Search results

i'd have thought that was obvious: the young, being full of health and vigour can provide and support themselves, the elderly cant. now that may not be strictly applicable today but those are the long held cultral convention. on top of that there is the notion of having paid into the system...

who said they would be replaced by tech jobs? demographic curves are irrelevant, when technological change it is usually rapid, within 10 years, half a generation tops. old jobs are redundant, new jobs emerge. how many stable hands and saddle makers became obsolete in the 1920's as cars...

yes, the bedwetter experts are wrong. its nothing new, a couple of generations ago there were no tractors and nearly all farming was done by hand, with a few horse and oxen. harvesting required dozens of people, the reason for the long summer holiday so kids could help. mechanisation allowed...

reproduction has always been related economics. for generations people had large families so enough would survive to adulthood and care/provide for them in retirement. go back a generation or two and mothers took in work as soon as they could, child care was provided by aunts and grandparent...

there's the whole problem, we seem to have moved from a state welfare system to support those who are victims of circumstance, to one were we demand provisions made so we can live according to choice. you could do both, at vast cost, or the former at a sensible cost. we try to do the latter on...

i enjoy how they use incongruent stats to start the argument - why are childcare cost linked to average earnings? from there we wonder if the TUC research bothered to look at why childcare costs rose substantially, perhaps due to government policy to give free childcare, leading to increased...