Labour - For goodness sake, now free childcare...

magick · 21 Sep 2008 at 11:13

fini said:
If it helps people to get back to work and means that kids, that would otherwise be ignored by high chavs playing playstation,

The sort of chavs that sit around getting high and playing on playstations won't work period.

fini said:
which is ultimately good for politics so we can have a real choice.

It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always wins. Think about it next election when you'r deciding which party is going to lie to you the least.

fini · 21 Sep 2008 at 11:19

magick said:
The sort of chavs that sit around getting high and playing on playstations won't work period.

So just give up and don't try?

magick said:
It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always wins. Think about it next election when you'r deciding which party is going to lie to you the least.

Well aren't we Mr Cynical? It's always better to have choice - even if you think both choices are rubbish.

magick · 21 Sep 2008 at 11:29

fini said:
Well aren't we Mr Cynical? It's always better to have choice - even if you think both choices are rubbish.

Sorry to sound cynical but we don't really have any choice. Labour and the Conservatives are both two sides of the same coin.

People have now had enough of labour and will swing to the conservatives for a few terms then once they've had enough of them they'll swing back to labour.

It's a never ending cycle and a perfect system that keeps people believing they have some degree of say over who runs there lives.

Surfer · 21 Sep 2008 at 11:47

sounds like a good idea. As long as its not for chav parents who pack their 9 kids off to the nursery then just stay at home themselves claiming benefit for themselves and the 9 kids.

m4cc45 · 21 Sep 2008 at 12:19

I heard somewhere earlier it's going to take around 10 years to come in and cost around a billion pounds a year to support.

Personally I have no problem with them saying 'vastly reduced childcare for working parents' but to say free childcare for everyone is wrong and is going to increase my taxes. Personally I haven't, and don't want, kids. I like me and the mrs to have a pleasant weekend together without the thought of getting up and then having to have our lives revolved around a kid. Do I get anything for that, for actually not being a drain on the system? Do I buggery!

Besides it'll never come in. Everyone with an ounce of intelligence is going to vote for the conservatives. I hate to say that but labour are leaving us no option. They need to get that prat out of No. 10 asap.

M.

JBuk · 21 Sep 2008 at 12:21

Aides were stressing that the extra childcare places were an aspiration rather than a firm policy commitment

I think that says it all really, its just a carrot thats being dangled and will probably never happen

Dolph · 21 Sep 2008 at 12:23

There's nothing free about it, what they mean is another way to spend the money they have taken by force.

Hopefully labour will be obliterated so hard at the ballot box they never return to government...

BigglesPiP · 21 Sep 2008 at 12:24

And so it starts, the popularity contest before the next general election. Only this time it's going to take the country beyond the brink of disaster. When the Conservatives get in they'll have to make hugely unpopular decisions just to get the country back on the rails. But then you know this, because the same happens EVERY time labour get in power.

And J. K. Rowling (OBE) donating £1m isn't helping, that's basically Harry Potter endorsing Labour (She got the OBE before all this right?).

Bertie Smalls · 21 Sep 2008 at 12:55

Dolph said:
Hopefully labour will be obliterated so hard at the ballot box they never return to government...

You mean like the Tories 11 years ago ?. When they get in they will put back social welfare by at least 11 years and then continue to do it year after year.

The right wing stance by the outspoken majority on this forum disappoints me. You are actually complaining that they want to help the less well off ?.

Dolph · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:12

Bertie Smalls said:
You mean like the Tories 11 years ago ?. When they get in they will put back social welfare by at least 11 years and then continue to do it year after year.

Social mobility and dependancy have got worse, not better, under labour, confirming that far from putting social welfare forward, they have made it far worse. There's a reason why Labour traditionally have spent far more time in opposition than they have in government. The only reason they lasted this long was that Brown carried on Conservative economic policies for a few years before he really started his tax and spend plans, delaying the inevitable result of their repeatedly failed polices.

The right wing stance by the outspoken majority on this forum disappoints me. You are actually complaining that they want to help the less well off ?.

