Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 5)

[bitchstewie]

Good to see Tobias Ellwood and Jonny Mercer coming out and saying the Government should be re-visiting this and that the communications have been poor.

2000 paediatricians have apparently signed a letter pointing out the the Government that feeding children is the "most basic human responsibilities" as it seems they need reminding (along with some parents).

School meals: Pressure mounts on government to reverse decision

[loafer123]

IforB - you should take a look at setting up a Community Fridge;

https://www.hubbub.org.uk/how-to-set-up-a-communit...

It not only uses up food that would otherwise go to waste but also provides a free resource of food for those that want it with no stigma, as it is for everyone. It would also help people to cook more food themselves rather than relying on ready meals and takeaways.

It is working very well where I live, supported by the community, supermarkets, food producers and farmers.

[bitchstewie]

mike74 said:

Can't be bothered replying separately to all the woefully uninformed and gullible individuals who've quoted me so I'll say it all here.

I live and work in the community of one of the least economically active counties in the whole of the UK (it's had the lowest GVA figures for the entire UK consistently for many years)

Yet I constantly and consistently see people choosing to have children they couldn't otherwise afford because the rewards in terms of benefits available for doing so are so ridiculously generous.

I know several young women (under 21) in my own workplace who have given up what is a secure, reasonably well paid job to become ''full time single mummies'' because the lifestyle and financial rewards are so much more appealing.

In the community I see ''single'' parents (at least they claim to be single) living in council housing with houses and gardens literally overflowing with excess ''stuff'' furniture, toys, clothes until the council occasionally provides these people with a skip (FOC of course) to help them get rid of it before they start accumulating all over again.

I personally know of one ''single'' mother of three who is pulling in £350 a week in UC...
Plus Child Benefit
Plus Council Tax Benefit
Plus child maintenance from the 3 dads
Plus any money she may or may not earn from the obligatory 16 hours per week that she claims to work as a childminder
She drives a 16 plate Kadjar, has regular nights out, shopping trips to the nearest city and outlets, has a pedigree ''handbag dog'', frequently advertises used children's clothes for sale on Facebook... every single item is an expensive brand or designer label.


Any children who are living in any form of poverty and going to bed hungry under the current benefits system must be the product of such feckless, irresponsible and uncaring parents that they are undoubtedly legally unfit to have a child in their care in the first place, they're probably not even capable of looking after themselves never mind being responsible for kids and subsequently the children should be taken away from them as a welfare and safeguarding issue.

I actually suspect that the numbers of parents/children who do fall into the above category are very small, but no, the uninformed idiots on here just want to jump on the Saint Rashy bandwagon and reward all ''vulnerable'' and ''poverty stricken'' parents on benefits with yet more money.

The debate we should be having is how do we end the insane situation of encouraging and rewarding the feckless breeders but I doubt that will ever happen, it's the same as the phoney war on mass immigration, ukgov just wants to inflate the population by any means necessary, mainly to keep those oh so important GDP figures in the positive range.

I don't think people are saying the benefits system is wonderful are they?

I think people are saying that there's an issue that needs a short term sticking plaster in the middle of a pandemic and more economic hardship than there usually is.

Personally I see it quite simply which is I can either be a bit idealistic which I'm sure I am but thousands of small struggling businesses up and down the country seem to have leaped on that idealistic bandwagon too.

Or I can wake up this morning and find I'm you.

Wanging on about "feckless breeders".

It's pretty disgusting.

[markyb_lcy]

bhstewie said:

Or I can wake up this morning and find I'm you.

Wanging on about "feckless breeders".

It's pretty disgusting.

Agreed.

Chocking on their own froth is not a good way to go.

[anonymous-user]

IforB, congratulations on doing something good. Shame on those who go so far as justifying hungry children to defend a crooked, incompetent and heartless government.

[anonymous-user]

mike74 said:

pablo said:

Doesn’t exist because you’ve never seen it, You really are a aren’t you?

Can't be bothered replying separately to all the woefully uninformed and gullible individuals who've quoted me so I'll say it all here.

I live and work in the community of one of the least economically active counties in the whole of the UK (it's had the lowest GVA figures for the entire UK consistently for many years)

Yet I constantly and consistently see people choosing to have children they couldn't otherwise afford because the rewards in terms of benefits available for doing so are so ridiculously generous.

I know several young women (under 21) in my own workplace who have given up what is a secure, reasonably well paid job to become ''full time single mummies'' because the lifestyle and financial rewards are so much more appealing.

In the community I see ''single'' parents (at least they claim to be single) living in council housing with houses and gardens literally overflowing with excess ''stuff'' furniture, toys, clothes until the council occasionally provides these people with a skip (FOC of course) to help them get rid of it before they start accumulating all over again.

