Which comment can be interpreted as; "If they do not have a job it is not their fault"
Your assumption is predicated on a total lack of charity. Something you have espoused in earlier posts.
Thank you for the shout out. The only way that poverty can be eliminated is for everyone to have and make the same. In any other combination those with less will either be considered poor, or consider themselves poor.
If it comes up as part of the discussion it becomes part of the discussion. You trivialize it by refusing to consider it.
Again you are slightly off point. My views did not come about as a result of my earning a place in College. In fact the opposite is true. My views showed that I could earn a way into college. There is a school of thought that explains values; "What you are is where you were when!", Morris Massey.
And that is supposed to prove what?
I note you left the unions out completely!! True I am not intimately conversant with the school system in the UK. But funding comes with strings. Strings from the Government are called mandates. Basically, you take our money you do it our way! Just that economic strings the administration is spreading and pulling in as many areas of the country as possible. Control of the schools should be community based, unfortunately the teacher unions have usurped that role as well!
The money is not what we agreed on. It was the goal and outcome of education. The funding is a Pandora's box especially if it comes from Government or is controlled by the union.
Nor are they flexible or risk takers. The are by nature pedantic and hidebound. Teacher unions are merely myopic!
Still requires a huge amount of time and capital to accomplish.
Again the assumption that a single person requires all the knowledge to accomplish the task at hand. I had a contract to deal with. I did not like to focus nor terms of the contract. I read and wrote amendments to the contract. Then I called my lawyer in. Having done what I did we cleared the project in about an hour. It would have taken longer than that to explain my position to the lawyer. Plus the time for him to codify and put to paper the discussion. I am not a lawyer yet I was able to accomplish a law task on my own with a post consult with an expert. This is what I said in the previous message.
So basically what you are saying here is that it is the responsibility of the Government to GIVE you;
- a house
- 2,000 calories of food per day
- bath soap
- sampoo
- manicure
- pedicure
- haircut
- free transport to work
That "etc" is real hard to deal with! As well as subsistence, That is as varied as the definition of poor!
She already told you such would not be the case!