allowance, Atos, backdoor, BBC, benefit, benefit cap, benefits, Bob Crow, Coalition, committee, Conservative, cut, David Cameron, Department for Work and Pensions, disability, disabled, divisive, DWP, economy, Ed Miliband, employment, Employment and Support Allowance, ESA, facts, fraud, genocide, government, housing benefit, Iain Duncan Smith, Labour, Mike Sivier, mikesivier, mislead, one nation, Parliament, Pensions, people, PFI, politics, Private Finance Initiative, provider, sick, sickness, social security, spending, support, Tories, Tory, unemployment, Vox Political, WCA, welfare, work, work capability assessment, Work Programme
Yesterday I wrote that Ed Miliband’s speech on social security reform was the beginning of the Conservative victory in 2015 – and picked up a little criticism for it in some areas. I stand by my words.
Ed’s speech proved he is not a leader but a follower. He has agreed to follow Conservative spending cuts and not reverse them. He has agreed to follow Tory spending plans for the first year after a Labour government takes office (if it does) in 2015. He has said he would cap social security spending, formally adopting as policy an idea the Tories floated during the March budget. He has agreed to give up the principle of universal benefits.
He has done this when the Conservatives have no argument whatsoever that can possibly justify what they are doing.
All the Tory claims about austerity have blown away in the wind – hot air to disguise their real aim of shrinking the state and selling off the family silver to their rich friends.
Iain Duncan Smith is to face a grilling by Parliament’s Work and Pensions committee over his – and his colleagues – persistent misrepresentation of the facts about unemployment, sickness and disability and the people claiming benefits on these grounds.
As for the benefit cap, Miliband said an independent body should advise government on how best to design it. Great! Can I sit on this body? I could do with the cash!
Or is it another example of fake jobs for the boys to get their snouts in the trough?
The system needs to change, because the Conservatives/Coalition have cocked it up. Miliband offered up more of the same, with a little bit of tinkering around the edges. Red Conservative.
For a party that’s supposed to be the official Opposition to the government, there was a hell of a lot of Tory talk in Miliband’s speech, like this: “It is only by reforming social security with the right values that we’ll be able to control costs.” Tory values?
“We have always been against the denial of opportunity that comes from not having work. And against the denial of responsibility by those who could work and don’t do so,” he accused, in one of those confusing single-sentences-split-into-two that make his speeches so utterly unreadable. But he needs to get his facts right. The number of people who could work but don’t do so is around 2.5 million – but that’s because there isn’t any work available for them. One job for every five people, although we have witnessed moments when adverts for a handful of places at a single shop have attracted thousands of applications. These people aren’t denying responsibility, Ed – they’re desperate for a chance.
He was referring to benefit fraud, though, wasn’t he? Benefit fraud is the bogeyman that haunts much of Iain Duncan Smith’s policy, even though it is, as the facts show, a ghost. In fact, 99.3 per cent of all benefit claims are genuine and are made out of real need – according to government figures – and that figure rises to 99.6 per cent in sickness and disability cases. It’s not a perfect situation but any system will have its abusers, and that’s why we have fraud detection built into it. Benefit fraud is not a huge problem, and Miliband does himself and his party enormous harm by adopting the Tory line and alienating the genuinely sick and disabled people who have been fighting the unjust removal of their benefits by a system he seems unlikely to reform, for all his weasel words.
He returns to this theme later: “Just as there is a minority who should be working and don’t want to, there is a majority who are desperate for work and can’t find it.” Evil, divisive, Tory rhetoric. Isn’t this the man who wants a ‘One Nation’ government? Why is he trying to split us up and set us against each other? That’s Tory policy.
Have some more of the same: “I want to teach my kids that it is wrong to be idle on benefits, when you can work” – implying that people – many people – are in just that position. Tory divisiveness from a Labour leader.
Here’s another: “It appears that some people get something for nothing and other people get nothing for something – no reward for the years of contribution they make.” This one really got my goat because it turns the principle of the Welfare State on their head.
