I read the news today oh boy! Page 2,212

Quote: DaButt @ 21st October 2020, 4:45 PM

There are 23 houses on my street. Six of them are displaying political signs: one for Biden and five for Trump. (None of them are mine.)

I voted yesterday and heard nothing but pro-Trump comments during the 75 minutes I was in line, although there wasn't much conversation due to distancing and masks. I walked away with a free sticker, a free pencil, and hopefully Covid-free.

View original

Well done on voting. It is genuinely a great thing to exercise your democratic right whoever you choose to vote for.
It's a shame the person you voted for has no such respect for these democratic traditions, however. He currently seems hell-bent on undermining the whole process if the outcome doesn't go his way.

We all know that if he loses Trump won't leave the White House.

Doesn't really matter if he doesn't though. Even if he refuses to leave, power doesn't derive from the White House itself. He'd still cease to be president on January 20th.

Berlusconi exonerated again. But he's used to paying people to get him off.

Scandinavian women coming to Italy are reminded to put their clocks back. 863 years.

When you use an alleged 'Savant' to oversee your entire policy you should not be surprised when they fail to see an issue that would require a working knowledge of empathy even if they don't possess it themselves.
As it stands the government can U turn and retro pay for the kids food and be left looking even more incompetent than it was thought possible.
Or they can front it out and then face another vote on the same issue on the very eve of Brexit. At that point they will have to whip their MPs into making kids hungry at Christmas.
This is why you need a degree of humanity or at least someone in the ranks to step forward with it, as these sociopaths have made a mound into a hill and then been forced to make it the hill that most of their MP's will die on at the ballot box, which will also be drawn much closer as a consequence.

These people need to spend money on their children's dinners - instead of spending it all on lager, fags, gambling, PlayStations and mobile phones

Is what a lot of these wankers in government probably think...!

They are not alone in that though and could normally rely on the comments section of the Daily Mail to get them through, Sadly owning the press is no longer enough thanks to social media and they are being mauled on it to the degree that they can't hide from it but don't posses the wit to deal with it due to the high level of sheer incompetents within their ranks.

When did it become the States responsibility to feed children?
They have always had free school dinners for poor families.
Unemployed or low income families receive benefits - and family allowance.
If a child is neglected or malnourished then it should be dealt with at local level.

It breaks my heart to think any child goes hungry but it is appearing to me that it is just another stone to throw at the government and a reason to berate anyone that speaks out.

Stephen I am not throwing stones, merely stating facts. Currently the people who were furloughed from work on minimum wage have been placed there by this government and in doing so their basic pay of £8.72 ph was reduced by 20%. This is not feckless unwed immigrants we are talking about. These are the people that sweep your streets and pour you pints and its their kids that are going hungry.
I know more than most that there are abuses to the welfare system and it galls me, but I also know how much tax evasion goes on at the other end, But in the middle of this are real people who work and contribute but for some reason don't count and thats why I came on and said what I said.
I am neither liberal socialist nor communist I just know a lot of people on my estate who who work often through agencies with the only safety gear being a hi viz vest for minimum wage and they and their children are suffering .. a lot.

I get the feeling this government are feeling there way towards a level of right-winged-ness they can get away with.
Much as they'd love to go full-throttle, they have to take the country with them.
A sort of piece-meal totalitarianism.
Or a dealer starting a kid off on blow with the hope of escalating them onto crack.
If the country will wear it they'll push on through.
If the country says "Whoa - that's too far!" they back off.
Little by little they find out what we'll put up with.
Which is exactly why those of us who disagree should shout "foul" as loudly and as often as we can.

And you do.

Glad you noticed.

Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 25th October 2020, 12:58 PM

When did it become the States responsibility to feed children?
.

View original

To prevent children from starving?
Yes. That should be one of the basic esponsibilities of the state. Not much point having a state if it isn't allowed to do this. It's not 1830.
This government already gets away with a lot. It shouldn't be allowed to get away with this. I think they know they've screwed up over this.

Theyre only bothered about the bad PR

They won't think they've made a mistake for any other reason than that