It's shocking idle young brats won't get out of bed for less than £40k but I know exactly what's to blame
IF I'd told my parents in the 1990s that I couldn't be bothered to get a job unless I was paid the equivalent of £40,000 a year, I can imagine their reaction.
And it would not have been pretty.
7
7
Even my friends would have thought I was a jumped-up little madam who had lost her mind, because back then, getting your first job wasn't about the money.
It was about getting your foot on that first rung of your career ladder. Now, it isn't.
This week, House of Lords peers visibly gasped when an employment adviser told how kids are now 'on the internet 24 hours a day, and don't want to work for anything less than £40,000'.
I was horrified when I heard that figure too. What a generation of entitled upstarts.
Graham Cowley was giving evidence to a government inquiry into why there are almost a million 16 to 24-year-olds not bothering to work or study.
Easy buck
There are now so many of them not in employment, education or training that they have been given the acronym Neets.
How absolutely gruesome.
And it's shocking to me that they don't want to get a job and make something of their lives unless they are earning such an unrealistic salary.
But is it any wonder, when they are on the internet 24 hours a day and often getting influenced by influencers who wouldn't get out of bed for less than £40,000 a month, never mind a year?
They are seeing how you can make an easy buck with no real work, training or qualifications.
Like Tories a decade ago, Labour need to show some steel to turn round number of 'inactive' Brits and they know it
They are seeing their peers being chucked money for wearing a thong on a Dubai beach or flashing their new eyelashes. That must make the average kid quite jealous.
It's easy money for not much work.
But to sit on your backside sulking while hoping to become the next big content creator or get that dream salary to materialise is just madness.
My generation lived in the real world when we started out. It is the only one we had.
We knew that £40,000 a year didn't happen with a click of an influencer's fingers.
Allowing these deluded youngsters to live off the Bank of Mum and Dad only encourages them to wait for that luxury salary
Jane Atkinson
My first job at 18 had a £6,700 salary, which is about £18,000 in today's cash, at a news agency in Darlington.
Not very glamorous or lucrative, but I remember the exact figure because I was proud of that wage, that I was able to pay for my own flat and car.
Kids now don't seem to realise that a proper job can give self-worth, pride, achievement and respect — regardless of the salary.
It can be good for your mental health. With youngsters turning their noses up at starter salaries it is unsurprising that so many are suffering from depression.
We also had the stumbling block of our parents' expectations to deal with. Mr Cowley told the inquiry he believes kids should be taught again that 'you need to put a shift in to get what you want in life'.
I agree. And that is their parents' job. I find it baffling they are not getting this life lesson.
Deluded youngsters
The Lords responded to Mr Cowley's statement, with one saying young people 'are not stupid' and have actually decided 'it's more comfortable to stay in the house than it is to go and try and find your way through life' on low pay.
Unless they are on benefits 'the house' for this lazy lot is the one belonging to their parents. Which means their parents are letting them down.
Allowing these deluded youngsters to live off the Bank of Mum and Dad only encourages them to wait for that luxury salary.
And then there is, so importantly, the issue of benefits.
The Government says it is fighting to bring the number of Neets down by helping them get jobs, encouraging studying — and cutting benefits for these workshy, greedy layabouts and scroungers.
This needs to happen. And fast.
When Graham Cowley heard those gasps from the peers on the Lords social mobility policy committee he responded by saying: 'You may laugh, but that is the reality.'
And that reality is a tragedy.
FRED'S DOC SO BRAVE
THE torrent of abuse that Freddie Flintoff has received on social media and forums over his documentary about his Top Gear crash is cruel, nasty and wrong.
The former cricketer is being slated for his 'sob story' and slammed for taking a £9million compensation payout, even though the cash came from insurance policies, not licence fee payers' pockets.
If anyone deserves criticism here it is the BBC, not him.
Freddie says they pushed boundaries with their driving stunts and used him like a 'piece of meat' to boost viewing figures instead of thinking of his safety.
Former Top Gear host Steve Berry has since revealed he was told to keep quiet about a crash he suffered while filming the show.