For goodness’ sake, it isn’t about paying in money in order to get exactly the same amount back another time. It’s about contributing to the welfare of the state as a whole, including everyone in it. A Labour leader should be making the argument that this is not about selfishness; if you’re a part of this nation, you contribute to its well-being. “From each according to [their] ability, to each according to [their] needs,” as Marx put it. His philosophy may be out of fashion with the ‘Me, me, me’ generation but that doesn’t make those words any less relevant to the funding of a national economy.
I wonder whether quoting Bob Crow from last night’s This Week programme will actually make the message any easier to hear, but I’ll give it a go. He said: “It’s the strong helping the weak – that’s what the whole welfare benefits system is based on.”
“We have to tackle this too,” bleated Miliband. Yes, we do – by correcting the wrong attitude, whenever we hear someone spouting it. So get a clue, Ed.
There are dire portents for the future “laser-focusing” of a Labour government’s spending, as well.
Look at his ideas about attempts to get people into work. He said: “This government’s work programme can leave people… unemployed year after year after year,” leading one to believe that he’ll ditch the work programme and its useless money-grubbing private, for-profit ‘provider’ firms that have been leeching millions from us for years. Official figures have proved they are worse than useless.
Alas no. He went on to voice his support for the grievously damaging Atos-run assessment regime for Employment and Support Allowance, claiming that this backdoor genocide policy “was the right thing to do. We continue to support tests” that kill 73 people per week, on average, according to official figures last year.
His problem with the Atos test was that it should be focused on helping to identify “the real skills of each disabled person and the opportunities they could take up” – completely missing the point about disability. Of course people who are off work with illness have skills, but they cannot use those skills because they are ill! It doesn’t take a genius to work out the sticking-point so he must be intentionally avoiding it.
And then, the killing blow: “So these tests should be connected to a work programme that itself is tested on its ability to get disabled people jobs that work for them.” He would re-employ the useless and wasteful ‘work programme provider’ firms, putting the final seal of hopelessness on the lives of people who thought they could rely on him for help.
Perhaps the worst betrayal in this whole sorry mess – and I’ve only scratched the surface here – is the fact that Miliband and Labour had the front to claim they were making tough decisions. There’s nothing tough about copying the hated policies of a hated and failed administration. There’s nothing tough about allowing their private-interest friends to continue bleeding the state of its cash, and there’s nothing tough about opening up more opportunities for them to strip us of whatever we have left.
Miliband and his team have proved they cannot take the tough decisions; that they are followers and not leaders. If they can’t – or won’t – step up and meet the challenge of our times – starting with a retraction and apology for yesterday’s speech – then they should make way for somebody who will.
And they should do it now, while there is still time to mount a credible opposition to David Cameron’s government of failures.
Postscript: One aspect of the speech I haven’t explored in detail relates to housing benefit, and the pledge to build more houses. Be warned: It seems this heralds another expensive and wasteful private finance initiative (PFI) adventure: “We would let [councils] keep some of the savings they make, on the condition that they invested that money in helping build new homes.” I have a feeling that those homes would fall into private hands at some point in the future – at huge cost to the taxpayer. Again.
Ian Westell said:
If Milliband thinks this is opposition we are all doomed. If you can’t persuade a disgruntled population of this magnitude to vote against what we are experiencing, then, you are not fit for the job. Hang your head in shame man. Show us your true colours and join the tory party!!!
Keith Lenaghan said:
Labour won’t get elected on a left wing agenda. Ed is doing the right thing
Mike Sivier said:
He’s doing the right-WING thing. That’s not his job. If people want Tory policies they’ll vote Conservative; they won’t bother with a Labour version that’s exactly the same.
And his capitulation on spending and welfare was utterly pointless – the Tories have lost both those arguments. All he had to do was present a strong alternative case and keep pushing it.
