Jeremy Corbyn (Vol. 4)
Discussion
ntiz said:
Perhaps I am a little mental but I get genuinely annoyed when people bang the poverty drum in the UK.
But I have this opinion because the first time I went to India when I was 15. On the second day I saw a child couldn’t have been any older than 8 dead by the side of the road people just walking over her.
It shook me to my core and made me question everything about myself.
It is the critical difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty.But I have this opinion because the first time I went to India when I was 15. On the second day I saw a child couldn’t have been any older than 8 dead by the side of the road people just walking over her.
It shook me to my core and made me question everything about myself.
People in this country hear "poverty" and assume absolute, not relative.
ntiz said:
Perhaps I am a little mental but I get genuinely annoyed when people bang the poverty drum in the UK.
But I have this opinion because the first time I went to India when I was 15. On the second day I saw a child couldn’t have been any older than 8 dead by the side of the road people just walking over her.
It shook me to my core and made me question everything about myself.
There are no doubt many people who are the victim of circumstances beyond their control that find themselves living miserable lives as a resultBut I have this opinion because the first time I went to India when I was 15. On the second day I saw a child couldn’t have been any older than 8 dead by the side of the road people just walking over her.
It shook me to my core and made me question everything about myself.
And no doubt also a body of people who's poor decision making, lack of personal responsibility and refusal to accept the reality of their life, has also contributed to their unhappiness
And then there are people who are entitled and believe the world owes them a living and they are determined to get as much out of society as possible whilst putting as little in as they can or in fact detracting from it with crime, antisocial behaviour etc
I'm not saying it is easy to differentiate them for the purposes of handing out benefits, and I'm not saying the current government has done a good job of it, I'm not saying we shouldn't support people incapable or unwilling to helping themselves I accept as a civilised society we have to have a safety net and look after those that can't / won't do it themselves.
I do however think that Corbyn's Labour is no doubt the party for all three of these groups.
I do think that Corbyn's Labour demonises people who have worked hard, got on and pulled themselves out of needing the state to help them and paints us as the problem before turning to us and expecting to take even more of what we have earned to pay for the others.
Relative poverty is a serious problem IMO! It is nonsense..... it is a phrase so overused and twisted that it becomes meaningless.
In effect, the poster above hit the nail on the head - absolute poverty vs relative!
According to the most (ab)used mantra of the left, it is all the fault of the nasty Tories. Using relative poverty definitions and stats is disingenuous at best.
Labour keep telling us how bad ‘poverty’ is now in the UK. There are way too many poor people struggling and the truly needy do deserve care, help and support.
Not having a TV in your bedroom should never be described as poverty.....
So much to say on the subject but I’ll be walk away for now to think and find some examples to show my point.
In effect, the poster above hit the nail on the head - absolute poverty vs relative!
According to the most (ab)used mantra of the left, it is all the fault of the nasty Tories. Using relative poverty definitions and stats is disingenuous at best.
Labour keep telling us how bad ‘poverty’ is now in the UK. There are way too many poor people struggling and the truly needy do deserve care, help and support.
Not having a TV in your bedroom should never be described as poverty.....
So much to say on the subject but I’ll be walk away for now to think and find some examples to show my point.
Johnnytheboy said:
Relative poverty is so clearly ideology-driven, as you'll never eliminate it unless you make the rich poorer.
You’ll never eliminate it because a sector of society would blow through any amount of weekly assistance. I don’t believe there is an economic reason why people live in a cardboard box and even die on the street. Mental health etc. I’m happy to be schooled on the subjectAs relative poverty is a reference against someone else's wealth/income, it is by definition something that can't be eliminated until everyone is within a small scope of those references. That means relative poverty will never be removed from any working society.
It's a really dumb reference to use if you want to highlight a genuine problem and tackle it.
It's a really dumb reference to use if you want to highlight a genuine problem and tackle it.
"The BBC keep inviting on Zionist liars"
"Have you complained to them about it?"
