Something for the week-end

“How can individual freedom be extended while at the same time protecting that degree of public provision which voters believe necessary for a civilised life?” Discuss.
(Hat tip to Peter Hoskin/Coffee House)

  • Mark McGregor

    While I like the idea of parents being supported in spending more time with their children in the earliest years (parents not just mothers) I wonder how the idea would be funded, certainly in the earliest stages, where there is no reduction in the payout to those claiming for older children. Is it to be funded for 18 odd years by a gradually declining but increased tax burden? Where would this tax be derived from? Also, unless it took account of low income families it could be a benefit of use to the rich only. Those on lower incomes couldn’t afford to reduce the later assistance and would seem to be excluded from getting any benefit.

  • Wilde Rover

    Individual freedom cannot be extended.

    What part of World Peace didn’t you get?

  • Gregory

    If people want freedom they should immigrate to the United States, what we need in the EU, is for somebody to send at least one plumber back to Poland.

    That’s a priority, and he better not have turned gay (a homosexualist) in his travelling.

    I am a soft spoken critic of the ECHR, Bill of Rights, but, and if, we are going to lower the age of electoral franchise,

    we may as well make it 6 years old, that way the voter will have enough schooling to do an x or two, or a doodle, or a smiley face.

    A bit like Scottish adult voters.

    ‘The polls have been hit by major problems with seven counts suspended and up to 100,000 ballot papers spoilt.’

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6623287.stm

    Poland really needs that plumber.

  • Harry Flashman

    From the article;

    *In Denmark, 300 parents can take the state education budget for their children and set up their own school. One quarter of all Danish schools are now run along these lines.

    The then boss of the Inner London Education Authority objected to the idea. Reactionary working-class parents would seize the opportunity to run schools with children sitting in rows learning their tables by rote and likewise how to spell.*

    Doesn’t that just show up the real nasty truth about socialism?

    They couldn’t allow their constituents the right to run their own schools as they might actually do a better job than those run by teachers’ unions, and instead of having state subsidised left wing propaganda institutions they might end up with, you know, actual schools.

    Educate the working class? Christ no, you couldn’t have that! They might end up voting Tory.

    Much better to keep them as servile clients of the state on the welfare reservations, poor, ignorant and in their proper place.

  • Gregory

    “In Denmark, 300 parents can take the state education budget for their children and set up their own school. One quarter of all Danish schools are now run along these lines. ”

    I mentioned Denmark today in a meeting with SF. The parents need to, it’s Denmark, the teachers there are wild. If they’re not making porn they’re doing something else.

    They’ve even run strip shows (using schoolgirls) for the benefit of teachers to decide (wait for it) who sits where in the canteen!

    The PSNI by the way have *no* way of vetting any of that.

    The parents went to the UN when pedophiles took over a raft of their schools.

    All of Denmark is like Humberside, early years, is not very safe there, it is scary.

    Child Sexual Abuse in Denmark:
    Report to the UN Committee
    on the Rights of the Child
    Alternative Report to the Second Periodic Report of Denmark
    Danish Association of Parents
    for the Protection of Children (FBB)

  • Are any members of NIPSA going to be charged with child abuse following the disgraceful scenes at picket lines during the recent dispute.

  • Comrade

    It seems to me that individual freedom can only be secured with a powerful state. The alternative to state power is centralised power in the hands of a few. The economy/machinary of the state, far from being in the hands of all of us happy free agents is geared toward those who can afford it.

    The power in a country will always be in the hands of some institution or other so it may as well be in one that everyone is able to play part in equally. A democratic and transparent state seems to be the only one that fits the bill.

    Why does anyone think that a totalitarian situation is more likley to happen in a country controled by the state than one controlled by the wealthy? Provided the mechanisms of the state allows for pluarity and transparency where’s the danger?

  • Gregory

    “Are any members of NIPSA going to be charged with child abuse following the disgraceful scenes at picket lines during the recent dispute. ”

    Who precisely would pay some of my costs?

    Between Special Brnch and the teaching unions, I qualify for political asylum to the nordic country of choice.

    I wouldn’t see NICCY or anybody else helping. I would be vilified, smeared, intimidated, harassed and generally hounded for my trouble.

    The Labor Relations Agency, for example, became involved in the Laurehill scandal which I found positively shocking,

    I’m still gobsmacked by the lack of moral vocabulary of it all. It was and is blank stare territory,

    it was also silly (in that case) because the NASUWT hadn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of winning through on ANY of their so-called issues.

    (they wanted immunity from prosecution for their members, and they thought threy could get it)

    Laurelhill imploded on them because they irritated people in America, who basically had had enough of the union’s bizarre behavior.

    Possibly the shortage case in front of a Lord Chief Justice in over a century.

  • Gregory

    “Provided the mechanisms of the state allows for pluarity and transparency where’s the danger? ”

    That’s a lot of civil servants to sack. The silly sausages, are group-think indoctrinated to run the country via press release.

    G.

  • aquifer

    Field understands how the socialist state undermines the altruism that produced the socialism in the first place. Socialism is the recognition by free individuals that certain forms of social organisation are rational and desirable. Without freedom and choice (and the freedom to suffer from bad choices) socialism withers, or simply becomes fiscally unsustainable as dependency is incentivised.

    Unfortunately the schoolboy careerists who infest new labour take progressive schooling for granted, because they benefitted from it themselves, but fail to notice when such social escalators are broken.

    Margaret Thatcher removed the transferable married persons tax allowance, and as marriage competes with government as a source of freedom and support, labour replaced it with tax credits based on child numbers. You too can be a welfare state, but never an autonomous republic.

    It is assumed that a free market needs value-free social governance, and a surrender of authority to market forces. The credit crunch reminds us that when the market-makers get it wrong, that people suffer.

    Trouble is that the term socialism is burned out through over-use by ignorant and incompetent opportunists. The free mutual and co-operative rythms of progressive movements in these islands were eclipsed by the heavy metal of marxist gangsterism, and then increased wealth made corporate state social democracy look affordable.

    Frank is the auditor who says social capital matters more than das kapital ever did, and that new labour is therefore broke.

    Less old labour, more old school.

  • Gregory

    “Field understands how the socialist state undermines the altruism that produced the socialism in the first place.”

    At the risk of sounding very dumb. who is Field? Is this Frank Field?

    I would agree with your thrust, the thought struck me that the schoolboy politicians of the Blair era, were people of no account in any other walk of life, it is nepotism, from the college refractory to cabinet office.

    I’m directed towards certain politics, when I first enountered the Blair nu-crew, so many years ago, some were supporting PIE/GLF, and I bore them no ill will, I just thought they were terribly naive and incredibly stupid.

    ‘Unfortunately the schoolboy careerists who infest new labour take progressive schooling for granted, because they benefitted from it themselves, but fail to notice when such social escalators are broken.’

    Rather than a malignant entreprise, nu-labor’s greatest crime, was that they didn’t have joined up thinking or input/output analysis as a practiced art.

    There is malcious, and there is stupidity, and a lack of gravitas or merit pervades the remnants of nu-labor.