Smiling Carcass said:
As Mike said, an alternative and push it. I have said for 30 years the Labour Party must not turn its back on the working class; in 1997 the country was ready for change and we didn’t need the Blairites or their pseudo-Tory policy to get a Labour Party elected- they’d have voted fopr Pol Pot if he’d led Labour!
What the Labour Party should have been doing all the time they were out of office was to examine how they could get the socialist message across to a country that had begun to stagnate on greed. This is what they should have done- not turned coat and fled to the centre-right.
I’ll never vote Labour again while it is run by Miliband and his ilk. Giove me 600 Dennis Skinners, Dave Nelists, Michael Foots and Tony Benns any time and I’ll vote Labour with a joyous heart.
labour are the new tories.theyll all sh*t in the same clog from now on.
Mike Sivier said:
Is that a real saying?
It is now!
When you’ve sold out as much as Labour have since the mid-1980’s, there’s nothing left to sell…..
A Labour voter all my adult life, I will not willingly vote for a party that would allow a ToryLite pillock like Ed to lead it. The problem is, if the Left’s votes are dispersed among the “lesser parties,” as seems likely from the online rhetoric, then it will virtually guarantee a majority for the Conservatives, whoever leads them by then.
Why? Simple, the Left’s voters can be fickle and lazy, they always have been while, for the most part Tories are loyal to the party and keen to vote, when it comes to the crunch. And if UKIP’s star continues to rise (god help us all!), Labour could so very easily come third in 2015 – and will have only themselves to blame.
Get rid of Ed – now – because it’s almost too late to do so and leave a new leader to to become established, if it isn’t already. Do it – you have nothing to lose.
I so agree with you Ron. Unless we get a better person to lead the party, and better people around him, then we are screwed!
guy fawkes said:
“I want to teach my kids that it’s wrong to be idle on benefits when you can work”, let’s hope that Ed and Byrne and co.are in the dole queue come the next election – not even securing a place as the shadow party.
“The welfare state is about helping the weak”, I think he should rephrase that to helping the poor, although a lot of the poor have worked hard and paid into the benefits systems all their life, yet have never earned what the middle and upper classes did to protect them from poverty.
Brilliant piece Mike.
Mike Sivier said:
There was much more material available than I could possibly fit into an article – this was almost 1,500 words, which is very long for me – so I was a little worried that I might be missing important material. There will be something else to talk about tomorrow but this must not be allowed to quietly disappear. I’d appreciate anybody’s ideas on how to keep it going, so the Labour leadership don’t get a false impression that people approve of what they’re doing.
I can’t understand anyone having issue with your last post on this subject and there is certainly no need for clarification.
Milliband’s speech was something you expect from IDS or Cameron not a LABOUR leader.
It is not about pauperising the rich nor about enriching the poor it’s about making sure everyone in society is looked after at least to a basic standard.
Let’s be honest we all know people who have been lazy and never worked, we all know someone somewhere who has faked illness or disability, that’s life. In life there are some who will take the p**s but they are always few and far between.
But on the other hand we all know lots of people who have taken more than their fair share including most of our MP’s and their families and who get away scot free.
What is happening now is the demonizing of anyone who is not working 50 hours a week and doesn’t have £50 grand plus in the bank.
Sick. disabled, carers, part time workers, working parents, elderly, young, foreign, state employees, in fact every section of society is a target for hate except those who caused the problems in the first place. Namely Bankers assisted by the last few governments.
Tony Hemphill said:
Like i been saying for the last 3yrs the labour party is no more,its dead someone just nailed miliband and his party on to the opposition benches it is no more,it had joined the living dead.. YES IN 2014 Because i want nothing more to do with Westminster and its SE of england bias
I tried to analyse the speech by copying into a word processor and annotating in red. It came to twenty pages, but by page nine there was more red than black. I gave up!
I now conclude that I have to agree with everything said here.
There is one point I noticed (on page 4 of my file):
Whereas the Labour government took action, of which I am proud, (of which I am not proud. We should have imposed a living wage then) to increase tax credits to help make (the tax payer pay employers) work pay and to address pensioner poverty in a way no previous government had done since the War.
