FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Child poverty increasing in the UK
Child poverty increasing in the UK
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative " Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? " You're not allowed. Anyone who does so, and who discusses the governments role in this issues gets hounded to fuck. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? You're not allowed. Anyone who does so, and who discusses the governments role in this issues gets hounded to fuck. " I'm not sure why? Are we debating "the" Goverment, or "this" Goverment? | |||
| |||
"Simple cant afford them then dont have them.reason i only have two is thats what i can afford comftably.anymore than that and my two kids would be living below the poverty line" I'll put you down as a "B". | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? You're not allowed. Anyone who does so, and who discusses the governments role in this issues gets hounded to fuck. I'm not sure why? Are we debating "the" Goverment, or "this" Goverment? " I would suggest that a decade of austerity has left a lot of people in a very dire situation. Food bank use has sky rocketed. Child poverty and hunger is a big problem. But sure. I'm sure that I'm off the mark here and that the real answer is one of the above. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? " Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative " None of these actually. The first question is by what measure is it increasing? Is it by percentage of median income, which is largely discredited as a measure of poverty. That's more a measure of wealth inequality, which is important but a different subject. Or is it by absolute measure, I think the Rowntree Foundation, eh ability to pay for a winter coat, shoes, hot meals and electricity bills etc. So let's agree what we're measuring first. Ta. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? You're not allowed. Anyone who does so, and who discusses the governments role in this issues gets hounded to fuck. "  | |||
" So let's agree what we're measuring first. Ta. " Could start by noticing an increase (more than what it used to be) using whatever method. And are you suggesting an acceptable level | |||
" So let's agree what we're measuring first. Ta. Could start by noticing an increase (more than what it used to be) using whatever method. And are you suggesting an acceptable level " Well IF the increase is by measuring relative wealth, then that can occur simply by the rich getting richer faster than the poor. Important but not anything to do with poverty. So in the OP, what are you referencing? | |||
"Simple cant afford them then dont have them.reason i only have two is thats what i can afford comftably.anymore than that and my two kids would be living below the poverty line" Responsibility and priorities | |||
"They've already been shamed by a footballer.. Why is this happening ffs! Tory ignorance or this tory policy? They're announcing a royal yacht but why can't they fucking fix a growing and real problem in this country? " Firstly it is not a Royal yacht. Secondly it will create jobs. Thirdly £200M for thirty year service which will promote trade around the world will be good value for money. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two." I just said that....  | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year?" The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen." When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean?" I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. " So what would you take it?(2nd go) | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean?" Wear a condom! | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go)" If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. " Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? Wear a condom!" Maybe you should pass that advice on that clumsy oaf who is running the country? | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner?" Father pays child support for his children. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner?" Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Father pays child support for his children." How do you do that on income support..or minimum wage? | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent." I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. " And that is one person's opinion | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. And that is one person's opinion " Actually..its quite a common opinion. | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. And that is one person's opinion Actually..its quite a common opinion." I can only see one person saying it here. I also can't see anyone saying we should forcibly sterilise anyone who earns under a certain amount per annum. You just made the bit up | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. And that is one person's opinion Actually..its quite a common opinion. I can only see one person saying it here. I also can't see anyone saying we should forcibly sterilise anyone who earns under a certain amount per annum. You just made the bit up" Because you still havent fully explained what you take it to mean. If you cant afford to have kids ,dont have them. If you cant see where that ultimately takes you,I really cant help. | |||
| |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. And that is one person's opinion Actually..its quite a common opinion. I can only see one person saying it here. I also can't see anyone saying we should forcibly sterilise anyone who earns under a certain amount per annum. You just made the bit up Because you still havent fully explained what you take it to mean. If you cant afford to have kids ,dont have them. If you cant see where that ultimately takes you,I really cant help." Pretty sure I've said I take it to mean exactly what the poster said. I also said bad luck can happen to any of us. | |||
"The internet has many costs involved in bringing a child up. If you take a modest total of £150k per child, over 18 years, then that equates to £8400 per year. I'm sure many parents have looked at such figures, to understand if they can afford to have children. " It doesn't cost 700/month to bring up a child. Those figures are nonsense | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that.... "So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
"Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK? BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one. | |||
| |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one."Why is absolutele poverty even relevant? Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless."Absolute poverty is entirely relevant when speaking about poverty. Do you know the difference between the two? | |||
" So let's agree what we're measuring first. Ta. Could start by noticing an increase (more than what it used to be) using whatever method. And are you suggesting an acceptable level Well IF the increase is by measuring relative wealth, then that can occur simply by the rich getting richer faster than the poor. Important but not anything to do with poverty. So in the OP, what are you referencing?" I will come back with my wisdom when the OP clarifies the question | |||