Fellow ex-host Richard Hammond once warned about safety issues and weeks before Freddie's crash, presenter Chris Harris said someone could be killed if safety procedures weren't tightened.
Freddie nearly was. He now knows he was stupid to get in that car.
But many employees fail to do the right thing when they are scared for their job.
I wish he had given some of the documentary cash to charity. But he wasn't stupid for doing the film in the first place, he was brave.
And if that bravery saves just one boy racer from an accident behind the wheel of a car in the future, that can only be a good thing.
PATSY IS JUST RUDE
SINCE being booted off Celebrity Big Brother, Patsy Palmer has been a tricky interviewee.
Presenters AJ Odudu and Will Best were met with a stony silence when they brought up Mickey Rourke and the broccoli incident in the house.
Brave Lorraine Kelly still invited the stony- faced EastEnders star on to her chat show, and managed to cover up the silence with her lovely, trademark giggle.
Patsy took to social media afterwards, writing: 'There's nothing awkward about silence. It says it all!'
Unless you're doing a live interview, Patsy, and then it just says you're rude.
FLO AND BEHOLD
7
FLORENCE PUGH certainly made sure she grabbed our attention at the premiere of her new Marvel film Thunderbolts, squeezed into the tiniest leather bra and skirt number.
It was eye-catching for all the wrong reasons – and I'm pretty sure she had her top on back to front.
It looked as though she had borrowed the outfit from someone half her size.
SEEING Pope Francis's close friend Sister Genevieve Jeanningros quietly sobbing as she said her final goodbye to him on Thursday was a reminder that the late Pontiff was also just a man who had friends, family and loved ones.
7
And it highlighted just how disgusting all those people were who said they had come to mourn him but actually stopped for a tacky selfie as they passed his coffin.
Finally, the Vatican asked people to stop taking photos.
You would think that some things really shouldn't need to be said.
I HATE being told what to do. And despite the boss at the biscuit factory where McVitie's chocolate digestives have been made for the last 100 years saying that we should eat them with the chocolate on the bottom, I won't be turning mine the other way up.
I don't think I've ever met anybody who eats them with the chocolate facing down.
It makes them look like a boring digestive. And that takes all the fun away.
PADDINGTON the musical is coming to the West End. Which could be amazing.
But according to its creators, the plan is for this show to be less of the marmalade sandwiches type of fun, and more about exploring 'the politics of Paddington' and honouring the fact he is a refugee. Cheery.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Reform is a serious political force in Scotland but Tories in trouble
Formerly a seat where the SNP could be confident of winning a substantial majority, Hamilton is now a marginal seat for the first time, with a Labour majority of just 602 votes over the SNP. Reform UK is clearly on the march in Scotland, and this result bears out the surge in support for the party seen in British-wide opinion polls so far this year, with over a quarter of voters who turned out in Hamilton casting their vote for the party. Read more It would be wrong to read too much into one by-election result. By-elections are unusual events, where governments tend to lose support, people may vote in protest and turnout is typically much lower than at Holyrood elections. Nonetheless, the result in Hamilton will matter to all Scotland's parties for its symbolic importance ahead of next May's Scottish Parliament elections. For Scottish Labour, this by-election win will help to reverse the recent narrative of Labour decline. Following the party's slump in the polls over the last 10 months, the result signals that Labour can still win in Scotland and will put wind back in the party's sails. It underlines that listening to and acting on voters' concerns can help to turn the party's fortunes around – Keir Starmer's announcement of a U-turn on cuts to the winter fuel payment may well have helped the party's popularity among voters in Hamilton. The win will also give the UK Labour Party a much-needed boost, after its heavy losses in parts of England at May's local elections, losing the Runcorn by-election to Reform UK and trailing 7 points behind Reform UK in the polls UK-wide. Nigel Farage is less popular in Scotland than he is in England (Image: free) The result is a major blow to the SNP, who were widely tipped to win the seat. While incumbent governments tend to suffer at by-elections, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse is the kind of central belt seat that the SNP will need to retain if it is to hold onto power in Scotland next May. This result is an early sign that that will be a tough contest. The SNP has topped recent national polls, with a double-digit lead over Scottish Labour – a remarkable position for a party that has been in power in Scotland for 18 years. This by-election will be an unwelcome reminder that voters' preferences can and do shift. While John Swinney is widely seen as having