Next Boss (And Tory Peer) Simon Wolfson, Shoots Himself In The Foot And Then Complains About A Pain In His Foot

[Hymie]

[ZebuSanctuary]

//My parents were not at all rich. //

This is a meaningless comparison and not germane to the financial hardships faced by those families with children today.

The cost of putting a roof over one's head, be it a mortgage loan to the tune of 6/7 times a person's annual salary or the alternative - paying astronomical rent to a private landlord. On top of that, the cost of living crisis putting undue pressure on parents trying to do the best by their children.

Since family allowance was not introduced until the mid 1940s, presumably then, you refer to a time when council housing stock was in plentiful supply.The financial burden of working towards owning a private property weighed no where near as heavily as it does today. Sadly you have not moved with the times.

// I’m not talking about teachers. I’m talking about paid childminders//

A corollary of calling those carers in private nuseries funded by CTCs, a 'bunch of paid strangers', is to tar with the same brush
those teachers in schools who take young children under their wing. Thus by inference, you have made a lamentable faux pas!

The other striking difference is those teachers you have labelled 'a bunch of paid strangers', cost a great deal more of taxpayers money, than the measly £7k in CTCs that you deplore going to those adults in work.

Perhaps your heart might soften if you were to adopt the philosophy... 'A stranger is a friend I have yet to know?'

//This country will not prosper//

The UK economy will certainly not succeed by allowing the unemployed to sit at home with their kids. Claiming even more taxpayer funded benefits, as would be their entitlement.

//there is a fundamental difference//

One significant difference is that I value highly those low paid workers, who choose to carry out vital services for the communiity.

Your previous comments were no oblique reference either. It was open disparagement on a group of low paid workers who fulfil demanding roles, as anyone who works with children will tell you.

It rather puts your writings in the light of elitist. And you, as supercillious.

Whatever I thought of you before you made those remarks, I think a little less of you now.

What can be said about your wishes to abolish the much needed benefits by those families with children - Such steps would be retrogressive!

It is to punish those on the lowest incomes.
This is contemptible and extremely divisive!

//cost of bringing up a child should be met by parents.//

Once again I am forced to remind you of your misguided philosophy which is tantamount to... 'Only the rich can have children.'

Presently and thankfully, parents with 2 children (up to the age of 20 if the right circumstances are met) are entitled to financial assistance.

Amen