• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

stupid man says stupid thing

does anyone expect anything different from the man who didn’t know there was a large body of water between us and mainland Europe

and the whole GoT reference is clearly the latest brainwave to appeal to the young
 

The joke that is the UK PM is now worried about providing cheaper TimTams which I can tell you as someone who has lived in Australia for 14 years is a Penguin. Nothing more, nothing less.

Glad this Brexit is going to make Britain Great again.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
At face value they look like large numbers BUT you would have to drill down to see how and why are some people on that list.

Some parents are plain selfish and incompetent when it comes to prioritising and nutrition, are they on that list because of that?
Click to expand...

Education -lack of it- is a factor. As is economics. Two job parents, four job households, still scraping by and not around to provide a decent meal. Then there is just the standard "don't have enough money for food" bit.
There are many aspects around the issues of food insecurity. Which is in a sense what you're saying I suppose, but it isn't just down to selfish parents.
 
Grays_1890 said:
The stats don’t look good and I’m in no way to argue against them but I do slightly agree that within some there will always encompass variations of why there are different levels of poverty.

There is undoubtedly those that are let down by the system and that makes up the majority of the percentage no doubt so let’s clear that up before the uproar claiming I haven’t acknowledged that.

There are those that have stretched beyond their means and have then fallen into the one pay cheque to poverty, I know mates who were earning and probably still are around the 40,000 Mark who would blow any spare cash the last week before pay day. How many times have you heard people in offices two weeks after pay day say they can’t do things until next pay? There is a human budgeting issue in the U.K.

Then there are undoubtedly the selfish who are lifers on benefits, I’ve seen it living in Thurrock most of my young life and parents who would be in the pubs, smoking and recreational drug users who would lean on the benefits system, that exists in this country in a huge way and although they are not the main cause of the stats mentioned their is a comfort blanket that they are included and therefore makes for a tricky conversation
Click to expand...

As is.
At the end of the day, there are going to be undernourishedand hungry kids as a consequence. They need to be helped.
 
parklane1 said:
Without a doubt many are, you only have to go into pubs to see guys who drink/smoke most of their money away, they also find money to buy the latest boy toys ( phones, stereos etc) but skimp on the food budget.
Click to expand...

And the kids should pay the price? Isn't that precisely the point of free school lunches as they sometimes are the ONLY source of a balanced meal some kinds get, thanks to sometimes this sort of scenario?
 
Parklaner81 said:
It's little wonder really - only a handful of politicians even attempt to talk about the country as whole living within it's means, and when they do they're usually treated as if they've committed a moral outrage, and are labelled as extremists, headbangers etc. It's no surprise to see that reflected at the individual level.
Click to expand...

You're getting into interesting waters here. I personally agree that people need to live more within their means, but two things to throw into the conversation.

1) the way western society generally appears to work is to encourage people to NOT do this, to instead imagine that they "deserve" that Gucci bag or BMW when they perhaps can only afford a John Lewis one and a new Honda Accord. Debt is an "important part" of "being someone" (gonads of course but my point is debt is pretty much encouraged). Add this to my old friend lack of decent education and you're on a crash course.

2) sometimes the means people have are so genuinely brick that their fate is unavoidable.
 
thfcsteff said:
Education -lack of it- is a factor. As is economics. Two job parents, four job households, still scraping by and not around to provide a decent meal. Then there is just the standard "don't have enough money for food" bit.
There are many aspects around the issues of food insecurity. Which is in a sense what you're saying I suppose, but it isn't just down to selfish parents.
Click to expand...
i never said it was Steff. The figures quoted around food poverty were being politicised in the previous posts. My point was that analysis of how those children 'qualified' for that list was important. If you were to audit their (child and parents) situations one by one, income, time, choices, education there would be many that you and i would conclude aren't in food poverty, it is due to ignorance and bad choices from parents. Of course whatever the conduit to the hunger of a child at the sharp end is, it needs dealing with but the state can only provide so much, and in a lot of cases that is enough (ie at that point they're not in poverty), its the parents choices from then on that dictate the outcome.

I've been to India (and Nepal) three times, it would always strike me that although the kids lived in , (what appeared like) material and enviromental squalor, there day clothes or school uniform would always look spotless and mum would reguarly be on the stove with her 30kg bag of rice and whatever veg and dahl they had, maybe she's got the skills (she probably doesn't even realise they are skills) but more importantly she CAN be bothered and she's NOT distracted.(insert list of much more important distractions:rolleyes:, than feeding your kids)

I suppose its levels, different cultures etc BUT i don't want to allow that as an excuse. Shelter your kid, clean your kid, feed your kid and do it the best you can.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
i never said it was Steff. The figures quoted around food poverty were being politicised in the previous posts. My point was that analysis of how those children 'qualified' for that list was important. If you were to audit their (child and parents) situations one by one, income, time, choices, education there would be many that you and i would conclude aren't in food poverty, it is due to ignorance and bad choices from parents. Of course whatever the conduit to the hunger of a child at the sharp end is, it needs dealing with but the state can only provide so much, and in a lot of cases that is enough (ie at that point they're not in poverty), its the parents choices from then on that dictate the outcome.

I've been to India (and Nepal) three times, it would always strike me that although the kids lived in , (what appeared like) material and enviromental squalor, there day clothes or school uniform would always look spotless and mum would reguarly be on the stove with her 30kg bag of rice and whatever veg and dahl they had, maybe she's got the skills (she probably doesn't even realise they are skills) but more importantly she CAN be bothered and she's NOT distracted.(insert list of much more important distractions:rolleyes:, than feeding your kids)

I suppose its levels, different cultures etc BUT i don't want to allow that as an excuse. Shelter your kid, clean your kid, feed your kid and do it the best you can.
Click to expand...

