So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
Yes they are however of the almost 1000 a month that parent I quoted has in cash in hand they just spend an extra 60£ a month of wasteful stuff and use the voucher to fill in that hole. They obviously spend some on food even if they are only feeding themselves properly
Out of interest, do you have any dealings with real people that are on FSM ?
Honest question as I strongly suspect the answer is no.
As I said I have experience from before fsm were a thing on bringing up a child. For the first three years of his life certainly we would have had more money (circa 30£) a month if I had quit work and gone on the dole (1992-1995). It was hard but we managed by not wasting money on stupid crap and he was always fed and clothed adequately so yes I have been where these parents are personally
See my post earlier in this thread. I suspect a lot of people will turn up to vote and find out that even after queuing for x hours the polling booths will have closed before they can vote.
Which means lots of petitions to the court for them to stay open and exit polls delayed interminably for UK observers wanting their bed because they have court in the morning. Sigh.
My main hope for the night is that it becomes reasonably obvious that Trump has lost Florida fairly early. I don't really see how he wins without it. I mean, I know its mathematically possible, I just don't think it is at all likely.
Texans can do us all a massive favor, in more ways than one.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
I have never understood why people prefer M and S to Asda. Similar quality, but far pricier.
Mind, I only shop at Asda at Christmastime now, because I love those Yule Logs they do. Otherwise, it’s Morrison’s.
Re TSE's post, if you look at what is happening on the ground, it really doesn't feel like landslide territory, it feels like a tight race:
First up, North Carolina. Bitzer has an updated post (http://www.oldnorthstatepolitics.com/2020/10/nc-early-votes-10-24.html). The Republicans have knocked another 2 point lead off the Democrats in early voting in terms of party registrations, which is becoming a daily occurrence. Even that probably overstates the Democrat lead because in rural counties (19% of votes so far), the numbers are showing the Democrats in the lead - great until you realise many of these are likely to be Democrat-registered but Republican-voting older voters. Black turnout is also trending down to below its share of the electorate and the "souls to the polls" Sunday drives are likely to be less effective because of CV.
Florida. The Democrats had a big lead in mail-ins but the IPEV vote is eating heavily into that with 10 days to go. Miami-Dade IPEV is actually equal (about) Democrats / Republicans. Democrats had over a 230K (I think) lead in FL in 2016 going into election day but still lost. The trend rates suggest that the Republicans will continue to eat significantly into the vote.
Nevada. Ralston reckons the Democrats need a 80K firewall in Clark and 54K overall to be confident. At the moment, it's around 65K in Clark although there is some mail in to come. However, the question is how many more mail-ins are there because the GOP is winning the daily IPEV in both Clark and Washoe.
Minnesota / New Hampshire: Trump is planning a big ad campaign and the Senate race is now voted a toss up in the former and he is doing a rally in the latter. A bit bizarre if you think these are no-hope states. He obviously doesn't/
The male-female-unassigned split of early voting in North Carolina should utterly terrify President Trump. At the end of yesterday, people identifying as men were less than 41% of early voters - that's five points worse than in 2016. (And I'm going for both women, and the gender unassigned going being good voter pools for Biden.)
See my post earlier in this thread. I suspect a lot of people will turn up to vote and find out that even after queuing for x hours the polling booths will have closed before they can vote.
Which means lots of petitions to the court for them to stay open and exit polls delayed interminably for UK observers wanting their bed because they have court in the morning. Sigh.
My main hope for the night is that it becomes reasonably obvious that Trump has lost Florida fairly early. I don't really see how he wins without it. I mean, I know its mathematically possible, I just don't think it is at all likely.
Texans can do us all a massive favor, in more ways than one.
He certainly can't win without Texas but that could be TCTC for a month. #notafunctioningdemocracy
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Correct me if I’m wrong, but all these private businesses offering to step-in where the Government has so badly failed require the children to actually turn up and eat in order to receive the benefit. Likewise with going to a school.
And your solution to give parents that don't give a damn obviously about feeding their children properly of giving them more money actually requires them to spend that money on feeding their children. A thing they have already shown themselves unwilling to do. Correct me if I am wrong.