The brackets are I my annotations.
As you can see I think these were real weasel words the increase in Tax Credits is one of the main reasons for the rise in the welfare bill: the tax payer funding businesses who pay poverty pages. This is definitely not a socialist idea; it is The Red Conservative Party.
Samwise Gamgee said:
To be fair I was pleased when Ed Milliband won the Labour leadership in 2010, “at last” I thought, “a genuine alternative to the Conservatives after years of New Labour with Blair and Brown”. Now it seems “Red Ed” is just another shade of blue, with almost the same outlook, policies and attitudes as the current government. Labour needs a leader with the backbone to challenge the Blue Labour/New Labour tendency that has infected the party since the mid-late nineties.
Who will step forward after 2015?
hekatetrimorpheSarah Parker said:
I hope people will get involved in Left Unity, which aims to start the construction of a new democratically run party (some way) to the left of labour – you are right that Labour is promising to keep attacking ordinary people, should it succeed in winning the next election.
Alex Reddy said:
brilliant piece of writing, spot on, exactly my thoughts !
Owen Jones for PM, repeal all anti-union laws,re nationalize service industries and utilities,and become a socialist country,that should be what Labour stand for and that is what this country needs.
Sally Burgess (@sillybugs55) said:
I’m not going to say “I told you so” Mike, as he’s far, far worse than even I expected. I’ve been wanting him gone as long as he’s been opposition leader, never thought he was a real Labour man – I’d love to hear what his dad would say about him.
It may be time we all started returning our membership cards, maybe the message would get through. The man is a total coward, spineless and vacuous – hmm think IDS said the same thing – the only thing I will ever agree with him on. No passion, no vision, no understanding of what Labour voters want, ie an opposition, a novel idea for him I think. I have a very bad feeling that the promise he will provide jobs for all means the continuation of the barking mad Workfare. I think I will be cancelling my direct debit because until they grasp that austerity and their crazy work programmes don’t work we are looking at a scary future with no choice. We need another party, a red Labour Party.
Mike Sivier said:
I’ve written to request a debate about this locally, Sally – possibly leading to pressure on the leadership for a change. I wouldn’t recommend returning your card just yet (although it’s a tactic that seems to be working on the Tories and their Yellow Helpers).
Other readers: for information, Sally lives just down the road from me and is a fellow Labour member. We have had many conversations about the suitability of our leaders for their roles, in which I have generally taken the optimistic view. Mistakenly, it appears.
Thomas M said:
There won’t be an NHS left by the time any left wing party gets big enough to win seats.
guy fawkes said:
hear hear murray.
Tony Britton said:
Thank you, spot on
and reinstate Clause 4
We do have to keep this going Mike, there is no doubt about it as this cannot just float away in the wind. This is serious! Ed Milliband is NOT the leader we need for the opposition as he’s just a Tory, and he doesn’t even need to disguise it!
The only thing that I can think of is a short, but firm email or letter being sent out to each and every MP in the Labour Party, as well as to every member that we can get addresses to. It only needs to say something along the lines of “As a citizen of this country and eligible to vote, I put forward a Vote Of No Confidence to the Labour leadership”
Sometimes its the simpler things that do work. If every member of the Labour Party did this, with their name and addresses on, they have to by law answer you. And if this letter lands in the inbox or letter box of the chairman of the Labour Party over and over again, and maybe some of it’s biggest donaters , as well as the Unions and their members doing the same, then it MAY make a difference. It’s not a petition, it’s a genuine vote of no confidence in Milliband.
Something has to be done, before Labour get blown out of the water by Ukip and we end up with another five years of Conservatives.
