires more than a bit of pluck and ambition. My sister is an educational psychologist and some of the cases she has to deal with (even in the relatvely affluent area she covers now - it was worse when she covered East Ayrshire) are horrific. Some of those kids have no chance from the moment they're born. There are degrees of deprivation.

[navyblueshorts]

I was talking about people being born into sht situations. Now being born into a situation where you have been killed by uour parents is pretty damn sht. My point, and it still stands, is that unfortunately, sone people are born into situations where they cannot escape it for whatever reason.

I don't live in the sunny uplands and think everyone can succeed with a bit of willpower and a teacher, thats bullsht.

I don't give 2 shts about fat people. Literally don't care.

You're talking about a miniscule amount of people who "can't escape" It's absurd pedantry....

And you explain the prevalence of religion how, then? How is it that so many adhere so strongly to a mainstream religion?

Ben: I have S_R down as a reformed fat person. There's few worse than a reformed person for their preaching. Regardless, he knows little/nothing about the biochemistry and physiology of visceral fat or humanity's evolution in that regard etc, so he thinks it's all about 'willpower'. He also thinks that what works for him (one person out of ~7 billion) is therefore all that matters and the only thing relevant for the remainder of the planet's population.

[McLaren]

Are we sure he is reformed? I have often wondered if super is actually quite fat and his strong anti fat rhetoric on here is an extreme form of wishful thinking.

[beninho]

Realist, you didn't answer my question.

Do you think that experiences in a childs formative years, can impact them in later life?

[superflyweight]

Realist, you didn't answer my question.

Do you think that experiences in a childs formative years, can impact them in later life?

Such as a lack of hugs leading to a total lack of empathy?

[beninho]

I understand, realist, does lots of running and exercise. Did this start as a health kick in order to lose weight? Which, it tends to be for a lot of people. I also gather he is in his 40s, I maybe wrong, with no wife or children. I don't think he's gay, so maybe the excercise is an emotional crutch to mask this.

[pedro]

So what's the key to getting all these kids out of misery? Even the wet dream of many, Scandinavia - with their 50-60 years of free education, health care, generous welfare support, nursing ad nauseum etc., you name it - doesn't do much for social mobility and health. And there we're not even talking about the same level of misery as you'll find in the UK.

It just seems to be "send more money" so all the rest of us can feel good?

[navyblueshorts]

So what's the key to getting all these kids out of misery? Even the wet dream of many, Scandinavia - with their 50-60 years of free education, health care, generous welfare support, nursing ad nauseum etc., you name it - doesn't do much for social mobility and health. And there we're not even talking about the same level of misery as you'll find in the UK.

It just seems to be "send more money" so all the rest of us can feel good?

All of what you mention isn't just about social mobility, is it? I suppose we could aspire to the US model? Nah.

It's complex problem that politicians etc think has a simple answer and that doesn't require money. No wonder it isn't close to being solved.

[pedro]

So what's the key to getting all these kids out of misery? Even the wet dream of many, Scandinavia - with their 50-60 years of free education, health care, generous welfare support, nursing ad nauseum etc., you name it - doesn't do much for social mobility and health. And there we're not even talking about the same level of misery as you'll find in the UK.

It just seems to be "send more money" so all the rest of us can feel good?

All of what you mention isn't just about social mobility, is it? I suppose we could aspire to the US model? Nah.

It's complex problem that politicians etc think has a simple answer and that doesn't require money. No wonder it isn't close to being solved.

Not advocating for the US model. In fact I don't have the solution. I'm just pointing out that what has been done for decades - incl. the Scandinavian model - doesn't really solve the problem either.

[McLaren]

Pedro

If you had to be the poorest in a society which country would you choose to live in?

[dynamark]

I'm a bit behind in this thread now from Macs whats the point post but the point being that where you are born does not determine where you progress to.Obviously parental and other influences are huge and none of us get to pick our initial circumstance.
Ive said before that you cannot help all of the folk all of the time but you can give everyone a good chance.Id rather have a family now than 40 years ago for lots of reasons .

[pedro]

Pedro

If you had to be the poorest in a society which country would you choose to live in?