"The internet has many costs involved in bringing a child up. If you take a modest total of £150k per child, over 18 years, then that equates to £8400 per year. I'm sure many parents have looked at such figures, to understand if they can afford to have children. It doesn't cost 700/month to bring up a child. Those figures are nonsense" Maybe so, but its whats quoted by many Children's groups and charities. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless."I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs". Well worth a read. | |||
"The internet has many costs involved in bringing a child up. If you take a modest total of £150k per child, over 18 years, then that equates to £8400 per year. I'm sure many parents have looked at such figures, to understand if they can afford to have children. It doesn't cost 700/month to bring up a child. Those figures are nonsense Maybe so, but its whats quoted by many Children's groups and charities. " Maybe that figure include the increase in housing costs as the family grows, not sure. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read. "I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery. The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment. Does tory waffle graphs show that? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
"Rowntree was a remarkable man, a quaker, you'll either be bothered to read about him or you won't. | |||
"The irony in castigating people for not doing an 18 year cost/risk analysis,factoring in economic conditions, before deciding if they can have children or not,whilst the pm has that many children ,he doesnt even know their names,is genuinely beyond satire." plus the perceived threat to employment. Can anyone guarantee they have a secure job for 18 years to bring kids up | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
"To be accurate, Rashford has stepped in arguing to spend taxpayers money, including minimum wage childless taxpayers, on feeding other people's kids. | |||
| |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
To be accurate, Rashford has stepped in arguing to spend taxpayers money, including minimum wage childless taxpayers, on feeding other people's kids. "Id prefer my taxes are spent on stopping child starvation rather than the vanity projects. So tell me what should be done besides blaming parents and allowing children to starve in the UK? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
To be accurate, Rashford has stepped in arguing to spend taxpayers money, including minimum wage childless taxpayers, on feeding other people's kids.
Id prefer my taxes are spent on stopping child starvation rather than the vanity projects.
So tell me what should be done besides blaming parents and allowing children to starve in the UK? "And they'll be minimum wage adult taxpayers who are starving NOW who have to pay more tax because of Rashford. Is that fair on them? Do me a favour, read the first page of the Rowntree website I've pointed you at, and you will see it's a complicated issue. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
"
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise. | |||
" Do me a favour, read the first page of the Rowntree website I've pointed you at, and you will see it's a complicated issue. " Ok i will when i get the time.. I understand there's some that take liberties with the welfare system and it's trying to sort it out | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I certainly wouldn't take it to mean forced sterilisation. So what would you take it?(2nd go) If take it to mean you shouldn't have kids if you can't afford them. That's what was said so I'd assume that's what the poster meant. Right..so when exactly are you allowed to have kids? And what happens if you suffer some bad luck like losing your job or splitting up with your partner? Who said anything about people being 'allowed'? Obviously bad luck can strike any one of us. That's what we have a benefits system for. Or at least it should be. The thing is, I've had bad luck, leaned on family (my family have supported me massively in the past) and then picked myself up and cracked on. It's what you do as a parent. I'm fairly sure I've quoted this once so I'll try again. If you cant afford to have kids dont have them. " Are you suggesting that the UK taxpayer should have to pay for the upbringing of all children born in the UK? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise."Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace? | |||
" Do me a favour, read the first page of the Rowntree website I've pointed you at, and you will see it's a complicated issue. Ok i will when i get the time.. I understand there's some that take liberties with the welfare system and it's trying to sort it out " There will always be people who blag the system For some reason it's the tiny percentage at the bottom who are utterly demonized to an extent television programmes are made about them | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
"The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple. The 1st step is acknowledging the problem | |||
" Do me a favour, read the first page of the Rowntree website I've pointed you at, and you will see it's a complicated issue. Ok i will when i get the time.. I understand there's some that take liberties with the welfare system and it's trying to sort it out There will always be people who blag the system For some reason it's the tiny percentage at the bottom who are utterly demonized to an extent television programmes are made about them " And yet no one ITT has said that. What is true is that there are many facets of poverty, I think even Holland stopped a version of Universal Basic Income due to taxpayer protest. Poverty of Ambition, particularly in mutigenerational families where no one has ever worked, is also a huge problem in terms of quality of life. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem "Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so? There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting. Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done."Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame? I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope. Do you know what every parent spends their money on? ..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits " Funded by?? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
"Well whatever it was it wasn't austerity, tax take and spend went up every year for those 8 years. Tax take percentage is this year the highest its been since 1995. Still, until the pips squeak eh? | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by??" Are you saying we cant afford it? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
Well whatever it was it wasn't austerity, tax take and spend went up every year for those 8 years.
