But in the end, it is adults who are poor, not children. They are let down by poor education, lack of opportunity, & barriers to taking up what opportunities there are, such as the low expectations all too common in this country.

Redistributing money towards people in low-paid jobs, (if they have children but not if they don’t), is not going to solve anything. What we should be doing is equipping people so that their labour will command a high wage in the market. We need this for our future as a nation in a global economy.

The potential for prosperity exists, but it will never be achieved through the methods being used.

The age discrimination that I refer to is that certain benefits, in and out of work, are arbitrarily paid to people over 25 but not those who are younger… no reference to their circumstances, only their age.

As for age discrimination, though… It’s impossible, in a practical sense, not to discriminate based on age in many circumstances. Are we saying that you shouldn’t ask for previous experience when hiring for a skilled job, for fear that you are discriminating against young people? Is it age discrimination that I can no longer get on a bus because it’s full of old people travelling for free? Is it ageist that OAPs get cheaper cinema tickets? Can Wimbledon really hold a ’senior’ tournament along with the main one, and exlude younger players from playing in it?

There is a problem of underachievement among ethnic minorities, women… and poor whites. But that will only be solved by extending opportunities so that they can become qualified, & then will be able to compete on equal terms in the market.

I find it offensive to assume that people who belong to X group will never be as well qualified as the already priviliged, so we should make allowances for it. It’s as if we accept inequality of oppurtunity & try to deal with it, rather than challenging it.

This government is in love with putting sticking plasters over everything.

For example, they pay subsidies to people in low paid jobs (especially if they have f**k trophies) as a way of saying “You can never better yourself, so we’ll give you handouts while you remain poor & powerless in a dead-end job”.

Whereas in fact, they can better themselves… or could, if there weren’t so many barriers in their way.

You could say that I support achieving socialist ends (or, at least, what the socialists claim to support) through liberal means

We have more women than men in senior positions and they are there on merit, and paid accordingly. In addition, we have roughly equal numbers of men and women on the shop floor and a large age range. Our workforce is ethnically diverse (in the context of the area in which we are located).

All our people are paid based purely on their skill levels and the job they do irrespective of age, gender or any other factor. We offer training opportunities to all those who want to progress. It would be economic suicide for us to do otherwise.

I find this sort of legislation insulting as it assumes that male WASPs like me in senior positions don’t make rational economic decisions – it is typical madcap socialism.

Economic necessity will drive equality – especially where there is a profit motive!

Shiney

PS – Oh wait, I’ve just realised what I’ve said. Perhaps those in the public sector don’t make rational economic decisions because there IS no profit motive and need legislation to force them to make the right choices.

You may have noticed that this is my hobby horse. Pity my workmates, as they have to listen to this relentlessly… but then, they all agree, & I’ve yet to meet someone who doesn’t. You included

Age discrimination is everywhere we look, but the government seem to be saying that some forms of age discrimination are ok whereas others are not on the basis of an entirely abitrary boundary that seems to suit those in charge both financially and electorally.

Regardless of family situation, tenure or anything else. Who the hell dreams this up?

They charge £40 a week in tax & give £ 43 in tax credits. Better not to bother taking the tax at all, thus saving admin costs.

If these strikes involve people from the DWP/Inland Revenue, Brown should tell them not to bother coming back, simplify the system, & give the money back as tax cuts to low & medium earners, & public sector employees such as teachers who do something vaguely worthwhile.

It is a bugbear of mine because I’m under 25… though I like to think when I’m old, I’ll have the same concern, & won’t degenerate into one of the things were better in my day brigade.

There is no justification for the tax credits system as it is: the few good ideas contained in the whole package can be better enacted in other ways.