Of course. All I'm saying is that it's very difficult to lift kids out of misery, regardless of the degree of misery. You can support people financially, health care wise, educationally etc. - which I think is right - but they, and their kids in turn, will most likely remain at the bottom of whatever society they happen to be born in. Yes social mobility is higher in Northern Europe than many most other places, but not as high as you should think given that most opportunities for climbing the social latter (in theory) are available.

[JAS]

So what's the key to getting all these kids out of misery? Even the wet dream of many, Scandinavia - with their 50-60 years of free education, health care, generous welfare support, nursing ad nauseum etc., you name it - doesn't do much for social mobility and health. And there we're not even talking about the same level of misery as you'll find in the UK.

It just seems to be "send more money" so all the rest of us can feel good?

All of what you mention isn't just about social mobility, is it? I suppose we could aspire to the US model? Nah.

It's complex problem that politicians etc think has a simple answer and that doesn't require money. No wonder it isn't close to being solved.

Not advocating for the US model. In fact I don't have the solution. I'm just pointing out that what has been done for decades - incl. the Scandinavian model - doesn't really solve the problem either.

I don’t think overall that it is a totally solvable problem and governments shouldn’t be saying they can solve it because they’ll fail then have to lie. It should be about how much they can mitigate and reduce and how much emphasis they would put into mitigating the worst of it.
The direction the country has chosen to go in now determines that we’re not going to be improving the life chances of the bottom 30% at any point in the next decade, for those at the bottom, things are going to get a shedload bleaker. Now that can cut 2 ways, most people in that demographic will be vulnerable and not have the inner strength to fight their way out of it. Some however will and fair play to them. The rather vulgar spectacle that will then take place is that the small percentage that do have the inner strength to strive and improve their lot will be paraded and lauded to guilt trip those that can’t and to falsely castigate politicians who know fine well that a large section of the lower income side of society simply don’t have the gumption to know how to fight and who genuinely need help.

[McLaren]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap. I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

[dynamark]

Jas are we still moaning and worrying about brexit actually happening.
Life chances are not the least bit likely to be affected and there no way 'things' get bleaker.There will always be someone at the so called bottom of the pile,.
Don't worry keep going

[McLaren]

Dyna

Are you that simple?

[pedro]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap.  I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

Mac, not sure if you’re trying to equate socialism and welfare? Financial redistribution to a certain degree is fine,  if you - as JAS points out - provide basic needs and/or use it to mitigate or reduce potential issues. But if you do it based on ideology it turns into a problem.

IMO inequality shouldn’t be a problem if there’s no poverty. For instance in Scandinavia you will struggle find poverty, in the true sense. But as the social mobility is still limited, the “moral” inequality may be the bigger issue here, rather than financial inequality. And for that there seems no easy cure.

[navyblueshorts]

Dyna

Are you that simple?

Thanks for that contribution, Mac.

[super_realist]

I was talking about people being born into sht situations. Now being born into a situation where you have been killed by uour parents is pretty damn sht. My point, and it still stands, is that unfortunately, sone people are born into situations where they cannot escape it for whatever reason.

I don't live in the sunny uplands and think everyone can succeed with a bit of willpower and a teacher, thats bullsht.

I don't give 2 shts about fat people. Literally don't care.

You're talking about a miniscule amount of people who "can't escape" It's absurd pedantry.

You are trying to blame people's circumstances for their lack of success, an insult to those who have proven you wrong. The analogy to fat people blaming others for their fatness is perfectly apt. If you don't succeed, blame your circumstances or someone else for your situation. That's your position. If you want to substitute "Fat" for poverty so that you understand the analogy better, go ahead. Doesn't change the fact you think that people can't succeed if they have grown up in a tough background.

I've never claimed everyone is equal, quite the opposite, just that it isn't a barrier to success. Might make it harder, doesn't make it impossible.

But given that more people born into such situations are likely to fail rather than succeed, perhaps that suggests that it requires more than a bit of pluck and ambition.  My sister is an educational psychologist and some of the cases she has to deal with (even in the relatvely affluent area she covers now - it was worse when she covered East Ayrshire) are horrific.  Some of those kids have no chance from the moment they're born.  There are degrees of deprivation.
   