That isn’t “my solution” at all. You’re the one demonising feckless parents instead of tackling the actual problem which is hungry or malnourished children.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
This is the Tories Why You Should Join the Tory Party
Go from a flaky claims business boss to millionairess overnight. A firm that was set up by Baroness Mone has been awarded a £122 million contract to supply 25 million gowns the NHS – just 44 days after it was set up. https://twitter.com/Grouse_Beater/status/1320099687999877123
Re TSE's post, if you look at what is happening on the ground, it really doesn't feel like landslide territory, it feels like a tight race:
First up, North Carolina. Bitzer has an updated post (http://www.oldnorthstatepolitics.com/2020/10/nc-early-votes-10-24.html). The Republicans have knocked another 2 point lead off the Democrats in early voting in terms of party registrations, which is becoming a daily occurrence. Even that probably overstates the Democrat lead because in rural counties (19% of votes so far), the numbers are showing the Democrats in the lead - great until you realise many of these are likely to be Democrat-registered but Republican-voting older voters. Black turnout is also trending down to below its share of the electorate and the "souls to the polls" Sunday drives are likely to be less effective because of CV.
Florida. The Democrats had a big lead in mail-ins but the IPEV vote is eating heavily into that with 10 days to go. Miami-Dade IPEV is actually equal (about) Democrats / Republicans. Democrats had over a 230K (I think) lead in FL in 2016 going into election day but still lost. The trend rates suggest that the Republicans will continue to eat significantly into the vote.
Nevada. Ralston reckons the Democrats need a 80K firewall in Clark and 54K overall to be confident. At the moment, it's around 65K in Clark although there is some mail in to come. However, the question is how many more mail-ins are there because the GOP is winning the daily IPEV in both Clark and Washoe.
Minnesota / New Hampshire: Trump is planning a big ad campaign and the Senate race is now voted a toss up in the former and he is doing a rally in the latter. A bit bizarre if you think these are no-hope states. He obviously doesn't/
The male-female-unassigned split of early voting in North Carolina should utterly terrify President Trump. At the end of yesterday, people identifying as men were less than 41% of early voters - that's five points worse than in 2016. (And I'm going for both women, and the gender unassigned going being good voter pools for Biden.)
We know the vast majority of Republicans will vote on the day this year and the majority of Democrats will vote early due to Covid by mail or by early in person vote so I don't think that necessarily follows, most Democrats are women and Hillary won the female vote in 2016 as Biden will do next month too.
Women and Democrats will therefore clearly make up a higher percentage of early voters this year than in 2016 as a result of Covid
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Correct me if I’m wrong, but all these private businesses offering to step-in where the Government has so badly failed require the children to actually turn up and eat in order to receive the benefit. Likewise with going to a school.
And your solution to give parents that don't give a damn obviously about feeding their children properly of giving them more money actually requires them to spend that money on feeding their children. A thing they have already shown themselves unwilling to do. Correct me if I am wrong.
That isn’t “my solution” at all. You’re the one demonising feckless parents instead of tackling the actual problem which is hungry or malnourished children.
I don’t care how it’s done, I just want it done.
I already suggested a method of tackling the symptom malnourished children which is vouchers that can only be used for a meal for a kid in a local establishment.
Your preferred one of rewarding feckless parents does nothing for malnourished children as it will be merely seen as we can spend 15£ more a week on what we want.
And feckless parents absolutely should be demonised they are the actual problem. Malnourished kids are the symptom. That is why I also said the money used for the vouchers be docked off the money they receive.
And yes there are hard cases like Kurts friend which aren't the fault of the parent but I suspect very much its a low percentage.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Correct me if I’m wrong, but all these private businesses offering to step-in where the Government has so badly failed require the children to actually turn up and eat in order to receive the benefit. Likewise with going to a school.
And your solution to give parents that don't give a damn obviously about feeding their children properly of giving them more money actually requires them to spend that money on feeding their children. A thing they have already shown themselves unwilling to do. Correct me if I am wrong.
That isn’t “my solution” at all. You’re the one demonising feckless parents instead of tackling the actual problem which is hungry or malnourished children.
I don’t care how it’s done, I just want it done.
I already suggested a method of tackling the symptom malnourished children which is vouchers that can only be used for a meal for a kid in a local establishment.
Your preferred one of rewarding feckless parents does nothing for malnourished children as it will be merely seen as we can spend 15£ more a week on what we want.
And feckless parents absolutely should be demonised they are the actual problem. Malnourished kids are the symptom. That is why I also said the money used for the vouchers be docked off the money they receive.
And yes there are hard cases like Kurts friend which aren't the fault of the parent but I suspect very much its a low percentage.
