UK Politics
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both [email protected] and [email protected] .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
[email protected] appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(
view the rest of the comments
I mean, she's not wrong about the breeding thing. I understand why it's so controversial to say, but the more educated you are, the less kids you're likely to have and a declining birth rate is a problem for any economy. Especially when you're simultaneously trying to stop migrants from filling unskilled jobs.
She does fail to mention that the more squeezed people are that the less likely they are to have kids also though.
Fifty years ago, only the top ten percent of people went to university and yet we still had teachers, nurses and every other job that for some reason needs a degree now. And a welder could earn a wage decent enough to buy an average house and support an entire family.
Don't act surprised when an entire generation has been brought up with the mantra "work hard and you can achieve anything you want!", and then act surprised that they don't want to have kids after working seven years for a worthless degree, no high skilled job role to move in to and a pile of debt before they've even started work.
Show me a study to prove this. It is just nonsensical BS, imo. The more educated you, the more likely you are to be above the mean wage. Money is the issue today.
We also had free education training and grants for living expenses for students. Today that training means a huge amount of debt. I am a firm believer in that we should be investing a lot more into education. There is a conspiracy theory that the Tories deliberately do not invest in education because the more educated are not voting Tory anymore. This is born from the report created in 2005 " DIRECT DEMOCRACY: An Agenda for a New Model Party". which states:
The list of authors at the end will interest you also.
As for the wage this purely down to the government's attacks on union organisations and how they are governed. Skilled workers are still highly paid though. Thatcher got rid of the shipyards. Welders are a dime a dozen (speaking as a welder, I know this for fact). Try to get a plumber, electrician or joiner on the cheap. We do not invest in trade skills anymore. We had government funding for companies to take on apprentices. This used to cover all the costs for an apprentice. An apprentice was cheap free labour. Now they are a cost with huge liabilities attached.
There are more people going to university now than there was 50 years ago. This is has no credence at all.
I strongly suggest you take the time to do some critical thinking on your beliefs.
I strongly suggest that you make sure there's some sort of credence to your opening paragraph before you go on to make consecutive ones that appear discretided by association.
"Often, couples with lower level of education have three, four or more children. This is linked to an increase in ‘multipartner fertility’, or, having a child with more than one partner. Highly educated men and women are more likely to have exactly two children"
https://fluxconsortium.fi/the-highly-educated-often-have-two-children-childlessness-and-high-numbers-of-children-more-commonly-seen-among-low-and-medium-educated-persons/#:~:text=Often%2C%20couples%20with%20lower%20level,to%20have%20exactly%20two%20children.
Bugger me you must have hunted high and low for that one.
Great except it is Finland and Sweden based. This is a UK forum based on the UK. There are people in Africa that are under educated and breed like rabbits. What has this to do with the UK?
On you go. Imagine the statistics in Finland not being totally different to the UK.
https://www.cpc.ac.uk/docs/BP29_Educational_differences_in_childbearing_widen-in_Britain.pdf
The study ends in 1969. This is based on people aged 50 and above. This is not relevant to the kids of today. The cost of living crisis is now. Kids are not having kids because they are really struggling to live.
There are some huge caveats missed in that study. It is akin to stating people who eat ice cream are more likely to get sun burned. There is not enough correlation between the stats of education level and child birth. They only suggest that is the case. In this era education was free. If a woman was not rearing kids, then education was at your disposal. Now it is not. Having kids stops education dead in the water for a lot of kids, because now it is a debt trap.
Again critical thinking goes a long way.
Here's a UK source from 2023. A person of such critical thinking would probably be able to start connecting the dots at this point.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/apr/25/graduation.highereducation
Mate give it up.
The article is 20 years old. It misses a massive point. Kids are struggling enough today without families. Birth control is better understood now than it ever has been in the past. Do you even read the news out side of the Tory media?
Being poor means less chance at education, being poor means you cannot afford a family, and will actively look to stop having kids. It is a consequence of not having the finances to do other stuff, like pay for an education, that makes the stats skewed. Having an education gives better access to better financial rewards from employment, which enabled you to give a child a better chance at stability. The prevalence of being childless is not a consequence of being under educated; it is purely down to the fact that the Tories have turned the screw to much on the least fortunate in the UK.
Again Ice cream does not give you sunburn. It is just that more people eat it on hot days.
I think, where we both agree is that we need better education across the country to give kids a better chance. The Tories have demolished funding for schools in the north of England. It needs rectifying. This is only one of the many other things the Tories have demolished in the last 14 years.
I understand your point and I don't contest it. But to claim that there is no correlation between education and the number of kids you have and to claim that it isn't least partly causative is denial.
If you came out of uni with thousands of pounds worth of debt, 7 years behind others who have already joined the work force, no high skilled job to move in to, not married because you were focusing on your studies and unable to afford a house, having kids would probably be quite far down your priorities list.
You might be the sort of pendant that says "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop!"
Actually, It is the sudden strop that kills you, or at the very least hitting something that slows you on the way down. Having no kids is a symptom not a cause, and education would help alleviate that. Demonising those who are less well is a blight in this country that needs to stop.
Sure, and it's the amps that kill you not the voltage! (Unless you ignore the fact that without voltage, there can be no amps). And guns don't kill people, bullets do!
Ok, well I think the evidence is overwhelming that higher educated people have less kids, I don't think that's the only reason people have less kids but it's obviously a factor. I think we're at the point where we have to agree to disagree, we're not going to change each others minds here.
Good day, and good luck!