steadied the ship since his election as party leader last May – and is the least unpopular of any of the party leaders among voters – this result suggests more turbulent times may lie ahead for the SNP. Reform UK were the unknown quantity ahead of this by-election. Their performance in Hamilton, finishing less than 1,000 votes behind the SNP, proves that the party can attract significant swathes of voters north of the border as well as in England. The result emphasises that Reform UK are now a serious political force in Scotland. Ahead of the next Holyrood elections, the party has a real opportunity to paint itself as the home for voters who want change. While Nigel Farage is less popular in Scotland than he is in England, this does not appear to have been holding the party back in the polls – reflecting that the rise of Reform UK may be being driven by wider public dissatisfaction and the unpopularity of other parties more than by views of its leadership. The result signals continued gloom for the Conservatives in Scotland. While the party was widely expected to come fourth, this was a poor result for Russell Findlay's party, who managed to hang onto their deposit with 6% of the vote. Read more The pattern seen in recent Scotland polls of the Conservatives haemorrhaging voter support to Reform has been borne out at this by-election. On this evidence, the Conservatives have a mountain to climb if they are to convince Scottish voters to lend them their votes next May. Will the result in Hamilton turn out to be a sign of which way the electoral winds are blowing ahead of Holyrood elections next May? It certainly underlines that this is a time of volatility in Scottish politics and shifting voter preferences. While Anas Sarwar and his team will take heart from this win, Scottish Labour's fortunes are closely connected with those of the UK party. How Scotland's voters are feeling about the UK Government's performance under Keir Starmer's leadership is likely to be an important factor shaping voter support at the ballot box. If it is to take seats from the SNP next May, Scottish Labour needs to show those who voted for the UK party at the General Election because of issues like public services, the cost of living and inequality that they were right to do so. Emily Gray, Managing Director, Ipsos Scotland
Glasgow Times
2 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
'For urgent change that's needed, Green voices must be heard'
There are also home truths for the SNP who put a lot into this seat. They tried to be the anti-Reform vote but that didn't work. The immediate reaction of some in the party that they instead need to "hit the independence button" hits home just how little they have to fall back on from their record in government. Greens led a solid grassroots campaign which helped to build profile and support ahead of the Holyrood elections next year, where the proportional voting system means Green votes count more. There are some clear lessons emerging for how Greens need to approach that election. The SNP can't succeed as the anti-Reform vote because they are the political establishment in Scotland that those turning to Reform are hacked off with. It's their cuts to council budgets and their failure to replace the unfair council tax that is responsible for the decline people see in their neighbourhoods. It's their failure to build enough homes or to bring down outrageous rents that are driving the housing crisis. It's their U-turn on climate targets and lack of a proper green industrial strategy that is putting jobs and communities at risk. Greens can put forward a bold manifesto that responds to these things and more. That speaks to real issues facing people, not the bogeymen put forward by Reform. Urgency is vital. Where the SNP is cautious in the extreme, Greens must present a plan to deliver tangible change, quickly. Parties are often pressed on having a costed manifesto. That's important, but I think it's equally so to have a timed plan, not with vague and distant targets, but for real improvement, now. Greens have policies that resonate and are needed, but the biggest barrier we still face is being heard. The BBC Scotland Debate Night programme this week is a clear example of that. The show was a 'Glasgow Special' but it didn't include the Greens, despite being clearly the third political force in the city. Instead, alongside the SNP council leader Susan Aitken, viewers heard from the Tories, who have just one councillor left and are facing being wiped out in Holyrood next year, and shockingly from not one but two Labour representatives (though the show's producers neglected to make the political affiliation of the unelected Baron Haughey of Hutchesontown clear). It's perhaps not a surprise that the BBC won't platform Green voices which challenge the status quo, but it is a real shame. Green representatives are shaping the future of Glasgow, whether that's by working to end rip-off rents, by making our streets and public spaces safer, or by delivering new powers, like the Visitor Levy, which will raise tens of millions more for local services. Greens can deliver the radical and urgent change people want, but to do that Green voices must be heard.