I have no “preferred method”. I am happy with your vouchers idea but I do not agree with “docking” the money from benefits. It isn’t necessary when we’re throwing billions around on a load of other useless crap.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Re TSE's post, if you look at what is happening on the ground, it really doesn't feel like landslide territory, it feels like a tight race:
First up, North Carolina. Bitzer has an updated post (http://www.oldnorthstatepolitics.com/2020/10/nc-early-votes-10-24.html). The Republicans have knocked another 2 point lead off the Democrats in early voting in terms of party registrations, which is becoming a daily occurrence. Even that probably overstates the Democrat lead because in rural counties (19% of votes so far), the numbers are showing the Democrats in the lead - great until you realise many of these are likely to be Democrat-registered but Republican-voting older voters. Black turnout is also trending down to below its share of the electorate and the "souls to the polls" Sunday drives are likely to be less effective because of CV.
Florida. The Democrats had a big lead in mail-ins but the IPEV vote is eating heavily into that with 10 days to go. Miami-Dade IPEV is actually equal (about) Democrats / Republicans. Democrats had over a 230K (I think) lead in FL in 2016 going into election day but still lost. The trend rates suggest that the Republicans will continue to eat significantly into the vote.
Nevada. Ralston reckons the Democrats need a 80K firewall in Clark and 54K overall to be confident. At the moment, it's around 65K in Clark although there is some mail in to come. However, the question is how many more mail-ins are there because the GOP is winning the daily IPEV in both Clark and Washoe.
Minnesota / New Hampshire: Trump is planning a big ad campaign and the Senate race is now voted a toss up in the former and he is doing a rally in the latter. A bit bizarre if you think these are no-hope states. He obviously doesn't/
The male-female-unassigned split of early voting in North Carolina should utterly terrify President Trump. At the end of yesterday, people identifying as men were less than 41% of early voters - that's five points worse than in 2016. (And I'm going for both women, and the gender unassigned going being good voter pools for Biden.)
We know the vast majority of Republicans will vote on the day this year and the majority of Democrats will vote early due to Covid by mail or by early in person vote so I don't think that necessarily follows, most Democrats are women and Hillary won the female vote in 2016 as Biden will do next month too
@HYUFD - in 2016, 4.75 million people voted in North Carolina.
The population has risen a bit in the last four years, so shall we say 5 million this year? (You can choose a different number if you like, but that seems like a reasonable guess.)
We're at 3.2 million votes cast already in the state. Each weekday (so far) has seen turnout of a quarter of a million votes or more. There are six weekdays before election day.
Even if we assume that we're *only* going to see a million votes in the next 8 days (which would be a staggering deceleration), that would leave just 800,000 votes to come on polling day.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Based on the same thing that makes you think its not. When my son was growing up I knew a fair amount of kids that weren't fed properly by parents on benefits and those that claimed to be poor. They always seemed to have a car though, and nice clothing whereas my other half and I bought our clothing in charity shops and I walked 4 miles to work and back each day. Thats what I base my feelings on. Somewhere along the lines many adults became more selfish and there luxuries come first.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Based on the same thing that makes you think its not. When my son was growing up I knew a fair amount of kids that weren't fed properly by parents on benefits and those that claimed to be poor. They always seemed to have a car though, and nice clothing whereas my other half and I bought our clothing in charity shops and I walked 4 miles to work and back each day. Thats what I base my feelings on. Somewhere along the lines many adults became more selfish and there luxuries come first.
I don’t think anything - I don’t know. I’d like you to provide data if you can rather than anecdotes which are meaningless.
Regardless I don’t actually care if some feckless people are “rewarded” if it means those who genuinely need help get help.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
Seems a curious thing to do. Why wouldn't they Google? Or phone or e-mail? And how would the school know? They don't administer it. Would make more sense to contact the company awarded a £234 m contract without tender. Whose name is on the e-mail received.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Based on the same thing that makes you think its not. When my son was growing up I knew a fair amount of kids that weren't fed properly by parents on benefits and those that claimed to be poor. They always seemed to have a car though, and nice clothing whereas my other half and I bought our clothing in charity shops and I walked 4 miles to work and back each day. Thats what I base my feelings on. Somewhere along the lines many adults became more selfish and there luxuries come first.
I don’t think anything - I don’t know. I’d like you to provide data if you can rather than anecdotes which are meaningless.
Regardless I don’t actually care if some feckless people are “rewarded” if it means those who genuinely need help get help.
But that is my point the kids of parents of the feckless won't be helped. I know of know statistics sadly that tell us how many are genuine cases like Kurts friend and how many are feckless which would inform the argument.
If 80% are like Kurts friend then the extra is justified. As we are helping a lot if 20% are like Kurt's friend then we need other ways of helping the kids.