I have decided that I want Mike to be leader of Labour. I read what you say every day and agree with you all the way! I don’t feel I can vote for Labour if they are just goiing to treat me, ( I’m disabled and battling for my benefits) just as insanely cruelly as the ConDems are. Yet I don’t want to waste a vote either by voting another way and the Cons still get in. Feels like a no win situation at the moment! I “worked very hard” for years and that is why I am in the physical state I am now! I expect some of the MP’s even had their university fees paid by people like me who paid taxes!!!!
Mike Sivier said:
I suspect you’re right.
Thanks very much for the vote! I don’t think it’ll happen within the next two years, but someday, maybe. 🙂
Adele Winston said:
The late Bill Owen, with the advent of New Labour, said he now had no-one to vote for who represented him. I agreed with him then & feel the same now. I am Old Left, a trade unionist. Don’t know who Milliband speaks for but it SURE AS HELL isn’t me.
anthony lynch said:
I have been a labour man for over 50 years now ,but they get my vote no more,and I whould tell my union to stop backing them
I am probably going to upset a lot of people here but , I don’t think a left wing party has a cat in hells chance of getting elected.
All people remember is the “loony left” revenge seeking, anti wealth, over the top tax taking Labour of the 70’S. Basic tax 33% and higher rate 98% not good for anyone.
What is needed is a party that recognises that hard work is worthy of good rewards. That private enterprise does have a role to play in any economy, That not all privatisation works and more importantly union membership ( like any other club membership) is a choice, not something to be enforced on people.
Like it or not there will always be rich people, whether it is the elite rich we have now or the elite rich power holders in Government such as in USSR and China.
The one and only over-riding consideration is that we ALL do share in bringing the country back to life and make our contribution according to ability. Revenge against the rich may be on a lot of minds but satisfaction is a short lived sensation and can ultimately lead to cutting ones nose off to spite ones face
guy fawkes said:
In the 70’s I was paying 33% income tax and never quibbled about it because I knew it was funding a welfare state and nationalized industries that were loosing money yes because of waste but mainly to keep people in decent paid jobs.
I was also paying 18% interest on our mortgage, so they have little to whine about these days with the interest rate being so low.
I’m sorry but I am going to upset you now and say you sound like one of those “xuck you Jack I’m alright” kind of people.
Not sure were you get my I’m al’right jack attitude from. Anyone who has read any of my other posts should know that is definitely not my attitude.
My post says we should ALL do our bit to help those who need helping according to ability.
As a partially disabled person I have as much to lose as anyone under this government, I receive Mobility allowance and because I can walk more than 50m albeit in some pain I know for a fact I will lose it. There are no shops or other amenities within 50m. I live in Wales which as anyone knows is full of steep hills especially in the valleys where I live. On losing mobility allowance I will become a virtual recluse, even walking from a bus stop to a place of work can put me in extreme pain.
Mobility allowance allowed me to take some of those s**t low paid jobs we apparently do not want to do ( I have been an office cleaner and cocky watchman both low paid jobs) as otherwise I wouldn’t have been able to run a car.
For the record I do not get a new car every 3 years I run a 14 yr old car and the DLA I get covers just the running costs.
The excesses of the “loony left” are well documented so I don’t really need to elaborate here and being a long time resident of Liverpool in the 80’s I saw only too well how corrupt and inefficient not to mention self serving so called socialist extremists were.
I have no objection to (and never did for exactly the reasons you state) paying a 33% basic rate of tax (after all I wasn’t paying 20% vat on everything) but I would most definitely start screaming if you wanted 98% because I worked harder and had a little more !!
Well said Mike as usual you are spot on
Mike Sivier said:
I’m in a proper quandary about what to do for the best, though.
