If the parents are inadequate then the state should step in and make it compulsory for kids who are at risk to attend somewhere to be fed.
Cummings Government searches desperately for a reverse gear.
- Thread starter JohnD
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Given the policy of privatising/'outsourcing' everything that'll be McDonalds then...
'Let them eat s hit' as that old saying goes
What Noseall said is absolute truth. There's no 'pretty much' about it.
Cameron is/was a Tory, He was PM from 2010 to 2016. The Tories had the majority of Cabinet positions.
The Tories had the greatest number of MPs.
It was a Tory led government, no doubt about it.
D
dontbelieveawordofit
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsored Links
D
dontbelieveawordofit
maybe this is the norm of what the government sees when they’re making the decisions. It’s on the news after all.
It was a coalition. No doubt about it.
Its where each side gives and takes.
A bit like being in the eu. Except the eu always "takes".
Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher
D
Deleted member 18243
Tory maybe, but certainly not conservative.
yes, the EU used to take the specifications and regulations we drafted, especially on Financial Services but also on some technical and engineering mattters, and we even wrote the Convention on Human Rights. And they used to take our votes in the European Parliament, and our nominations for the Council of Ministers.
It will be harder for us, making and seling goods and services to meet their rules and specifications, when we have no input and no influence on defining what they should be.
Ah, well.
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,081
- Reaction score
- 3,020
- Country
That's easy, just sell them all our factory seconds.
"Parents are inadequate" ......Victim shaming
Being short of money to feed your family is due to right wing neoliberalism not because parents are inadequate.
Suffering in work poverty maybe due to high cost of private rent, zero hour contracts,
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,081
- Reaction score
- 3,020
- Country
No it isn't.
Don't be silly, while low wages may be one factor you don't seem to be able to accept that some parents are incapable of looking after their children properly and no matter how much money you give them they will just waste it on their addictions.
Another issue is single parent families, don't you think that 2 parent families would be more effective in relieving poverty among low wage earners.
One parent goes out to work while the other looks after the kids, it isn't rocket science.
The present system where a single parent has to work and still look after her kids is a major cause of child poverty.
I know one single parent who works but has to spend more on child minders than she does on rent.
She is always moaning about being skint.
If she was in a conventional relationship her partner would be working full time and she could work part time and still look after her kids properly.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,782
- Reaction score
- 849
- Country
No, but there are many cases where it is not so clear what it best. What we do know is that for kids from very poor or abusive homes, school is often the best place for them. Teachers can keep an eye on them, report if they see signs of harm. Education is often the best route out of poverty. One way to encourage kids into school is to offer them hot meals they don't get at home. Plus, kids learn better when well nourished.
In short, feeding kids creates a happier and more prosperous society. The cause for their hunger is irrelevant, the focus should be in providing a safe environment now and feeing them now.
The government could very easily change policy to make it easier to accomplish this 52 weeks a year, but instead they are taking the line that the system already provides. But the evidence shows that it is not.
A friend is a teacher, I wasn't so sure about the news of all these hungry, starving British kids. But he confirmed it, every day he sees hungry kids, kids who skip lunch because their parents haven't put money on their lunch card, but also not enrolled for support.
Although many people, teachers included, don't think schools should have to be responsible or this, the fact is that schools are the only opportunity for society to identify and help resolve these problems.
A lot of local councils, charities and private companies are stepping in, but this just reminds me of these:
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,081
- Reaction score
- 3,020
- Country
Who is responsible for this ?
Sponsored Links