Tax take percentage is this year the highest its been since 1995.
Still, until the pips squeak eh? "So austerity had no impact at all? Right..probally just a total coincidence that the number of food banks exploded during this period. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it?" Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest | |||
"Simple cant afford them then dont have them.reason i only have two is thats what i can afford comftably.anymore than that and my two kids would be living below the poverty line I'll put you down as a "B"." Put me down as what you like mate just pointing out ifi had more than the two daughters i have i wouldnt be able to afford them.didnt mention ciggies or sky t.v. Thats just you trying to put words in peoples mouths | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest " Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean?" I was the one who said if u cant afford them dont have them.i can afford two so thats what i stopped at.no where did i mention forced sterilisation.thats you just being over dramatic as usual lionel | |||
| |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I was the one who said if u cant afford them dont have them.i can afford two so thats what i stopped at.no where did i mention forced sterilisation.thats you just being over dramatic as usual lionel" So what exactly does that mean then..even if you are working how can you possibly now what's going to happen in the future? | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange " I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. " You asked who it was funded by? If that doesnt imply we cant afford it,I don't know what does I've just provided a list where absolutele billions has been spent.. use some of that money. Look at the tax system | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I was the one who said if u cant afford them dont have them.i can afford two so thats what i stopped at.no where did i mention forced sterilisation.thats you just being over dramatic as usual lionel So what exactly does that mean then..even if you are working how can you possibly now what's going to happen in the future?" U go on benefits and spend accordingly not carrying on the life you were while working.then get into another job as soon as ya can.its not rocket science | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. You asked who it was funded by? If that doesnt imply we cant afford it,I don't know what does I've just provided a list where absolutele billions has been spent.. use some of that money. Look at the tax system " Neither sustainable or plausible in the long term to just defer necessary defence and infrastructure projects. I mean where will Corbyn find to sit and do a photo shoot if they do away with HS2? | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I was the one who said if u cant afford them dont have them.i can afford two so thats what i stopped at.no where did i mention forced sterilisation.thats you just being over dramatic as usual lionel So what exactly does that mean then..even if you are working how can you possibly now what's going to happen in the future? U go on benefits and spend accordingly not carrying on the life you were while working.then get into another job as soon as ya can.its not rocket science" That's what people do presumably. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. You asked who it was funded by? If that doesnt imply we cant afford it,I don't know what does I've just provided a list where absolutele billions has been spent.. use some of that money. Look at the tax system Neither sustainable or plausible in the long term to just defer necessary defence and infrastructure projects. I mean where will Corbyn find to sit and do a photo shoot if they do away with HS2?" A missile we will never use,a track that will shave 10 seconds of a journey and a pointless tunnel are necessary. Addressing structural poverty and unemployment where kids are going hungry are not. They should put that on their manifesto. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. You asked who it was funded by? If that doesnt imply we cant afford it,I don't know what does I've just provided a list where absolutele billions has been spent.. use some of that money. Look at the tax system Neither sustainable or plausible in the long term to just defer necessary defence and infrastructure projects. I mean where will Corbyn find to sit and do a photo shoot if they do away with HS2? A missile we will never use,a track that will shave 10 seconds of a journey and a pointless tunnel are necessary. Addressing structural poverty and unemployment where kids are going hungry are not. They should put that on their manifesto. " "A missile we will never use" it is in use every day and will remain so as long as the UK has them, it's called a deterrent and so far has done a very good job and long may it do so! How many seconds?? you little porky pie teller you. People should only have the number of children they can sustain. I have a relative who at a very early age had a child out of wedlock specifically to get council housing, it's wrong. | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange I'm implying nothing. What's really strange is the inability of some people to a straight answer to a question, that's both logical and plausible. You asked who it was funded by? If that doesnt imply we cant afford it,I don't know what does I've just provided a list where absolutele billions has been spent.. use some of that money. Look at the tax system Neither sustainable or plausible in the long term to just defer necessary defence and infrastructure projects. I mean where will Corbyn find to sit and do a photo shoot if they do away with HS2? A missile we will never use,a track that will shave 10 seconds of a journey and a pointless tunnel are necessary. Addressing structural poverty and unemployment where kids are going hungry are not. They should put that on their manifesto. "A missile we will never use" it is in use every day and will remain so as long as the UK has them, it's called a deterrent and so far has done a very good job and long may it do so! How many seconds?? you little porky pie teller you. People should only have the number of children they can sustain. I have a relative who at a very early age had a child out of wedlock specifically to get council housing, it's wrong." We launch trident every day? News to me that. What are they going to do when the child hits 16? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
