What would you do if you were Prime Minister? 2024

[jfman]

Don't subside childcare. Don't permit banks to lend for mortgages on the basis of two earners. Let the housing market pop. Frees up jobs for people who need them and gives parents time to parent.

[papa smurf]

take the boats [water taxi] from border force and sink them.

[Hom3r]

Ban 2nd homes for MPs


A hotel is built near Parliament and MPs are assigned a room, This has catering facilities should parliament sit late.


Better money for full-time carers, £600 (about this) is not enough to live on.

Originally Posted by jfman

Don't subside childcare. Don't permit banks to lend for mortgages on the basis of two earners. Let the housing market pop. Frees up jobs for people who need them and gives parents time to parent.

I didnt think your posts could actually get any lower/worse, but you prove me wrong again.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Paul

I didnt think your posts could actually get any lower/worse, but you prove me wrong again.

In what sense?

Although I was slightly playing devil's advocate to the post above by jonbxx (greater subsidies for childcare to make it viable for both parents to work) it's legitimate to ask whether to address the problem from the other side - essentially affordability of homes. Which is to a great degree based on what banks are willing to lend.

I didn't make any judgement on which parent. There'd also be an issue for single parents that would need addressed - however they wouldn't be in the rat race for affordable homes with a larger number of mortgage applications based on two earners.

I really don't know what "lower/worse" about that. There are undoubtedly many flaws within it however your implication that it's somehow "low" is utterly bizarre. As is the moral judgement on a seemingly large number of my posts.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by jfman

In what sense?

Although I was slightly playing devil's advocate to the post above by jonbxx (greater subsidies for childcare to make it viable for both parents to work) it's legitimate to ask whether to address the problem from the other side - essentially affordability of homes. Which is to a great degree based on what banks are willing to lend.

I didn't make any judgement on which parent. There'd also be an issue for single parents that would need addressed - however they wouldn't be in the rat race for affordable homes with a larger number of mortgage applications based on two earners.

I really don't know what "lower/worse" about that. There are undoubtedly many flaws within it however your implication that it's somehow "low" is utterly bizarre. As is the moral judgement on a seemingly large number of my posts.

Fact is, government need as many taxpayers as possible, by improving child care this increases the number of tax payers, both by freeing someone up to work and creating jobs in childcare.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Angua

Fact is, government need as many taxpayers as possible, by improving child care this increases the number of tax payers, both by freeing someone up to work and creating jobs in childcare.

If the jobs created are almost entirely reliant upon public subsidy, which many low paid jobs are already subsidised through tax credits, I’m sceptical better use of public money couldn’t be used on infrastructure projects or public services other than babysitting.

I suspect it’s better for share prices than living standards in the long run.

I accept though there’s a lot of complex dynamics at play - neither option is a zero sum game.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

If the jobs created are almost entirely reliant upon public subsidy, which many low paid jobs are already subsidised through tax credits, I’m sceptical better use of public money couldn’t be used on infrastructure projects or public services other than babysitting.

I suspect it’s better for share prices than living standards in the long run.

I accept though there’s a lot of complex dynamics at play - neither option is a zero sum game.

would be better focusing on creating an economy and jobs where a family can live with one major salary earner, instead of needing both parents to work just to keep their heads above water.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Pierre

would be better focusing on creating an economy and jobs where a family can live with one major salary earner, instead of needing both parents to work just to keep their heads above water.

The whole work life balance needs looking at. With more automation there will be fewer jobs to go round. So rather than the obsession with doing more hours and often producing less as a result, shorter working weeks opens up more leisure industry opportunities.

Also, the elephant in the room that is the relationship between house prices and salary…

In 1983, the average house price was £26,000 and the average salary was £8,528. Therefore, it would take 3 times the average salary to buy the average house.

In 2023, the average house price was £280,000, and the average salary was £33,000, needing 8.5 times the average salary to average house.

In Yorkshire, the current average house price is £240,000, and the average salary is £27,600 - 8.7 the average salary…

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Also, the elephant in the room that is the relationship between house prices and salary…

In 1983, the average house price was £26,000 and the average salary was £8,528. Therefore, it would take 3 times the average salary to buy the average house.

In 2023, the average house price was £280,000, and the average salary was £33,000, needing 8.5 times the average salary to average house.

In Yorkshire, the current average house price is £240,000, and the average salary is £27,600 - 8.7 the average salary…

I agree entirely with the above. When I bought my first house, in 1999…..and I was late to the party…..due to partying….very hard, in the nineties.

My house was twice my salary (not including my partners) and I thought it was steep.

Although, I will say there is plentiful housing available, around at about 20% of the Yorkshire average. But nobody wants it.

There is lots of affordable housing in the U.K. but nobody wants it.

Just saying……..

For the record, i wouldn’t live in these areas either. But …..make the areas better!

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

Massively subsidise childcare.

Definately.

I had three children in nursery at the same time. Those days were very difficult.

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Ban 2nd homes for MPs.
A hotel is built near Parliament and MPs are assigned a room, This has catering facilities should parliament sit late.
.

Absolutely. MP's are a joke most of the time. Let's not give them anything special. They are doing a job. We all do jobs. Why should they get extras!

---------- Post added at 13:32 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

10. Any cars on pavements to be crushed.
.

Yes! The amount of times I had to take my babies in their pram into the road to get road stupidly parked vehicles. Crush those cars!

[Itshim]

Your really wouldn't like my answers give the comments I seen here. In simple terms . Stop taking money out of people's pockets to subsidise every one whom is to simple, stupid, or to lazy to look after them self's.stop banks refunding people whom fell for scams. Tow boats back to French waters. And make anyone that brings them to UK shore totally responsible for all there needs. Offering no UK government support what so ever, removing charitable status for any one that does. That's the softest of my thoughts, making Mr k seem normal

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Your really wouldn't like my answers give the comments I seen here. In simple terms . Stop taking money out of people's pockets to subsidise every one whom is to simple, stupid, or to lazy to look after them self's.stop banks refunding people whom fell for scams. Tow boats back to French waters. And make anyone that brings them to UK shore totally responsible for all there needs. Offering no UK government support what so ever, removing charitable status for any one that does. That's the softest of my thoughts, making Mr k seem normal

I'm so glad to be 'normal'

Forgot one :-

13. Any cat or dog owner that fails to 'pick up', to be made to consume the offending deposit. If, for some bizarre reason, they hang it from a tree, they too should be hung from the tree...

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

I'm so glad to be 'normal'

Forgot one :-

13. Any cat or dog owner that fails to 'pick up', to be made to consume the offending deposit

Know many people that walk cats do you?