No, I'm complaining that they aren't helping the less well off. All they are doing is encouraging a culture of state dependancy and and continuning the policies that have removed responsibility from people for their own fate, encouraging the nanny state, controlling culture that tends to be associated with the authoritarian left.

Furthermore, the ways they choose to 'help' people are horrifically expensive and inefficient as well as ineffective.

cheets64 · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:15

Most people dont send babies to nursery till they are 18 months old, I personally wouldn't want me baby left alone with people on min wages.

Andy · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:17

More education is always a good thing and would be overall beneficial but this is not the most efficient way to do it. The focus should be on getting low income earners of the unemployed earning more or actually working so they can pay for their child to go to nursery. This is would be a lot more beneficial and cost us a lot less overall.
Its just an obvious popularity drive. Lets hope the new gov will actually care how the countries run..

JBuk · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:18

cheets64 said:
Most people dont send babies to nursery till they are 18 months old, I personally wouldn't want me baby left alone with people on min wages.

I don't think a lot of nursery nannies are paid much more than minimum wage anyways

atpbx · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:22

BigglesPiP said:
And so it starts, the popularity contest before the next general election. Only this time it's going to take the country beyond the brink of disaster. When the Conservatives get in they'll have to make hugely unpopular decisions just to get the country back on the rails. But then you know this, because the same happens EVERY time labour get in power.

I dont understand how more people cannot see this.

Labour governments are a nailed on economic disaster each and every time they get into power.
Echoing Dolphs comments, they could be beaten so badly at the next election it may very well destroy the party.
Which can only be a good thing, their backward thinking and pandering to the lazy and stupid is crippling the country.

Dolph · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:22

Andy said:
More education is always a good thing and would be overall beneficial but this is not the most efficient way to do it. The focus should be on getting low income earners of the unemployed earning more or actually working so they can pay for their child to go to nursery. This is would be a lot more beneficial and cost us a lot less overall.
Its just an obvious popularity drive. Lets hope the new gov will actually care how the countries run..

At the ages concerned, education is a lot less important than good parenting. This is yet another way for the state to encourage depandancy and allow parents to offload their children to the state for X number of hours a week, thereby both passing on some more of the responsibility and becoming more dependant on the state structure.

This is not a good thing for any society.

Bertie Smalls · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:30

Dolph said:
Snip

Complete right wing nonsense.

big_white_dog84 · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:32

Goberpiles316 said:
Bit confusing it has nothing to with getting people back to work the free childcare currently available is for a 2.5 hour session, who works for 2.5 hours?

Most local authority staff for a start....

Dolph · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:32

Bertie Smalls said:
Complete right wing nonsense.

Wow, what a convincing retort, It's bound to work hard to change not only my viewpoint but those of everyone reading.

Simply shouting down your opponant is rather indicative of authortarian rather than liberal desires, which fits in far more with the traditional left than the right...

Morba · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:40

Initial thoughts were that this was a good idea, but having read more than the headline I can quite agree with Dolph, its just a case of letting parents pass the kids off to other people again rather than actually doing some parenting.

Parents are the best people to teach kids at a very young age, so why are the government encouraging otherwise?

They want more mothers back at work earning money tbh.

Bertie Smalls · 21 Sep 2008 at 13:53

Dolph said:
Wow, what a convincing retort, It's bound to work hard to change not only my viewpoint but those of everyone reading.

Simply shouting down your opponant is rather indicative of authortarian rather than liberal desires though...

I hardly doubt your viewpoint will ever be changed, so whats the point ?.

The ones that let this country down are the people with their greed and selfishness, and yes sadly a lot of those are the ones abusing the benefits system. Its a crap system but its the only way to help those that need it most.

Ill be one of the first to admit that Labour havent done enough to help those that need it most and seem to be helping the middle classes more in their drive for upward mobilty, but they have done a hell of a lot more than the Tories ever have, or are ever likely to.

Labours motto should be : Damned if we do, damned if we dont.

What the hell is wrong with free child care ?.