Jump to content

General Politics Thread


Granny Danger

Recommended Posts

Just now, AsimButtHitsASix said:

It is literally an ideological stance. It doesn't matter what your opinion is.

Now, I'll humour ye, and say "WOW. You got her there. What a whopper of a lie."

What are the other lies?

It's literally not an ideological stance.  It's simply not the job of the Tories to provide for people in that way.

That's the 2nd post where you've acted all smarmy, so forgive me for not taking you seriously from now on.  Think I'm going to have to take a firmer stance with those who can't discuss things in a reasonable manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens if the sickness is permanent?
I would expect an up to date number of people "permanently" on benefits and not working before giving this typical, gammon bogeyman nonsense further airtime tbh.

I certainly doubt its a number high enough to convince any non-c**t that its worth keeping millions of other service users just below the waterline as some sort of warning tbh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

 

That's the 2nd post where you've acted all smarmy, so forgive me for not taking you seriously from now on.  Think I'm going to have to take a firmer stance with those who can't discuss things in a reasonable manner.

You could do that by going and getting yourself to f**k. It’s not the job of the forum to provide for you in that way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

It's literally not an ideological stance.  It's simply not the job of the Tories to provide for people in that way.

That's the 2nd post where you've acted all smarmy, so forgive me for not taking you seriously from now on.  Think I'm going to have to take a firmer stance with those who can't discuss things in a reasonable manner.

Would you say, for instance, communism is an ideology? I would. Within communism the state provides for each individual. 

These are fairly basic concepts. It's not really my fault you don't understand because you believe it's fundamental to your beliefs that doesn't make it a universal truth.

But, disnae matter, you couldn't find a single lie. Squirm away

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

The proportion of people living in poverty who are in a working family has hit a record high, according to a report that shows rising levels of employment have failed to translate into higher living standards.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation said that while paid employment reduces the risk of poverty, about 56% of people living in poverty in 2018 were in a household where at least one person had a job, compared with 39% 20 years ago.

Seven in 10 children in poverty are now in a working family, the charity’s annual UK poverty report found.

And because thick horrible c***s often respond better to pictures:

Screenshot_20220519-144222_Chrome.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I seem to recall Beveridge, the founder of the welfare state saying that welfare should be temporary to allow the individual to get through a period of unemployment or sickness but it should not be a permanent thing.

Can you find us the quote, please? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Duries Air Freshener said:

That's the 2nd post where you've acted all smarmy, so forgive me for not taking you seriously from now on.  Think I'm going to have to take a firmer stance with those who can't discuss things in a reasonable manner.

Are you going to put him on your ever expanding ignore list ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

I seem to recall Beveridge, the founder of the welfare state saying that welfare should be temporary to allow the individual to get through a period of unemployment or sickness but it should not be a permanent thing.

I seem to recall his report advocated support from "the cradle to the grave".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jakedee said:

It does talk about a ‘safety net’ which means that only when your income fell below that would you be helped.

 

2 hours ago, btb said:

 

I seem to recall his report advocated support from "the cradle to the grave".

Child benefits and OAP would cover that through the contributory system as we have now.

Also unemployment and sickness would be covered.

Again - the safety net but never a permanent entitlement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Child benefits and OAP would cover that through the contributory system as we have now.
Also unemployment and sickness would be covered.
Again - the safety net but never a permanent entitlement.
Can you detail the current provision for "permanent entitlement" for people able but not willing to work?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

No.

Im just summarising my recollection.

That’s lucky - you, and only you, remember the time that William Beveridge said something that backs up your exact ideological position, which you now can’t source.

How fortunate for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...