"I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own. Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't. Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry' | |||
| |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'"For the uneducated amongst us to be a "deterrent" they don't need to be launched. They still live in the house just had more children. | |||
"And here is an insane notion. Instead of spending 8 years cutting every service to the bone and shutting everything in sight,they could have done the opposite and created more jobs, which more people paying tax and more money in the economy?" It’s the “cut to the bone” notion that is so false. Yes many decent services, like libraries and swimming pools, were stupidly cut. Remember Baby Peter? Died in the middle of austerity? 80 separate visits by social services before his death. A service that was grossly over resourced and ineffective. Tax more? Waste more. Outcomes are what need measuring, not spend. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'"You brought up how people spend their money Give people decent jobs. Pay them a decent wage. Give people hope. Rebuild communities. If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem. | |||
"And here is an insane notion. Instead of spending 8 years cutting every service to the bone and shutting everything in sight,they could have done the opposite and created more jobs, which more people paying tax and more money in the economy? It’s the “cut to the bone” notion that is so false. Yes many decent services, like libraries and swimming pools, were stupidly cut. Remember Baby Peter? Died in the middle of austerity? 80 separate visits by social services before his death. A service that was grossly over resourced and ineffective. Tax more? Waste more. Outcomes are what need measuring, not spend. " Social services. Over resourced? | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange " Trident is not only the UK's deterrent but it also creates job. HS2 also creates thousands of jobs. A tunnel link would also create thousands of jobs. I see no downturn in creating thousands of jobs and boosting local economies. Money well spent. All this coming from someone who was happy to give the EU billions of pounds each year! | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
For the uneducated amongst us to be a "deterrent" they don't need to be launched.
They still live in the house just had more children."I know people who have got kids who work their arse off. Anecdotal evidence is hardly compelling. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
"We need a revolution .... off with their heads! | |||
"I'm going to say one of... A. What about Labour B. People shouldn't buy cigarettes or have sky TV if they have kids. C. Corbyn D. Nothing to see here, move along. E. Why don't you stop moaning/why don't you leave the UK/you should be shot/stop being so negative Or you could suggest some causes and possible solutions? Causes Austerity Institutional inequality Low paid jobs Widening gap between rich and poor Solutions Address inequality in society Local investment Create decent jobs and raise minimum wage so it pays to work Narrow gap between rich and poor Target areas where pockets of poverty exist Revitolise local communities Remove stigmitsation from people claiming benefits Funded by?? Are you saying we cant afford it? Is that what I asked? I want you to suggest how it should be funded without impacting on already low wage tax payers or running up more debt to be paid off by future generations, and before you say take it from the wealthy if you took all the money from the wealthiest 1000 people it wouldn't solve the problem it would just pause it for a year. "give a man a fish he eats for a day teach him....." you know the rest Thats what you seen to be implying? Funny we can find billions for trident, vanity projects like hs2 and a tunnel between Scotland and Ireland, we can spunk mllions on track and track and ppe contacts, we can bail out entire banks but when it comes to addressing poverty there simply isnt the money there? Strange Trident is not only the UK's deterrent but it also creates job. HS2 also creates thousands of jobs. A tunnel link would also create thousands of jobs. I see no downturn in creating thousands of jobs and boosting local economies. Money well spent. All this coming from someone who was happy to give the EU billions of pounds each year!" How many jobs were lost during austerity? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
"How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage? Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give  | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
We need a revolution .... off with their heads!"Giving people jobs is hardly a cornerstone of communism. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give "I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give "They don't count unless Lionel likes them apparently.! | |||
"And here is an insane notion. Instead of spending 8 years cutting every service to the bone and shutting everything in sight,they could have done the opposite and created more jobs, which more people paying tax and more money in the economy? It’s the “cut to the bone” notion that is so false. Yes many decent services, like libraries and swimming pools, were stupidly cut. Remember Baby Peter? Died in the middle of austerity? 80 separate visits by social services before his death. A service that was grossly over resourced and ineffective. Tax more? Waste more. Outcomes are what need measuring, not spend. Social services. Over resourced?" The bit that paid for 80 worse than useless visits? Yes, grossly, grossly over resourced. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
For the uneducated amongst us to be a "deterrent" they don't need to be launched.
They still live in the house just had more children.
I know people who have got kids who work their arse off.