Edinburgh Reporter
2 hours ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Lorna Slater will stand for leadership and selection
In just under a year's time the Scottish Parliamentary election will have decided who will be running the government for the following five years. As is the way of the polls there are some showing that Labour will win, and others that the SNP will win. The proportional representation by which MSPs are elected is not supposed to return a majority government – it happened only once, unusually, with the SNP under Alex Salmond in 2011. Labour won most seats and most votes in 1999 and 2003 but no overall majority. In 2021 the SNP was one short of a majority (there are 129 seats so the majority is 65). In an effort to do business more easily, then First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, entered into the Bute House Agreement with the Scottish Greens and Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie, the co-conveners of the party became government ministers. Now that there is one year before the election Lorna Slater said that her party offers the 'real, hopeful' and 'transformative' change that Scotland needs. We met with Ms Slater on the day when the programme for government was about to be announced by John Swinney the First Minister. She did not believe it would bring many changes, but was proved wrong on one policy – the scrapping of peak rail fares. However the Scottish Greens later responded to the announcement to say that while very welcome and a 'huge win for commuters and climate' the policy change amounted to a U-turn by the government. They also pointed out that this policy was 'initially secured by the Scottish Greens through budget negotiations in 2023 before it was then dropped by the SNP who said the numbers did not stack up to allow them to continue supporting it'. Ahead of the Programme for Government Ms Slater – who hopes to be selected to stand as Green candidate next year, and who hopes to continue as co-leader after an internal election in the summer, said: 'I don't think there'll be any new news. I think it will absolutely be a holding pattern. They don't have a plan for bringing down people's bills, because that would involve having an ambitious heat and buildings bill to insulate homes and improve the grant system and really roll out that programme. 'I think that they're going to kind of curl in on themselves and be unambitious because they're worried about doing anything ambitious before an election.' Out of government Asked if she misses being in government Ms Slater said: 'I really miss the ambitious positive energy we have because we had some really good, ambitious things going, and all the bills that have come out since we've been in government without our influence have been gutted. 'Natural Environment Bill, gutted, heat in buildings Bill, gutted, rent controls watered down. And it just goes to show that with the Greens in there, we were much more ambitious on taking practical action on climate, much more ambitious on tackling landlords, tackling polluting corporations, tackling the vested interests – and the SNP have a lot less interest in that. They have much more interest in keeping things as they are, sort of steadying the ship instead of making big change. And the Greens were about making that big change.' As to the fallout from Scotland's deposit return scheme which has landed the government in court, being sued by Biffa for their expenses getting ready for legislation which did not materialise, she is matter of fact. She said: 'The legislation for that was, of course, passed before I was elected. So in 2020 Scottish Parliament agreed that Scotland would have a deposit return scheme. So that already existed before I was in post, my role was to work with industry to implement that scheme. And that I did, we were weeks away from launching the scheme. 'We had nearly all the producers in Scotland lined up. I think it was 95% of the items that were on shelves in Scotland. The producers of those items had paid their money. They were part of the scheme and we had a workable scheme. It would absolutely have launched on time. It would have had maybe a bit of a rocky start, a bit of a phasing in period, but we absolutely would have launched on time. 'But then because Alister Jack (then Secretary of State for Scotland) interfered with it from February 2023 by putting doubts in the media, (and that was despite the fact that he had stood on Boris Johnson's manifesto to implement a deposit return scheme with with glass), he was able to use the internal market act to veto the scheme. 