Why have the Tories abandoned social mobility?

He may be a bastard, a class warrior, or a prophet, in any case, but what soon-to-be-Lord Flight said is certainly open to interpretation.Dave Osler hears tones of Keith Joseph’s eugenicism, something which cost him a chance to be Tory leader, Lenin does the same. Chris sees the class hatred, but somewhat excuses Flight, because in a way he is correct, if you change someone’s incentives, their actions will likely change.

What surprised me is that someone on the alleged right has a problem with poor people breeding (The upper classes produce heirs, the middle classes have families, the lower orders breed). This behaviour seems to rather give the game away as far as social mobility is concerned.

On average, I’m informed, children now cost £200,000 a pop; a lifestyle choice which would make even Tony Montana blush. This doesn’t include the school fees, which I doubt Flight would begrudge his daughters, or the benefits which he seems to think encourage the poor to procreate so much.

£200,000 (plus or minus your own prejudices and passions), isn’t such a bad deal however, if you expect a child to reach their potential, it begins to look like a bargain. The Conservatives have never offered much to the working class but they have allegedly offered the chance to “get on” and to move up the social ladder.

His coalition partner, Nick Clegg, would likewise insist that a just society lets those of ability rise to the top, regardless of upbringing and regardless of if they are born to those on benefits. If we assume that social mobility is important (rather than inequality), what is Flight’s problem with the poor having babies?After all, if the Tories do what they’ve always promised, someone’s origins should mean nowt.

I see three options. He may be an idiot, in that he can’t foresee the likely results of his own party’s administration. He may be a eugenicist, in that he does not believe his party can improve social mobility because people belong where they are born.

Finally, and most worryingly, he may being honest. Social mobility is a difficult thing to improve even when the economy is booming and families are getting help. With the the next few years offering none of this, Flight may just be reflecting on something inevitable, those born poor are going to stay poor.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Why have the Tories abandoned social mobility?

  1. I think the cut of this man’s jib was revealed in the extraordinarily vain family photo printed in the papers. It featured a slightly reclining Mr Flight in the foreground with his family appearing obediently in the background. He’s a weirdo.

  2. His comments where Politically stupid, if he cant figure out that the comments wouldnt play well, which would be obvious to most he is a liability.

    However I do have some sympathy for parts of his sentiment. The above article is right in championing social equality but in my opinion the UK benefit system has skewed financial handouts to the underclass to such an extent that it has removed self reliance & responsibility from a large % of our population, many mddle class people I know in 20’s or 30’s age group dont or cant have children or more than one child due to financial constraints because they have to earn it all themselves, they must be irked by teen single mum’s having several children on state handouts when they havent paid any taxes?

    This is more of a knee jerk reaction to a system that would eventually have half the population ‘on the sick’, its just frustration shared by many.

Comments are closed.