Anecdotal evidence is hardly compelling."Exactly and in your world those hard working folk with children, should be paying for the likes of people who don't work but have kids and spend the money given by the state (hard working tax payers) on frivolous things, because now they have food banks they don't even need to worry about that anymore. | |||
| |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
For the uneducated amongst us to be a "deterrent" they don't need to be launched.
They still live in the house just had more children.
I know people who have got kids who work their arse off.
Anecdotal evidence is hardly compelling.
Exactly and in your world those hard working folk with children, should be paying for the likes of people who don't work but have kids and spend the money given by the state (hard working tax payers) on frivolous things, because now they have food banks they don't even need to worry about that anymore."Yep..I cant wait to lose my job so I can have a life of luxury visiting the local foodbank..do they do champers there? | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/14/osborne-austerity-270000-public-sector-jobs In the public sector alone But it's ok cos Alex is building a magical which will create 1000s of permanent jobs" 9 Years ago, really you're bringing that up? | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/14/osborne-austerity-270000-public-sector-jobs In the public sector alone But it's ok cos Alex is building a magical which will create 1000s of permanent jobs 9 Years ago, really you're bringing that up?" Lets move on..lets forget all that  | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/14/osborne-austerity-270000-public-sector-jobs In the public sector alone But it's ok cos Alex is building a magical which will create 1000s of permanent jobs" Which you want to scrap and take away the jobs.! | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
For the uneducated amongst us to be a "deterrent" they don't need to be launched.
They still live in the house just had more children.
I know people who have got kids who work their arse off.
Anecdotal evidence is hardly compelling.
Exactly and in your world those hard working folk with children, should be paying for the likes of people who don't work but have kids and spend the money given by the state (hard working tax payers) on frivolous things, because now they have food banks they don't even need to worry about that anymore.
Yep..I cant wait to lose my job so I can have a life of luxury visiting the local foodbank..do they do champers there?"There's the problem right there, the state system was never designed nor should aspire to be giving out "champers" | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/14/osborne-austerity-270000-public-sector-jobs In the public sector alone But it's ok cos Alex is building a magical which will create 1000s of permanent jobs Which you want to scrap and take away the jobs.!" Did you answer my question about austerity? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in."Do we still have austerity measures now? | |||
| |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2012/mar/14/osborne-austerity-270000-public-sector-jobs In the public sector alone But it's ok cos Alex is building a magical which will create 1000s of permanent jobs 9 Years ago, really you're bringing that up? Lets move on..lets forget all that "Yes let's because a balance sane argument would include any jobs created as well to show a non biased picture. | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?"We have a pay freeze Does that count? Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today? Have I got that right? | |||
"there was a woman on news, size 20 at a guess claiming she was starving lol and needed to use food banks..... reality check required... I haven't even got an x box, I must be in poverty! And i Only have one car! And I must be straving coz im nowhere fucking near the size of the woman on the news lol" Do you get x boxes from food banks now? Or cars? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?"Have I at any point said it may not contribute? I don't believe I have. Just to clarify your argiment. Are you sating that they're are no parents out there who spend money on things they can't really afford? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?"Unemployment in the UK is at it's highest since the 1970 (covid accepted) so the austerity didn't harm the employment market just cut the chaff | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Unemployment in the UK is at it's highest since the 1970 (covid accepted) so the austerity didn't harm the employment market just cut the chaff "Jesus wept | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Unemployment in the UK is at it's highest since the 1970 (covid accepted) so the austerity didn't harm the employment market just cut the chaff
Jesus wept"OOps Unemployment is at it's LOWEST, silly me  | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Have I at any point said it may not contribute?
I don't believe I have.
Just to clarify your argiment. Are you sating that they're are no parents out there who spend money on things they can't really afford?"Ah the usual trick of implying someone (does austerity still exist)then backtracking completely. There may be..do you have any figures at hand? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Have I at any point said it may not contribute?
I don't believe I have.
Just to clarify your argiment. Are you sating that they're are no parents out there who spend money on things they can't really afford?
Ah the usual trick of implying someone (does austerity still exist)then backtracking completely.
There may be..do you have any figures at hand?"What have I implied again? | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Have I at any point said it may not contribute?
I don't believe I have.
Just to clarify your argiment. Are you sating that they're are no parents out there who spend money on things they can't really afford?
Ah the usual trick of implying someone (does austerity still exist)then backtracking completely.
There may be..do you have any figures at hand?"I highly doubt those figures are calculated. I'd hazard a guess though that every person on this thread knows someone who 'can't afford' certain things for their kids yet smoke/drink | |||
"From what I can see the increase is Relative Poverty, not Absolute Poverty. There's a world of difference between the two. I just said that....