'Alister Jack never gave any justification or basis for that interference. We asked repeatedly why he didn't want glass in the scheme. He never produced any evidence for that. So that was purely political interference in terms of the scheme itself.' At the time in April 2023 the Scottish Greens called for an investigation into the comments Mr Jack made, saying he had misled the House of Commons. Ms Slater said that this particular interference shows how the Internal Market Act has been used to 'stifle devolution'. She said: ' The deposit return scheme was a fully devolved matter, protecting the environment, recycling schemes – all fully devolved. That the internal market act can be used to undermine Scotland's ambitions and to harm Scottish businesses is a shocking state of affairs.' Under the still relatively new UK government administration she still holds the view that devolution is under threat. She said: 'It's an interesting question about how the Labour government is going to treat this. I have noted of course, that Wales is being allowed to continue forward with a deposit return scheme that has glass in it, even though that does interfere with the Internal market act. So why can't Scotland? Why does Wales get a free pass, and Scotland doesn't. So it isn't clear at all that Keir Starmer is changing direction. He hasn't said he will repeal or even revise the internal market act. So the status quo remains. It depends on the goodwill of individual ministers.' One of the reasons that the Scottish Greens and the SNP made for a relatively easy marriage was over the question of independence on which they agree. Ms Slater said: 'I'm a proponent of Scottish independence, and that is the only way we can be sure to put in place plans and programs that we know won't be interfered with by the UK government.' Whether or not I am selected as a candidate, the Scottish Greens will be standing on being a proudly progressive party of Scottish independence. Other parties, Labour, SNP, have conceded that left ground are moving toward the centre. They're allowing Reform to pull them in that rightward direction. You can see that with Labour, with its anti immigration policies, with its neglect of the social security net, the betrayal of the WASPI women, betrayal of disabled people, people who need benefits to live on – sick and disabled people. 'The Scottish Greens will not betray that ground. We are solidly behind equalities. We are absolutely trans rights supporters. We are absolutely in favour of ambitious work toward net zero. We are not going to give this ground. All of these things are really important to us. Human rights are important to us. A secure social safety net. Taxing the rich to pay for it is something we will we are not shy about saying, the rich for too long, have been under taxed. Have increased their wealth enormously well the poorest suffer. We have hungry children in this country. We also have billionaires. The Scottish Greens don't think that that's right, and that's the ground that we are going to contest the election.' This then shows little change in any policy which the party has stood on before – and their numbers improved at the last election. She continued: 'We are a party of values. We are a value led party. We believe in peace, equality, sustainability and human rights. Radical local democracy. We are not going to change our values, we believe that we set out a vision for a fairer, greener, independent Scotland, and it's how effectively we can persuade people that we have the power to implement such a vision, that it is possible that the future can be brilliant. We just have to decide to make it so. Constituency As to her constituents in Lothians they tell the stories of poverty and lack of benefits that are heard all too often. Ms Slater said that at the top of people's minds is their 'quality of life, and that includes everything from being able to pay their rent, being able to find housing in Edinburgh to anti social behaviour, whether it's in Portobello or Corstorphine. And people are experiencing anti social, social behaviour in the streets, all the usual troubles that go with having an NHS and care system industry and people being able to find places for loved ones in care homes people being able to get medical procedures in a timely manner. 'All those things are, of course, what people are concerned with. We also get a reasonable amount of case work because of decisions of the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Those are decisions that are not taken it at the Scottish level, but we work with constituents who are, you know, facing exorbitant fees, deportation, uncertainty in their visa status because of paperwork problems, those are all the kind of things we can support people with.' But there is at least one small chink of light. Asked if it is easier to work with the UK Government under Labour she concedes it is 'slightly easier, yes it is slightly easier. The Conservative government was extremely hostile to Scottish interests. Some of their MPs wouldn't take, correspondence from MSPs, wouldn't help our constituents if they went through an MSP – so they had to always go through an MP. 'I think things are definitely more cooperative, but it doesn't solve the problem that so much of what we need to do we can't help people with because it has to go to London, because it's not devolved. 'And every single day we come across things, Oh, can we help with this? No, it's not devolved. If only Scotland were an independent country, we could take action these things, and that is frustrating every single day.' Lorna Slater MSP Like this: Like Related
