I think that highlights very clearly one of the biggest problems with society - sex. Or rather the perceived need for it.
It's wonderful and has many many benefits but to class it as a need is absurd, frankly.
Families need £36,800 to live acceptably.....
- Thread starter Castiel
- Start date
I think that highlights very clearly one of the biggest problems with society - sex. Or rather the perceived need for it.
It's wonderful and has many many benefits but to class it as a need is absurd, frankly.
Why?
We are biological organisms with one "purpose" - to reproduce.
How exactly is it absurd for a biologic organism to follow every single built in drive to reproduce?.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 7,754
- Location
- Cornwall
IMO - I don't think we need wages increases, we need lower living costs. As posted earlier, too much capital is expended into mortgage payments. This is how the Germans have remained fiercely competitive with flat wage inflation, people are less likely to be mortgaged up to the eyeballs.
I would not go as far to say that we need a rental only system in the UK but things are out of control, this money could be better spent buying other consumer goods than going into interest payments.
Japan was a good model for this but an aging population has made this more problematic to argue as a perfect solution i.e their spending as slowed as the older you are, the less likely you are to buy designer clobber, electronics, cars etc.
Japan has little immigration so they are screwed in the long-term.
So, what the UK needs is a growing population, immigration and lower property costs - a toxic mix for an island with the culture and politics that we have.
I would not go as far to say that we need a rental only system in the UK but things are out of control, this money could be better spent buying other consumer goods than going into interest payments.
Japan was a good model for this but an aging population has made this more problematic to argue as a perfect solution i.e their spending as slowed as the older you are, the less likely you are to buy designer clobber, electronics, cars etc.
Japan has little immigration so they are screwed in the long-term.
So, what the UK needs is a growing population, immigration and lower property costs - a toxic mix for an island with the culture and politics that we have.
Last edited:
because he doesn't like kids
He is probably someone with an ambiguous sexuality....
£36k is probably short of the mark for living in the home counties or London. A 3-4 bedroom family house already costs upwards of £400k.
You probably need closer to at least £40k pre tax to be able to raise a family. By that i mean raise them yourself, without sponging off the state.
If two people together cannot muster £40k pa. then they should seriously reconsider having children.
You probably need closer to at least £40k pre tax to be able to raise a family. By that i mean raise them yourself, without sponging off the state.
If two people together cannot muster £40k pa. then they should seriously reconsider having children.
Because unlike other biological organisms, we are capable of reason and logic, allowing us to determine if having offspring is a viable choice.
If I was earning minimum wage, I wouldn't choose to have a kid, as it wouldn't be fair on them imo. I also don't choose to go out without an umbrella if the forecast is heavy rain later in the day.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,336
- Location
- The Orion Spur
We need to understand and take control of that instinct though imo, the need to reproduce shouldn't be our "one purpose", it is a very important aspect of course but we are not animals, we have a choice, I don't begrudge people following that instinct but I think we should be more restrained, we are intellectual organisms after all.
Utter garbage - do you have the maths for that?
Here's some:
Approx 500k people in the top 1% (>£100k income)
Approx 17 million tax payers under the average (under £20k)
Take £10,000 from the richest = Profit £5 Billion)
Redistribute to the needy = £294.117647 per year per tax payer. Or an extra 80p per day.
Yea that's going to really make a difference.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Sex and procreation are basic needs on an individual level as well as a species level. Sometimes we forget we are nothing more than smart monkeys.
I have seem a funny version of Maslow's needs that adds Internet at the bottom.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 7,754
- Location
- Cornwall
thing is, I wasn't on minimum wage when we had the kids, but things changed and then I was (am still but not with them), so unless you can see into the future, surely its best to have them when you feel ready, rather than when you have £100k in the bank 'just in case'?
They solved that one easily by not hiring anyone to administrate it
Any trip to the council for even quick simple things involves 2 hours of wait and a repeated visit down the line because it wasn't sorted the first time. Or nobody in the council ever talks to each other.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 13,336
- Location
- The Orion Spur
And sometimes people forget how important that small distinction is, look at what monkeys have achieved compared to us, we are very (at least on this planet) unique, we as far as I know are the only living species that can defy our instincts, personally I find that amazing.
you've potentially got 20 years of work left to do - plenty of time to find yourself a skill set that's in demand. If you've just got generic IT skills or are in a job that only really utilises general IT skills then why would anyone pay more regardless of whether you're 27 or 47...
learn stuff & change jobs if you want to avoid career stagnation
tis never too late to do this and you've no doubt got plenty of experience in your current field anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Are you saying people on minimum rage do not have the right to have a family? Are you saying that they cannot provide a decent, loving upbringing for a child? Like I said earlier a couple of generations ago even the most basic of what people have now would be luxurious to most people had. They managed to bring up well rounded kids on the bare minimum.
What if, like many, you chose to have a kid as you have stability and a decent salary and then *boom* four months into the pregnancy you lose your job? Because that can happen.
Again, personally, I see no issue with tax being used to provide support for those with children who are less fortunate than people like me who have plenty. It is good for society. The greater good here out ways those who think families shouldn't be supported, or like you say capped at two children.
It's never that black and white.
We are capable of thought and reason - we can look at a situation and determine if it's logical to have children. When you cannot afford to look after yourself, let alone a child, then I'm afraid that 'drive' goes out the window and reason takes over.
I for one and not driven to reproduce, I've managed to stay childless for 26 years, I doubt I'll have any problem for the next 26.
Unless I explode or die from lack of reproduction or something
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
We may delude ourself into thinking we can but in the long run they still win. That's the issue with just being smart monkeys. We lucked out getting out the trees but in all these millions of years of evolution we are still mostly creatures of instinct.
Speak for yourself.
I have no desire to reproduce, nor throw my own faecal matter during a disagreement.
He gets tax credits. Refunds on the tax he pays. Doesn't sound so bad now does it?