So everything is OK then in terms of absolute poverty? Brush it under the carpet, Rushford is just interfering in politics?
Do you have the figures for absolute poverty in the UK?
BTW, no poverty is ok before anyone tries pull that one.
Why is absolutele poverty even relevant?
Last time I checked we dont like in a 3rd world country,therefore comparing us to a family in Sudan is rather pointless.
I was correct actually, if you look up the Joseph Rowntree Foundation they give an excellent summary on their front page of the definition of poverty, headline "when your resources are well below your minimum needs".
Well worth a read.
I find it fascinating that poverty, especially, to explain away why some children are so hungry tbat some teachers are feeding kids, a footballer who has stepped in to helo feed kids, is explained away with this mathematical wafflery.
The only real priority is ensuring kids are adequately fed, clothed, washed snd grow up in a safe environment.
Does tory waffle graphs show that?
The fact that in 2021 in 1of the richest countries on the planet,kids are going hungry, is a disgrace.
Everything else is just noise.
Isn't it better to try find out why they are going hungry so you can attempt to fix it rather than just shout about it being a disgrace?
The reasons why they are going hungry are fairly simple.
The 1st step is acknowledging the problem
Are they simple? Do we know every child who is going hungry and why so?
There are a whole range of things that people spend money on which isn't a necessity. If any of those who do this have starving kids then that's bad parenting.
Granted, that may be a minority of cases but how are we to know unless checks are done.
Why Is it,it is always the person who is suffering who is to blame?
I knew if I lost my job and had to feed 3 kids, I would struggle to cope.
Do you know what every parent spends their money on?
..I'm no expert but if you reverse 8 years of austerity (or whatever it was)and address systematic inequality,that may help a bit.
I didn't at any point say everyone struggling is the fault of their own.
Neither do I know what every parent spends their money on, just as you don't.
Which makes for my whole argument against 'its fairly simple why kids are hungry'
You brought up how people spend their money
Give people decent jobs.
Pay them a decent wage.
Give people hope.
Rebuild communities.
If you do that, that will go some way to addressing the problem.
How does a government gove people decent jobs and pay them a decent wage?
Youre all for scrapping 'vanity projects' which creaye the very thing you want to give
I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat 8 years of austerity before it actually sinks in.
Do we still have austerity measures now?
We have a pay freeze
Does that count?
Amd just to clarify your argument.. despite us shedding nearly 300,000 jobs,in the public sector alone,over a period of 8 years,that, in no way,contributes to levels of poverty today?
Have I got that right?
Have I at any point said it may not contribute?
I don't believe I have.
Just to clarify your argiment. Are you sating that they're are no parents out there who spend money on things they can't really afford?
Ah the usual trick of implying someone (does austerity still exist)then backtracking completely.
There may be..do you have any figures at hand?
I highly doubt those figures are calculated.
I'd hazard a guess though that every person on this thread knows someone who 'can't afford' certain things for their kids yet smoke/drink"more than one, us people up norff are poor | |||
| |||
| |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life." I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life." How many more have a life because they received benefits? | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life. I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment" The structural reasons for poverty are fairly simple. | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life. I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment The structural reasons for poverty are fairly simple." If so, why do communist countries and socialist governments not remove it when in power? | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life. I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment The structural reasons for poverty are fairly simple." You said the reasons people are going hungry were fairly simple. There's probably only a small minority of those in relative poverty who go hungry | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life. I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment The structural reasons for poverty are fairly simple. You said the reasons people are going hungry were fairly simple. There's probably only a small minority of those in relative poverty who go hungry" Have a look at the no of foodbanks there are today compared to 10 years ago. | |||
"And I'd guess that most people know someone who is genuinly struggling. The amount of actual benefit fraid is tiny. Not surprising considering the inhumane process they put they through. How many people have died again after having their benefits stopped? Still it must be a cushy life. I haven't said there aren't people who genuinely struggle but its not 'fairly simple' which was your comment The structural reasons for poverty are fairly simple. You said the reasons people are going hungry were fairly simple. There's probably only a small minority of those in relative poverty who go hungry Have a look at the no of foodbanks there are today compared to 10 years ago." Food banks stop people from going hungry. And a great job they do at it too | |||