Sally Burgess (@sillybugs55) said:
Well, I think a starting point would be to demand that Labout, as a socialist party, should be to immediately stop targeting the poorest to pay the debts of the rich. That harassment and persecution of the sick and disabled and the Jobseekers should be a no-go area, I’ll move onto the ever-lasting criticism that New Labour contracted Atos in the first place shortly. That all employers must pay a living wage, and, at the very least, the minimum wage raised considerably, possibly for very small enterprises with under a certain number of employees so when they got to a profit level where they wanted to expand wages would gradually rise to living wage. All of this should be included in any business plan presented for bank loans and grants. I would also allow these small business’s to relax some maternity rights, once again with the expansion of said business these rules should be re-instated. I believe that the public would go for this as it’s business friendly & common-sense. This ratio rationale could also be used to help stop the iniquity of pay differential between the very top & lowest wage disparity. There’s loads more but this will turn into an essay if I continue this theme – haven’t even touched on the privatisation issue yet …
Whoops, seems I’ve just gone over number of characters allowed – will have to continue later. Ultimately, we need a new, well-thought out, manifesto as an alternative.
Grocky Groc said:
Sees foot – takes out gun – shoots it… rolls about on ground wondering why it hurts and there’s so much bleeding.
guy fawkes said:
Perhaps I was a little harsh in my comments but the so called “loony left”, did a lot to help the poorest in society and were no more self serving,corrupt nor inefficient than what we have now with the work providers and money in the form of EU grants being frittered away on various duplicate agencies or charities.
I personally feel to take low paid jobs is to undermine those that are demanding business pay adequate wages, not have them shored up by public money in the form of tax credits, surely we could all run a business if we are given start up grants, concessions for rental units and subsidy for wages, tax incentives etc etc. The problem is a lot of these business’ don’t survive because of the Global economic climate and our ability to compete within it unless the workforce live on slave wages.
To criticize a 98% higher tax rate I can understand, but the higher tax rate should be substantial because a capitalist society does not have a cap on earnings(which I think there should be) only a limit on what the lower paid can drop below. The whole pay structure system is unfair as far as I’m concerned because you should educate yourself for the benefit of society not for the benefit of your wage packet only then will we see the marxist theory “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” in progress, The need for most people is a roof, warmth, food, clothing, household utilities etc, and if all were paid the average wage all would be able to have these things, not the disparity we see now between the rich and poor.
The poorest paid such as the miners have worked harder and in more dangerous conditions than those who were paying 98%income tax, coming from the Welsh valleys you should know that – so let’s champion them for a change.
The problem is being nor more or less self serving than those we have today is not really a good comparison it just makes them equally as bad.
Yes I do agree some good came of the “loony left” personally I received a 35% wage rise when we joined the TGWU.
Of course taking low paid jobs is not ideal, but in an economy where that is all that is available what choice do you have. I agree the wage structure is barmy where a non productive cushy job in an office pays more than a miner 300ft below ground and becomes even more so when someone straight from University gets paid twice as much as a nurse with 10 years experience.
What we need in this country is a massive cultural change to enable us to compete globally. I don’t mean in wages and working practices but in the way we interact as social groups.
We have more of our parents / grandparents in care homes than most other countries, we have more “broken homes” than other countries, we are encouraged to separate from our families at a younger age than most other countries, we are encouraged to live alone more than other countries.
We have been encouraged to drink and gamble our lives away, spend all day watching tv, and treat each other as opponents for whatever scraps we can gather for ourselves.
For the last few hundred years the divide and conquer ethos has been used against us extremely successfully.
Only by co-operating as a cohesive society looking after each others interests can the country recover.
The Labour party did once unite us and brought us prosperity, however as we have seen even they have fallen to the lure of big money and unbridled power. If those we see as our role models and uniting force abandon us then it becomes every man for himself
I fear now that barring a massive disaster striking the country we are unlikely to get that cohesion again.
As you may know regarding high wages Caerphilly councillors have been taken to court for trying to award themselves a huge pay rise, hopefully a first small step in stopping these grabbers..
Reblogged this on HUMAN RIGHTS & POLITICAL JOURNAL.
guy fawkes said:
A very good analysis of how our country has become socially divided and socially remiss of it’s duty regarding the elderly, but this is due largely to the social agencies of the state who are taking control of the affairs of both the young and the elderly’ and forcing some unnecessarily into care homes, to free up much needed housing stock due to bad housing policy decisions.