I personally know of one ''single'' mother of three who is pulling in £350 a week in UC...
Plus Child Benefit
Plus Council Tax Benefit
Plus child maintenance from the 3 dads
Plus any money she may or may not earn from the obligatory 16 hours per week that she claims to work as a childminder
She drives a 16 plate Kadjar, has regular nights out, shopping trips to the nearest city and outlets, has a pedigree ''handbag dog'', frequently advertises used children's clothes for sale on Facebook... every single item is an expensive brand or designer label.


Any children who are living in any form of poverty and going to bed hungry under the current benefits system must be the product of such feckless, irresponsible and uncaring parents that they are undoubtedly legally unfit to have a child in their care in the first place, they're probably not even capable of looking after themselves never mind being responsible for kids and subsequently the children should be taken away from them as a welfare and safeguarding issue.

I actually suspect that the numbers of parents/children who do fall into the above category are very small, but no, the uninformed idiots on here just want to jump on the Saint Rashy bandwagon and reward all ''vulnerable'' and ''poverty stricken'' parents on benefits with yet more money.

The debate we should be having is how do we end the insane situation of encouraging and rewarding the feckless breeders but I doubt that will ever happen, it's the same as the phoney war on mass immigration, ukgov just wants to inflate the population by any means necessary, mainly to keep those oh so important GDP figures in the positive range.

Edited by mike74 on Sunday 25th October 05:42

Edited by mike74 on Sunday 25th October 06:50

Edited by mike74 on Sunday 25th October 06:54

Well done, now how is any of that the fault of the child going to bed hungry?

You’d rather throw every vulnerable child under the bus to stop, what even you identified as a small minority, from abusing the system.

You know a lot about others affairs too, have an opinion on seemingly who should and should not have children and make sweeping generalisations about their parenting skills whilst referring to others here as “jumping on a bandwagon” when in fact it’s simply having an interest in the welfare of thousands of vulnerable children.... you’re still a

[bitchstewie]

Oh I imagine quite a few of those god-fearing MPs who voted on Wednesday will be down their local church today.

Not sure religion is the answer for filling that particular void.

[IforB]

bhstewie said:

Oh I imagine quite a few of those god-fearing MPs who voted on Wednesday will be down their local church today.

Not sure religion is the answer for filling that particular void.

I don't think it is either, but I was hoping it may raise a twitch on his internal compassion meter. As so far, what I see is someone who is fundamentally dead inside.

[Stay in Bed Instead]

IforB said:

I think you should stop posting, as my next response to you is likely to get us both banned from the site.

Genuinely. You appear to not be a very nice human-being. I would suggest that as today is Sunday, you may want to go and find a church service somewhere and stop and have a think about what you are saying.

Why don't you stop threatening people and accept they are entitled to a different opinion to you.

[mike74]

pablo said:

Well done, now how is any of that the fault of the child going to bed hungry?

You’d rather throw every vulnerable child under the bus to stop, what even you identified as a small minority, from abusing the system.

You know a lot about others affairs too, have an opinion on seemingly who should and should not have children and make sweeping generalisations about their parenting skills whilst referring to others here as “jumping on a bandwagon” when in fact it’s simply having an interest in the welfare of thousands of vulnerable children.... you’re still a

Any child who is ''going to bed hungry'' is a result of neglectful if not actually abusive parents and not a result of an inadequate benefits system, and those parents and their children should be dealt with accordingly, not just have yet more money thrown at them.

You could give these parents a grand a week in benefits and their children would still be malnourished as well as no doubt suffering a whole range of other physical and mental and emotional neglect issues.

Please try not to keep worrying yourself so much about it though, that's just what they want from gullible easily led idiots such as yourself.

[mike74]

IforB said:

I think you should stop posting, as my next response to you is likely to get us both banned from the site.

Genuinely. You appear to not be a very nice human-being. I would suggest that as today is Sunday, you may want to go and find a church service somewhere and stop and have a think about what you are saying.

Thank you for the advice.

It's a shame you're concerned about getting yourself banned from the site due to you having reactionary, irrational, emotional responses to a subject rather being able to analyse and reasonably debate the issue from all angles and viewpoints.

Hopefully you can learn to control your emotions and remain a contributor on here (for what it's worth)

[Unknown_User]

IforB said:

mike74 said:

IforB said:

The "debate" the rest of us are talking about is whether hungry kids should be fed now.

No-one and I do mean no-one is suggesting that the welfare system is adequate or fit for purpose.

Two completely different things.

So when and how do you suggest we do break the cycle and stop encouraging and rewarding feckless, selfish and workshy people to do nothing other than sit at home breeding?

I think you should stop posting, as my next response to you is likely to get us both banned from the site.

Genuinely. You appear to not be a very nice human-being. I would suggest that as today is Sunday, you may want to go and find a church service somewhere and stop and have a think about what you are saying.