"Maybe we should sterlilise people who earn below 30k a year? The funny thing is, no one on this thread has said anything remotely related to forced sterilisation. You really do have a messed up way of reading things if that's what you've seen. When someone says. If you cant afford to have kids..dont have them. In your own words What would you take that to mean? I was the one who said if u cant afford them dont have them.i can afford two so thats what i stopped at.no where did i mention forced sterilisation.thats you just being over dramatic as usual lionel" | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/jan/28/disabled-man-starved-to-death-after-dwp-stopped-his-benefits He should have just sold his car and x box." And in your mind, is that sort of tragedy due to money, or administrative incompetence? | |||
"there was a woman on news, size 20 at a guess claiming she was starving lol and needed to use food banks..... reality check required... I haven't even got an x box, I must be in poverty! And i Only have one car! And I must be straving coz im nowhere fucking near the size of the woman on the news lol Do you get x boxes from food banks now? Or cars?" the report says relative poverty i.e if everyone is size 44 and your size 20 you are skinny lol and need the food bank! if you have 3 cars and i have only 1 then i am relatively poor etc etc But in the real world one car and size 20 is not hungry and not being in poverty. having said that the gap between rich and poor should not be allowed to continually increase. | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/jan/28/disabled-man-starved-to-death-after-dwp-stopped-his-benefits He should have just sold his car and x box. And in your mind, is that sort of tragedy due to money, or administrative incompetence? " exactly or because they have got to deal with so many bleating that the genuine get over looked... which is what a doctor was saying on the news.. so many shouting for attention and its the ones that can not shout that actually need it who get missed. | |||
"https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/jan/28/disabled-man-starved-to-death-after-dwp-stopped-his-benefits He should have just sold his car and x box. And in your mind, is that sort of tragedy due to money, or administrative incompetence? " The fact that people are dying beciade the benefits they are entitled too,for whatever reason, they arent getting,is borderline barbaric. | |||
| |||
| |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. " Well said | |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. " Who said if you dont have the latest I phone you are living in poverty exactly? | |||
"there was a woman on news, size 20 at a guess claiming she was starving lol and needed to use food banks..... reality check required... I haven't even got an x box, I must be in poverty! And i Only have one car! And I must be straving coz im nowhere fucking near the size of the woman on the news lol Do you get x boxes from food banks now? Or cars? the report says relative poverty i.e if everyone is size 44 and your size 20 you are skinny lol and need the food bank! if you have 3 cars and i have only 1 then i am relatively poor etc etc But in the real world one car and size 20 is not hungry and not being in poverty. having said that the gap between rich and poor should not be allowed to continually increase." Maybe they should only accept people who look like they have come out of a concentration camp? | |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. Who said if you dont have the latest I phone you are living in poverty exactly? " The Scottish Government apparently.. | |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. Who said if you dont have the latest I phone you are living in poverty exactly? The Scottish Government apparently.." Link? | |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. Who said if you dont have the latest I phone you are living in poverty exactly? The Scottish Government apparently.. Link?" Just bloody Google it.. Jeez | |||
"The word poverty is starting to lose its meaning. It appears that if people choose to spend their money on non essential items which is thier choice, they then aim to be impoverished because they don't have or don't get. Ive hear period poverty where people can't by sanitary towels costing less than £1 per pack. Recently I've hear while watching the news the term a digital poverty where people don't have the most up to date tech so they're now in poverty... I'm all for helping those who need it but to hell with the work shy and down right lazy. Who said if you dont have the latest I phone you are living in poverty exactly? The Scottish Government apparently.. Link? Just bloody Google it.. Jeez " Can I just ask..who is handing out these £600 phones to every tom,dick and harry? | |||
| |||
"Uncontrolled immigration has flooded the labour market with endless cheep labour and reduced terms and conditions " When.you say uncontrolled immigration... | |||
"I know little about British food banks. Do people who use them have to prove in any way that they need them - some sort of documentation for example?" No I believe they should give food vouchers that cant be spent on fags and booze, | |||
"there was a woman on news, size 20 at a guess claiming she was starving lol and needed to use food banks..... reality check required... I haven't even got an x box, I must be in poverty! And i Only have one car! And I must be straving coz im nowhere fucking near the size of the woman on the news lol Do you get x boxes from food banks now? Or cars? the report says relative poverty i.e if everyone is size 44 and your size 20 you are skinny lol and need the food bank! if you have 3 cars and i have only 1 then i am relatively poor etc etc But in the real world one car and size 20 is not hungry and not being in poverty. having said that the gap between rich and poor should not be allowed to continually increase. Maybe they should only accept people who look like they have come out of a concentration camp?" Rather than fat camp..... ? | |||
"Uncontrolled immigration has flooded the labour market with endless cheep labour and reduced terms and conditions When.you say uncontrolled immigration..." Do you need every sentence explaining.... it gets boring.... are you in word poverty lol educational poverty? Thinking poverty? ....lol | |||