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/status/12033914698...
Just another day at the office
"Have you complained to them about it?"
https://twitter.com/TimesCorbyn/status/12033914698...
Just another day at the office
jsf said:
As relative poverty is a reference against someone else's wealth/income, it is by definition something that can't be eliminated until everyone is within a small scope of those references. That means relative poverty will never be removed from any working society.
It's a really dumb reference to use if you want to highlight a genuine problem and tackle it.
I have always wondered if for example tomorrow the government found the world largest oilfield and decided to split the sale of it equally with everyone in the country. Making everyone a millionaire. By this metric we would still have the same amount of relative poverty?It's a really dumb reference to use if you want to highlight a genuine problem and tackle it.
Obviously I am ignoring the huge changes this would have on the country but basically if everyone was a millionaire would we still have relative poverty for certain people to complain about??
TheRealNoNeedy said:
ntiz said:
It’s called being woke guys!!!!
Obviously had there eyes opened by the sheer level of poverty and abuse on the streets of the UK.
We make places like India look like Disney land.
This is true, people that talk about poverty in the UK are talking crap, they need to go and see real povertyObviously had there eyes opened by the sheer level of poverty and abuse on the streets of the UK.
We make places like India look like Disney land.
Relative poverty is a useful metric but unfortunely had been hijacked by the labour party to paint a picture, and they quite deliberately leave out the relative part when they are bashing the tories. It's a disgusting tactic. The word poverty in my mind instantly brings up kids in Africa drinking out of the same water some buffalo is taking a piss in. That's poverty.
To describe those families in the uk who get by but dont enjoy the luxuries as an average family as being in poverty, relative or not doesn't sit right with me.
Oh and if we look at the data, absolute poverty has halved in the last 20 years, and relative poverty is broadly the same.
To describe those families in the uk who get by but dont enjoy the luxuries as an average family as being in poverty, relative or not doesn't sit right with me.
Oh and if we look at the data, absolute poverty has halved in the last 20 years, and relative poverty is broadly the same.
jsf said:
You'd struggle to have a social media post go more badly wrong for the OP than that. Brilliant.ntiz said:
I have always wondered if for example tomorrow the government found the world largest oilfield and decided to split the sale of it equally with everyone in the country. Making everyone a millionaire. By this metric we would still have the same amount of relative poverty?
Obviously I am ignoring the huge changes this would have on the country but basically if everyone was a millionaire would we still have relative poverty for certain people to complain about??
Sort of. It's income based (as idiotically defined poverty=less than 60% of median income; that's roughly 18k after tax per household). So if you gave every household 1m in the first year the median household income would be 1m and change no one would make less than 600k so there would be zero poverty. The following year though you'd be back to square one, except now half the country wouldn't need any income so your 'poverty rate' would sky rocket.Obviously I am ignoring the huge changes this would have on the country but basically if everyone was a millionaire would we still have relative poverty for certain people to complain about??
jsf said:
Is that like a dumbf
k double down or something?jsf said:
He really is a strange one isn’t he?He is also one of the Labour ‘heavyweights ‘ and travels around helping newer ‘lightweights’....
Just picture the front bench/cabinet if these clowns got in! Let alone the ‘top’ jobs
230TE said:
jsf said:
You'd struggle to have a social media post go more badly wrong for the OP than that. Brilliant.
fblm said:
230TE said:
jsf said:
You'd struggle to have a social media post go more badly wrong for the OP than that. Brilliant.1971 - Union Official
1978 - Local councillor
1983 onwards - MP
A Winner Is You said:
As opposed to Corbyn's CV
1971 - Union Official
1978 - Local councillor
1983 onwards - MP
You people always lie about Corbyn - you've missed off his education completely:1971 - Union Official
1978 - Local councillor
1983 onwards - MP
Top school for A Levels - awarded EE
Went to a poly to study trade union studies - kicked off course for being too argumentative in seminars
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff