1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Marcus Rashford

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by C.R.A.Z.Y, Jun 16, 2020.

  1. wesimmo

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 19, 2012

    Posts: 4,195

    Exactly.

    My sister gave up teaching because she couldn't handle the emotional stress.

    She worked in a really deprived area of Newcastle, some of the stories she can tell about trying to care about children when their parents didn't are heartbreaking.

    Just little things like deliberately spilling something on a child so she could get them into clothes from lost property and wash their own for them without recieving a load of abuse for suggesting something might be wrong to the parents.

    There's little support for teachers in such schools. But while that happens, we're creating a self perpetuating problem because the children get let down by their parents AND the state.

    Let teachers teach. Get more social support services involved. Provide more mental health support to teachers who are on the front line of those battles.

    Break the cycle. It'll be cheaper in the long run.
     
  2. Doobedoo

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 2,698

    Location: South West

    One of the biggest problems is not necessarily wether people would be open to being taxed more to support those that really need it, the bigger problem is trusting the government to use it in the right way.

    For example we have a housing crisis due to lack of houses and unaffordable rent for many. Now how many have more than one home? On the surface nothing wrong with it you’ve done well for yourself so you’ve invested in property as a means of a pension. Great. Now for every extra house owned by a person is one less home for a person that needs a roof not a pension fund. Now council houses are no longer a thing so how many of those claiming housing benefits, are now using that money to pay private land lords rather than living in a public funded council house. It’s inefficient, it’s more expensive and it’s using public money to fund additional pension pots for people that don’t really need it as much.

    All those solar farms you see at the side of the motorway and such. Why is that not entirely public funded and the benefits passed on directly to those paying taxes. Why do we always need corporations to build infrastructure so that they can then profit from us the people. Some of it can be funded using our own money and the benefits used to offset the cost of living, in this case cheaper electric thus freeing up more money to circulate back into the economy.

    Corporations have been given too much of a free reign we rely on them too much and the money we spend increases the divide between rich and poor.
     
  3. Roar87

    Soldato

    Joined: May 10, 2012

    Posts: 6,551

    Location: Leeds

    Is it not better for people to give their money voluntarily rather than have the government take it by force? You don't see any moral argument against taking people's money without their consent?
     
  4. Wizzfizz

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 13, 2003

    Posts: 10,465

    Location: Left of the middle

    I consent for my money to be taken for this
     
  5. Doobedoo

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 2,698

    Location: South West

    They already take without consent by your logic. Money is taken form my pay cheque every month without my permission.

    Taking from the rich to give to the poor has always been a noble endeavour I’m sure those that have too much can spare a little more and would happy to do so.
     
  6. wesimmo

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 19, 2012

    Posts: 4,195

    Again, it's nuanced. While I agree in principle, I don't necessarily disagree with certain things being outsourced, IF, and IME it's a big one, the contract benefits both parties equally and doesn't result in a drain on our financial systems by having foreign companies controlling energy, infrastructure etc and taking the profit.
     
  7. Roar87

    Soldato

    Joined: May 10, 2012

    Posts: 6,551

    Location: Leeds

    What's too much?
     
  8. Doobedoo

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 2,698

    Location: South West

    Absolutely. But how does allowing German companies build and operate solar farms with subsidies no doubt, then sell that electricity back to us at top dollar benefit us? We could have easily done that with our own money, employing our own people, then passing the benefits directly back to us, the investors.

    Not going to work in every case but some of them make absolute sense.
     
  9. Doobedoo

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 24, 2016

    Posts: 2,698

    Location: South West

    That would need to be sensibly discussed.
     
  10. bazzabear

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 2, 2013

    Posts: 2,386

    What sort of hate filled misanthropist do you have to be to genuinely think that allowing kids to eat is an unsuitable use for our taxes?

    As for those desperately trying to paint this somehow as a bad thing by claiming that he should be donating his own money, he - like all the other Manchester United players - has been donating 30% of his salary throughout the pandemic.

    The things that some people will manage to have a negative view on are staggering.
     
  11. Roar87

    Soldato

    Joined: May 10, 2012

    Posts: 6,551

    Location: Leeds

    What percentage of people who will access the scheme have other luxuries they could have perhaps sacrificed before relying on tax payer money? If you don't think people should have to sacrifice luxuries to feed their children then why not? I never want to see a child go hungry, I would assume that's obvious. When I was growing up my parents often had financial difficulties, looking back it was mostly poor choices.
     
  12. shadow_boxer

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 9, 2009

    Posts: 8,698

    Location: Stoke-On-Trent

    Great outcome. Guy is a class act for sure.
     
  13. Stumble Bum

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Apr 2, 2009

    Posts: 2,412

    Location: Location, Location!

    Barring a few extreme cases, how could there possibly be so many parents bringing kids into the world that can't even afford to feed them properly for this to cost another £120m?
     
  14. stockhausen

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 30, 2006

    Posts: 11,104

    Maybe they hadn't anticipated Covid-19 and losing their jobs :confused:
     
  15. wesimmo

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 19, 2012

    Posts: 4,195

    Barring no cases, it's not the child's fault.
     
  16. Mr Joshua

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 4,087

    They really can't read the room, can they?
     
  17. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 12,805

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    This. Rashford has done amazingly well to change Government policy in the right way.
     
  18. wesimmo

    Mobster

    Joined: Mar 19, 2012

    Posts: 4,195

    FFS, at the start of the year I was doing ok, 1 child, couple of houses by accident, earning multiples of the average wage and my missus ran an independent shop that was doing ok.

    I got made redundant in Feb and the job market for my industry disappeared. Her business is under threat. I'm seriously concerned about the long term, never mind if I was struggling week to week to begin with.
     
  19. Roar87

    Soldato

    Joined: May 10, 2012

    Posts: 6,551

    Location: Leeds

    There aren't, there's a minority of cases where the children very much need the help, these should obviously get it, and then there's a lot where it's just the tax payer subsidising parents.
     
  20. timebomb26

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Feb 26, 2012

    Posts: 1,633

    Location: Saitama

    UK child poverty statistics

    As a tax payer, there are maybe a few things I'd be annoyed about funding. This is definitely not one of them.