Social mobility has also played it’s part in separating families, as did the greed of the middle and upper classes who chose to have careers and bring in two good salaries from which they could afford child minders and cleaners, but which increased inflation to the point that both mother and father or single parent low earners were forced financially to leave the nurturing of their children to others (if they could find cheap childcare) while they slaved away just to keep their head above water with increasing rents and utility bills and come home to still do the cooking and cleaning themselves.
Mothers have not learned the skills of their mothers with regards to nurturing and cooking, skills which are condemned as stereotyping by the feminists but are still just as necessary today for creating a homely, stable environment for children to grow up in.
New labours policies on extending drinking hours to create jobs for people that should really be at home with their children was not a good policy but was accepted by what is a largely middle class political sector that has abandoned working class values to the detriment of society in my eyes. Why bother having children if you don’t want to rear them?
Just for the record I was not advocating corruption by any party, but you only made a point of blaming the loony left for corruption hence my reply. without going into a rant I totally agree that those in positions of power locally, nationally and internationally are manipulating economic policy to favour their own grubby ends and why we need real honest and fair policies made by the people not by the so called intelligentsia.
It all rather depends on what you mean by social mobility ? Does one have to abandon one’s family because you get a degree and become a higher earner than your parents? or because you are mixing with “a better class of person” than your family.
“Social mobility” is just another name for snobbery. I am a better class of person than someone earning less or who doesn’t have a degree.
Job mobility however is probably what you mean, having to travel for work ?
I have said for a long time that feminism has been one of the greatest causes of social damage to this country ( ducks to avoid all the s**t thrown at me).
That does not in any way imply I believe women belong in the kitchen but women for centuries were the backbone of family life, keeping kids in order, making sure families were fed, instilling discipline, morals and manners into children ( most often because the men were away fighting wars). This was not “forced” on them by society as we are led to believe but a natural “maternal instinct” and a desire to see their children had a better life.
Since the 80’s, surprise surprise, women have become men, they drink, fight, swear, abandon their kids, s**g anyone they want to, put their own needs before their kids and live their “own” life. This is all done in the name of feminism as it is their “right” to be equal to men. (uncaring and non paternal)
One cannot blame the women of course but the erstwhile social engineers of various governments and the media as a whole. Sex and the city, Big brother, I’m a celebrity, The valleys, TOWIE, ALL the soaps, they all push this agenda that women should be bed hopping, money grabbing, drunken slappers looking for “nasty men” to give them excitement in their lives. The moral of the story being “if you can’t beat them just become worse than them” Hard working men who provide for their families and look after their kids are portrayed as boring, slovenly, nerdy, sexually inadequate unworthy partners
Far from making women equal to men it has actually done nothing to reduce violence, rape, domestic abuse and lack of respect for women. Women are no longer a stabilising influence on men but now actively encourage men to drink and fight and abandon their families. Men no longer have respect for women and treat them much the same as they would any other guy down the pub.
I think maybe this discussion is getting a bit long lol..
Mike Sivier said:
No, it WAS social mobility that was being discussed – the idea that the job a person gets, no matter how near or far, would alter their standing in life.
Sally Burgess (@sillybugs55) said:
Interrupted by need to do some dishes while painkillers still working. What do you think of a Labour version of the Spartacus report? Of course we’d need some excellent number crunchers and budgeting experts, but when we have the abysmal performance of Gideon’s figures that shouldn’t be difficult. The likes of David Blanchflower or Paul Krugman could wipe the floor with him. Talking of wiping floors – I’d better make busy with the mop & bucket! Anyway just a thought.
guy fawkes said:
I agree with everything you said in your last posting regarding feminists being out of control and not doing the female sex any favours with their demands for equality. Whether we like it or not men and women are different and some men are different from some men, as are some women, herein lies the problem.
Pingback: Weekly Update #007 | Things Can Only Get Better