Your last sentence is the bare minimum for any parent. With 28 and 15 year olds myself, I feel I have always looked to set a higher bar than that.

I still do not like the weight of inference here. It is -IMO- simplistic and lacks any real context. There will always be a few scrotes but even then the kids of those scrotes need help wherever possible.

India...yes, been there too. And a few African nations. And most of South America. I too have marveled at how so many get by -and with efficiency plus pride- with so little. And it IS culture, absolutely.

You don't want to use it as an excuse, but our society is set up to make people feel they "should" all be rich without supplying the education to understand how. I could get into a long-winded waffle about values, but then we'd end up at what defines "success" and IMO, the Indian "mum" you refer to is ten times the success of a hedge fund manager.

So IMO, just let's make sure kids can at least get one decent meal a day regardless of whether their parents are "means test poor" or "plastic poor". What a conversation, are we REALLY judging poverty? brick...

A final thought. Wouldn't it be nice if we all agreed as a society to pay a few quid more per tshirt or a few quid more per garment so as "Mum" doesn't have to "honourably" be at the stove with her 30kg bag of rice and veggies and dahl? Maybe a slightly higher standard of living?
 
thfcsteff said:
Education -lack of it- is a factor. As is economics. Two job parents, four job households, still scraping by and not around to provide a decent meal. Then there is just the standard "don't have enough money for food" bit.
There are many aspects around the issues of food insecurity. Which is in a sense what you're saying I suppose, but it isn't just down to selfish parents.
Click to expand...
You sure about that?

Parents with two jobs will, I assume, be working one full time and one part time? So that's about 60hrs each in total. 120 hrs a week at minimum wage is nearly £1,050 a week between them. That's a household income of nearly £55K. They're not poor.
 
A household income of £55k is adequate if you have time to cook from scratch, to shop around, and to clean. Working 60 hours a week is fine but it leaves you needing to outsource pretty much everything else.
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
A household income of £55k is adequate if you have time to cook from scratch, to shop around, and to clean. Working 60 hours a week is fine but it leaves you needing to outsource pretty much everything else.
Click to expand...

The mums are usually to busy on Facebook while smoking their roll up fags and chatting to their mates about there next tattoo to care whether the children have eaten or not.


My minds eye of the ones i have know like that they are all white. Dont know what goes on with black children. Asian children are brought up with good values and the parents care about them.
 
thfcsteff said:
Your last sentence is the bare minimum for any parent. With 28 and 15 year olds myself, I feel I have always looked to set a higher bar than that.
Click to expand...

My point is they are failing the bare minimum by choice.

thfcsteff said:
I still do not like the weight of inference here. It is -IMO- simplistic and lacks any real context. There will always be a few scrotes but even then the kids of those scrotes need help wherever possible.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I have said that. Hungry kids matter:)

But if the list and numbers is politicised, you need to know how many of them are down to the state. That report said a fifth of all UK children are in 'food insecure households' , 1 in 5!, looking around im not seeing 20% of households that look poor enough to struggle to put food on the table through choice and events that are not of their own making. 20% would be massively visible.

thfcsteff said:
You don't want to use it as an excuse, but our society is set up to make people feel they "should" all be rich without supplying the education to understand how. I could get into a long-winded waffle about values, but then we'd end up at what defines "success" and IMO, the Indian "mum" you refer to is ten times the success of a hedge fund manager.
Click to expand...

Believe me my overarching thoughts on the social economic behaviour of (largely) the western world is very much aligned with yours. And perhaps our trips to the 'third world' has contributed to reevaluating our perspective that was more than likely part of our conditioning thru our youth?

thfcsteff said:
So IMO, just let's make sure kids can at least get one decent meal a day regardless of whether their parents are "means test poor" or "plastic poor". What a conversation, are we REALLY judging poverty? brick...
Click to expand...
But the plastic poor need educating or at least some realisation of why they are in the situation. For example if someone came into a 'food help' centre and asked for food or money to feed their kid and you gave them a form to complete and the first three questions were....Do you smoke?....Do you buy bottle or cans?....Do you bet?.....if they answered yes to any of them, the (harsh) temptation is to say 'do-one', ''sort your priorities then come back and see us'.
I do have a problem (a bee in the bonnet:)) with people making bad (life) choices, and then expecting others to support them or bail them out, especially when it comes along with the whole 'i'm a victim' diatribe.You make your bed etc......

thfcsteff said:
A final thought. Wouldn't it be nice if we all agreed as a society to pay a few quid more per tshirt or a few quid more per garment so as "Mum" doesn't have to "honourably" be at the stove with her 30kg bag of rice and veggies and dahl? Maybe a slightly higher standard of living?
Click to expand...
Agreed, i think we should pay more.Within our friends and family, when someone buys something ridiculously cheap i'll flippantly in a dark comedic way say 'Get in! Only a couple of kids died making that' .

I think that's slightly patronising towards the Indian mum,it's a simple way of life but she's doing the bare minimum three things well. she's happy (and proud) doing what she does, Does she want a higher standard of living who knows? If that comes with the western distractions, then i hope not as the ship she runs sails ok, and the faux higher standard of living many Britons think they have doesn't look to be working out in a food sense, debt and happiness?
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
A household income of £55k is adequate if you have time to cook from scratch, to shop around, and to clean. Working 60 hours a week is fine but it leaves you needing to outsource pretty much everything else.
Click to expand...
If you live up north you can build a property empire on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back