Won't somebody think of the children?

[formant]

Not sure that's a good idea, also WFT is national social service exactly?

Hm, no idea if that's what DA is talking about, but in Germany mandatory social service was the official alternative to conscription (until that was gotten rid of in 2011) - people (well, men) who didn't want to serve in the military, would spend the equivalent amount of time working in hospitals, care homes, and similar places instead.

[DodgyAgent]

Hm, no idea if that's what DA is talking about, but in Germany mandatory social service was the official alternative to conscription (until that was gotten rid of in 2011) - people (well, men) who didn't want to serve in the military, would spend the equivalent amount of time working in hospitals, care homes, and similar places instead.

Exactly what I meant

[DodgyAgent]

From what age? Agree Not sure that's a good idea, also WFT is national social service exactly?Agree 100%. It's very clearly the case that the majority of kids from deprived families are doomed to end up like their parents, whether because they are taught to be that way, or simply that they don't get a chance otherwise.
Forcing kids away from their parents to break the cycle though - that's a VERY extreme position to take. Do you take them at 5 before they are moulded too much, or at teenage years, or what?

We should debate this within the democratic hotbed that is CUK

[vetran]

how many children do we actually need? Population replacement should be enough.

The majority of manual jobs in factories, kitchens, offices, fields etc can be replaced by robots or automation. The main reason we still have low skilled manual workers is because they are cheap for start up. If we completely automate low paid jobs we have 25-50% less jobs.

Much of our work is physically undemanding and its likely our work lives will lengthen to 70+ which gives 50 years instead of 40 = 25% less jobs.

What we do need are high calibre staff that can innovate and influence.

what we don't need is a dependence society making us less competitive and tying up resources.

Frankly if you stopped all of those on benefits breeding you would solve a large number of issues in a generation.

The current situation is because we have a surfeit of applicants for each job as a direct result of Labour vote rigging.

That right wing enough?

[MarillionFan]

The report is full of crap.

Over 600 million people live on less than $1 a day. That's poverty. £29k for two parents with kids is low, but its not like you're having to scrabble around in the bins or beg on the streets. The West has completely lost its senses when it comes to grading poverty in its welfare rich streets.

[The Spartan]

The report is full of crap.

Over 600 million people live on less than $1 a day. That's poverty. £29k for two parents with kids is low, but its not like you're having to scrabble around in the bins or beg on the streets. The West has completely lost its senses when it comes to grading poverty in its welfare rich streets.

Don't you want to help those less fortunate than yourself

[d000hg]

Hm, no idea if that's what DA is talking about, but in Germany mandatory social service was the official alternative to conscription (until that was gotten rid of in 2011) - people (well, men) who didn't want to serve in the military, would spend the equivalent amount of time working in hospitals, care homes, and similar places instead.

Ah I see. I thought it meant working for the council or something. This is actually not a bad idea, except for the fact that do you really want your grandma's well-being in the hands of kids forced against their will?

However, if it's conscription then the current generation will be in uproar BUT new generations would grow up expecting it so perhaps that would be a lot better.

I wonder if any government would ever be able to get anything like that in - would people vote for it or against it?

[d000hg]

The report is full of crap.

Over 600 million people live on less than $1 a day. That's poverty. £29k for two parents with kids is low, but its not like you're having to scrabble around in the bins or beg on the streets. The West has completely lost its senses when it comes to grading poverty in its welfare rich streets.

Because everything costs the same everywhere, of course? In many parts of the world $1 can easily buy you food for a day. Not that they're not poor, but a direct comparison is ludicrous.

[MarillionFan]

Because everything costs the same everywhere, of course? In many parts of the world $1 can easily buy you food for a day. Not that they're not poor, but a direct comparison is ludicrous.

Poverty in the UK is defined differently because we have different 'standards'. Not being able to take a holiday once a year, no TV or playstation is considered poverty here. And yes you could eat on $1 a day in the UK so the comparison is completely valid.

[KentPhilip]

Because everything costs the same everywhere, of course? In many parts of the world $1 can easily buy you food for a day. Not that they're not poor, but a direct comparison is ludicrous.

Indeed. In any free economy things will adjust to make afforable and efficient the production of that which is needed by most people at a price at which they can afford it.
The only thing that changes is the quality - the dressing around the edges.