I'm sure it is difficult, but to say there is "no chance" is laughable.

[super_realist]

I understand, realist, does lots of running and exercise. Did this start as a health kick in order to lose weight? Which, it tends to be for a lot of people. I also gather he is in his 40s, I maybe wrong, with no wife or children. I don't think he's gay, so maybe the excercise is an emotional crutch to mask this.

Hilarious. I've been a fan of exercise my entire life, why wouldn't you be a lifelong athlete?
I spotted early on that if you can't be fit when you are young, it's unlikely you ever will be. It also is hardly any effort to keep fit and healthy.

Also, why is there a stigma about being single? I can do what I want, spend my own money, live how I like, go where I want. Guaranteed that a lot of people with a ball and chain of a wife and far too many children running around would love to be in my situation.

[super_realist]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap.  I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

Mac, not sure if you’re trying to equate socialism and welfare? Financial redistribution to a certain degree is fine,  if you - as JAS points out - provide basic needs and/or use it to mitigate or reduce potential issues. But if you do it based on ideology it turns into a problem.

IMO inequality shouldn’t be a problem if there’s no poverty. For instance in Scandinavia you will struggle find poverty, in the true sense. But as the social mobility is still limited, the “moral” inequality may be the bigger issue here, rather than financial inequality. And for that there seems no easy cure.

That's nonsense Pedro, as someone who has been to Denmark, Norway and Sweden probably in excess of 30 times, I can assure there is poverty there. You see plenty homeless people, prostitution,  plenty people running round picking up deposit bottles/cans for 10 kroner etc. Poverty is alive and kicking in Scandinavia. It's true that it is almost entirely the immigrant population, but it is there for sure.

[JAS]

Jas are we still moaning and worrying about brexit actually happening.
Life chances are not the least bit likely to be affected and there no way 'things' get bleaker.There will always be someone at the so called bottom of the pile,.
Don't worry keep going

Absolutely not I stated many times that as far as Brexit was concerned, at the time of the vote I held a more Bennite Lexit view of the situation and indeed voted for it, although I subsequently concluded that maybe staying would be better but the overall effect either way would be marginal.  The real, much bigger issue than Brexit is that we have elected a bunch of lying, ideological right wing Trumpian zealots who care not one hairy bollock about anyone outside the top 1% of the population although every 5 years they rehearse well the arguments to convince enough aspirationals that neoliberalism works and that compassionate social democracy is dangerous. It’s utter bilge but collectively that’s what the country wants, too many people in this country are quite happy to stick their their heads in the sand and ignore poverty and deprivation as long as they’re doing ok themselves. People might occasionally be slightly irked by beggars in shop doorways etc not realising that their vote condemns many more to that fate.

[super_realist]

JAS, the choice between Tory and Labour was hardly something where either option was especially preferable.

You sound like a bit of a conspiracy theorist with your "right wing Trumpian zealots" and your claim that "they care not one hairy bollock for anyone outside the top 1%".

Whilst having a Tory government might be far from ideal, the vast majority of the UK see it as the lesser of two evils than the horrendous alternative of Corbyn's socialism. Socialism of the type put forward by Corbyn, especially when he had no financial plan has never worked anywhere in the world ever.

Given the laughable content of the Corbyn manifesto, it's hard to see how Britain could possibly be any better off under Labour.
I'm not saying we'll be great under the current government, but I blame Corbyn and his deluded party for that. It was their job to provide a viable alternative to the government and they completely failed to do so, in a decade of the least popular leaders in Tory history, they managed to do the unimaginable, be even less popular and even less electable. Abandoning their roots and apparently only appealing to the Putney middle classes.
Good riddance Corbyn. If Cameron should face a probe for allowing Brexit to happen, Corbyn should face something similar for failing to stop the Tories, yet he hasn't even got the good grace to step down immediately. He's as clueless as a Hollywood celebrity.

[McLaren]

Super

This might make your day, one of those bottle guys in Denmark tried to take my half full bottle of water out my hand so I resisted, he then tried to fight me. Luckily a near by shop owner seemed to know the guy and intervened.