This /\

Mike74 - Shut your computer down, then take yourself off for a bit of fresh air and exercise, and have a think about the words you put together. You are not coming across at all well.

[anonymous-user]

Sir Bernard Jenkin Calling for Boris’s chum Dido Harding to go.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-senior-cons...

He suggests control of test and trace should now be given to the military.

12 billion spent and SAGE saying it’s having “marginal impact” at best.

[mike74]

Unknown_User said:

This /\

Mike74 - Shut your computer down, then take yourself off for a bit of fresh air and exercise, and have a think about the words you put together. You are not coming across at all well.

There really is no helping you idiots is there?

You're all utterly brainwashed into believing that any starving kids is a result of an inadequate benefit system and not a result of selfish, neglectful, abusive, manipulative parents... who you want to reward with yet more money rather than dealing with the basis of the problem and giving these kids the help and support they really need.

[anonymous-user]

Fairly awful conversions about how parents of hungry children must be lazy and feckless is exactly the kind of harm that comes from the government's confused position. Same as that awful Devon MP suggesting businesses who have offered children free meals ought not receive government support.

Johnson needs to get a fking grip because the country is going to hell in a handcart whilst he potters about.

[bitchstewie]

El stovey said:

Sir Bernard Jenkin Calling for Boris’s chum Dido Harding to go.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-senior-cons...

He suggests control of test and trace should now be given to the military.

12 billion spent and SAGE saying it’s having “marginal impact” at best.

Whilst I have nothing against her personally it's difficult to understand how she could ever have been considered the best person for the role.

There's also a bit of background noise around the fact that the position is meant to be none political whilst she has apparently taken part in Lords business as a Conservative peer.

12 billion on this and given where we find ourselves given the Rashford campaign it seems especially ironic how easily 12 billion can be found and be unquestioningly deployed when it suits.

The whole thing smacks of cronyism and lack of scrutiny around public money.

[greygoose]

bhstewie said:

El stovey said:

Sir Bernard Jenkin Calling for Boris’s chum Dido Harding to go.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-senior-cons...

He suggests control of test and trace should now be given to the military.

12 billion spent and SAGE saying it’s having “marginal impact” at best.

Whilst I have nothing against her personally it's difficult to understand how she could ever have been considered the best person for the role.

There's also a bit of background noise around the fact that the position is meant to be none political whilst she has apparently taken part in Lords business as a Conservative peer.

12 billion on this and given where we find ourselves given the Rashford campaign it seems especially ironic how easily 12 billion can be found and be unquestioningly deployed when it suits.

The whole thing smacks of cronyism and lack of scrutiny around public money.

It is cronyism, this government hand out cash to their mates and their companies on a huge scale.

[anonymous-user]

bhstewie said:

El stovey said:

Sir Bernard Jenkin Calling for Boris’s chum Dido Harding to go.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-senior-cons...

He suggests control of test and trace should now be given to the military.

12 billion spent and SAGE saying it’s having “marginal impact” at best.

Whilst I have nothing against her personally it's difficult to understand how she could ever have been considered the best person for the role.

There's also a bit of background noise around the fact that the position is meant to be none political whilst she has apparently taken part in Lords business as a Conservative peer.

12 billion on this and given where we find ourselves given the Rashford campaign it seems especially ironic how easily 12 billion can be found and be unquestioningly deployed when it suits.

The whole thing smacks of cronyism and lack of scrutiny around public money.

That’s the issue, another important appointment made due to support for Boris not ability. The result is more waste and a system still not working and someone incompetent running it.

Nepotism and cronyism again shown not to be good methods of deciding roles especially in a crisis.

[bitchstewie]

Patel still in bother too it seems.

Keep in mind apparently Buckland and Braverman warned her to tone down her grubby rhetoric.

Priti Patel kept up anti-lawyer rhetoric after Met warning on terror

Why it matters

Man faces terror charge over alleged attack at immigration law firm

She's also had to withdraw at least one tweet over concerns it might influence an ongoing criminal trial.

Not good.

[GrizzlyBear]

RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:

Fairly awful conversions about how parents of hungry children must be lazy and feckless is exactly the kind of harm that comes from the government's confused position. Same as that awful Devon MP suggesting businesses who have offered children free meals ought not receive government support.

Johnson needs to get a fking grip because the country is going to hell in a handcart whilst he potters about.

Glad to hear that someone else gets the point, even if the kids parents are fools who have kids for the benefits, THE KID IS STILL HUNGRY!!! and that is not the child's fault, they are a child and can't do anything about it. So unless the Government tell people they aren't allowed to breed unless they can pass a common sense test.

The state has to step up, I never had kids, but when I think about what my taxes are spent on, I hear all the allowances MPs get (obviously thought up by MPs for MPs), and then I hear that some poor child, who through no fault of their own is going hungry in a first world country! but some MPs don't want to fund it I think how corrupt the current system is.