| |||
"Uncontrolled immigration has flooded the labour market with endless cheep labour and reduced terms and conditions When.you say uncontrolled immigration... Do you need every sentence explaining.... it gets boring.... are you in word poverty lol educational poverty? Thinking poverty? ....lol" Good one | |||
"Sorry to peddle in. You know.. facts.. you can only go to a foodbank if you have been referred by either the citizens advice bureau or another professional such as a school, but you will be asked to provide details of your personal circumstances. So the notion that you can just rock up and get a new I phone is..unsurprisingly. Bollocks" Did anyone say you could? | |||
"Sorry to peddle in. You know.. facts.. you can only go to a foodbank if you have been referred by either the citizens advice bureau or another professional such as a school, but you will be asked to provide details of your personal circumstances. So the notion that you can just rock up and get a new I phone is..unsurprisingly. Bollocks" since covid started you can just rock up at the foodbanks without being put forward.will it go back to normal once furlough ends who knows.but nice to see you comment on something you have no idea about.very unlike you | |||
| |||
| |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. " You know for a fact that rashford uses tax avoidance schemes? | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. " you mean like Gary llinecker | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker" Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ? | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. You know for a fact that rashford uses tax avoidance schemes?" I'm sure he uses tax avoidance, that's legal, tax evasion isnt. Shame some dont know the difference | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ?" ues he’s also white so maybe that’s why he doesn’t get the same shit rashford gets | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ?ues he’s also white so maybe that’s why he doesn’t get the same shit rashford gets " Was Lineker one of those who promised to house an immigrant? | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ?ues he’s also white so maybe that’s why he doesn’t get the same shit rashford gets " He got plenty of abuse for being a Leftie & Housing an Immigrant . Abuse comes in many forms Its not restricted to colour | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ?ues he’s also white so maybe that’s why he doesn’t get the same shit rashford gets He got plenty of abuse for being a Leftie & Housing an Immigrant . Abuse comes in many forms Its not restricted to colour " I did t say it was lol | |||
"The internet has many costs involved in bringing a child up. If you take a modest total of £150k per child, over 18 years, then that equates to £8400 per year. I'm sure many parents have looked at such figures, to understand if they can afford to have children. It doesn't cost 700/month to bring up a child. Those figures are nonsense" I bet it’s not far off. Bigger house Three bed over a one bed is a big leap if you have two kids . Electric , gas , water Food Clothes If you can afford a car it’s bigger Public transport more often you can’t. Disney plus!!
Even basic leaving would get close .
Decent living standard then you’re adding mobile phones I pads days out, holidays etc etc
It’s not just a few ready meals .
| |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. " If English born non domiciles paid their fair share then we’d have free meals and better education investment for all kids. | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. If English born non domiciles paid their fair share then we’d have free meals and better education investment for all kids. " if only eh | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. You know for a fact that rashford uses tax avoidance schemes?" they all do, his accountant most likely runs his finances, most people dont understand the tax system fully which is why accountants exist... they specialise in rich footballers lol | |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. you mean like Gary llinecker Is Gary llinecker an ex sports star named after a welsh town ?ues he’s also white so maybe that’s why he doesn’t get the same shit rashford gets He got plenty of abuse for being a Leftie & Housing an Immigrant . Abuse comes in many forms Its not restricted to colour I did t say it was lol" I know you did t Whoever t is ? lol | |||
"The internet has many costs involved in bringing a child up. If you take a modest total of £150k per child, over 18 years, then that equates to £8400 per year. I'm sure many parents have looked at such figures, to understand if they can afford to have children. It doesn't cost 700/month to bring up a child. Those figures are nonsense I bet it’s not far off. Bigger house Three bed over a one bed is a big leap if you have two kids . Electric , gas , water Food Clothes If you can afford a car it’s bigger Public transport more often you can’t. Disney plus!!
Even basic leaving would get close .
Decent living standard then you’re adding mobile phones I pads days out, holidays etc etc
It’s not just a few ready meals .
"You may have missed my following post. They may be taking the increase in housing costs into account. You mention having 2 kids, that would be 1400/month. I have 2 kids, they both have ipads, phone, netflix, Disney plus, prime, Spotify, their own bedrooms in one of the most expensive places in the UK to live. And the rest. It doesn't cost as much as they are saying. | |||
| |||
"If the footballer paid income tax, rather than using tax avoidance schemes, then the tax raised would cover all free school meals. You know for a fact that rashford uses tax avoidance schemes?" I understand he pays it on salary, but creative accountants are heavily involved with his trademark work.... | |||