Pedro

What I was saying and what you have since picked up on is whether there is an appetite among the right to not only used the welfare state to provide a safety net but also a means of closing gaps in inequality. Our great thinker Dyna exemplifies the view of the right that people should just work harder to close the equality gap.

[McLaren]

Also, why is there a stigma about being single? I can do what I want, spend my own money, live how I like, go where I want. Guaranteed that a lot of people with a ball and chain of a wife and far too many children running around would love to be in my situation.

Not sure what sort of abusive relationships you have been part of but I am in a long term relationship and both me and my partner have all the freedoms you mention.

[beninho]

Realist, have you chosen a life as a singleton yourself? Was that a conscious decision, and if so when did you make the call that you didn't want a partner or kids?

Or, did that life, choose you?

[superflyweight]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap.  I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

Mac, not sure if you’re trying to equate socialism and welfare? Financial redistribution to a certain degree is fine,  if you - as JAS points out - provide basic needs and/or use it to mitigate or reduce potential issues. But if you do it based on ideology it turns into a problem.

IMO inequality shouldn’t be a problem if there’s no poverty. For instance in Scandinavia you will struggle find poverty, in the true sense. But as the social mobility is still limited, the “moral” inequality may be the bigger issue here, rather than financial inequality. And for that there seems no easy cure.

That's nonsense Pedro, as someone who has been to Denmark, Norway and Sweden probably in excess of 30 times, I can assure there is poverty there. You see plenty homeless people, prostitution,  plenty people running round picking up deposit bottles/cans for 10 kroner etc. Poverty is alive and kicking in Scandinavia. It's true that it is almost entirely the immigrant population, but it is there for sure.

Sex tourism?

[pedro]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap.  I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

Mac, not sure if you’re trying to equate socialism and welfare? Financial redistribution to a certain degree is fine,  if you - as JAS points out - provide basic needs and/or use it to mitigate or reduce potential issues. But if you do it based on ideology it turns into a problem.

IMO inequality shouldn’t be a problem if there’s no poverty. For instance in Scandinavia you will struggle find poverty, in the true sense. But as the social mobility is still limited, the “moral” inequality may be the bigger issue here, rather than financial inequality. And for that there seems no easy cure.

That's nonsense Pedro, as someone who has been to Denmark, Norway and Sweden probably in excess of 30 times, I can assure there is poverty there. You see plenty homeless people, prostitution,  plenty people running round picking up deposit bottles/cans for 10 kroner etc. Poverty is alive and kicking in Scandinavia. It's true that it is almost entirely the immigrant population, but it is there for sure.

Must be illegals then, paying off their trafficker. A single unemployed parent with two kids are guaranteed £2K/month after tax. May not be a fortune, but call it poor would be a stretch.

[navyblueshorts]

Pedro


I think part of the issue is that welfare has mainly been used as a safety net rather than a process for narrowing the inequality gap.  I don't think the right could ever be persuaded to do more than the bare minimum when it comes to welfare.

Mac, not sure if you’re trying to equate socialism and welfare? Financial redistribution to a certain degree is fine,  if you - as JAS points out - provide basic needs and/or use it to mitigate or reduce potential issues. But if you do it based on ideology it turns into a problem.

IMO inequality shouldn’t be a problem if there’s no poverty. For instance in Scandinavia you will struggle find poverty, in the true sense. But as the social mobility is still limited, the “moral” inequality may be the bigger issue here, rather than financial inequality. And for that there seems no easy cure.

That's nonsense Pedro, as someone who has been to Denmark, Norway and Sweden probably in excess of 30 times, I can assure there is poverty there. You see plenty homeless people, prostitution,  plenty people running round picking up deposit bottles/cans for 10 kroner etc. Poverty is alive and kicking in Scandinavia. It's true that it is almost entirely the immigrant population, but it is there for sure.

Must be illegals then, paying off their trafficker. A single unemployed parent with two kids are guaranteed £2K/month after tax. May not be a fortune, but call it poor would be a stretch.

**** me! Is that for real? I have a Ph.D., have been in paid work continuously since ~1992, am now (sadly) 53 and I don't even take home enough to hit the 40% income tax bracket.

[Sponsored content]