I also pointed out that many parents in similar or worse conditions because they aren't getting uc and are in jobs will not be getting these fsm vouchers but are being asked to subsidise them through taxes which is hardly fair
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
Seems a curious thing to do. Why wouldn't they Google? Or phone or e-mail? And how would the school know? They don't administer it. Would make more sense to contact the company awarded a £234 m contract without tender. Whose name is on the e-mail received.
I get the feeling you think I am making it up! Believe what you like, I don't see why my gf would invent stuff about her day at work, but maybe she does
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
What proportion, though? (I'm sure some surprising individuals with clever accountants do technically qualify for FSM... It certainly happened in the days of EMA.) Knowing also how rushed things were in the spring, I understand why the 60% FSM primary school I knew best concluded that it was better to send vouchers to everyone who asked- there isn't qualification data for infant schools and there wasn't the time or staff to check.
But there's a bigger issue here. For things like this, is it better that some undeserving get the freebie, or that someone deserving doesn't? And how much effort and money should go into separating the sheep and goats?
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Not sure where the racial stereotyping is there. It's mostly referring to the the Welsh Conservatives on this site who are apoplectic at their inability to buy a kettle or a toilet seat in a shop right now. Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Where's the racial stereotyping? It's just a joke based on the Welsh firebreak supermarket bans
I see Trump is 3 pts ahead in Florida, Arizona, Michigan
Remarkably 50/47 in all 3
What does it take for a "pollster" to be downgraded mid campaign?
It is rather transparent, isn't it? I guess if the Biden biggie happens that will be the end of "Trafalgar". Career change required. Perhaps Trump Corp will have something.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
Not only that, but take North Carolina for a second. Let's assume turnout is 75%. (Which would be amazingly high.)
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%) vs 36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
Yeah. Both look iffy. On Trafalgar - Trump picking up 28.8% of registered Democrats in THIS election? And 61.9% of non-partisans? Does not pass the smell test.
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Where's the racial stereotyping? It's just a joke based on the Welsh firebreak supermarket bans
Maybe it's because I spelled Hood "Hwd"? I had a quick look to see whether that was a real word, and it turns out it's Egyptian for "rich man", which I'm quite pleased with. Accidentally clever, that.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
Seems a curious thing to do. Why wouldn't they Google? Or phone or e-mail? And how would the school know? They don't administer it. Would make more sense to contact the company awarded a £234 m contract without tender. Whose name is on the e-mail received.
I get the feeling you think I am making it up! Believe what you like, I don't see why my gf would invent stuff about her day at work, but maybe she does
I'm not accusing you, or your gf, of making stuff up. Merely that an anecdote is not necessarily a convincing argument. There are plenty of examples of all kinds of daft, selfish, corrupt, illegal and ludicrous behaviour all over the place from all kinds of people every day of the week.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
What proportion, though? (I'm sure some surprising individuals with clever accountants do technically qualify for FSM... It certainly happened in the days of EMA.) Knowing also how rushed things were in the spring, I understand why the 60% FSM primary school I knew best concluded that it was better to send vouchers to everyone who asked- there isn't qualification data for infant schools and there wasn't the time or staff to check.
But there's a bigger issue here. For things like this, is it better that some undeserving get the freebie, or that someone deserving doesn't? And how much effort and money should go into separating the sheep and goats?
Oh sorry, I am talking about pre Covid FSM liberty taking - she has only been back four days from a year off, so I don't know about the current situation.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
Not only that, but take North Carolina for a second. Let's assume turnout is 75%. (Which would be amazingly high.)
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%) vs 36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
Ballpark Biden 53%, Trump 44% on those figures. If that is the case, we're looking at MO and IN moving columns too. Not likely. But your point is well taken - Biden odds of winning NC from this point far exceed Trump's
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
Seems a curious thing to do. Why wouldn't they Google? Or phone or e-mail? And how would the school know? They don't administer it. Would make more sense to contact the company awarded a £234 m contract without tender. Whose name is on the e-mail received.
I get the feeling you think I am making it up! Believe what you like, I don't see why my gf would invent stuff about her day at work, but maybe she does
I'm not accusing you, or your gf, of making stuff up. Merely that an anecdote is not necessarily a convincing argument. There are plenty of examples of all kinds of daft, selfish, corrupt, illegal and ludicrous behaviour all over the place from all kinds of people every day of the week.
Well she works at a school as an administrator so sees the liberties taken with FSM etc. As someone who grew up on FSM because her Dad was ill and couldn't work, she is irked by it. Someone asked so I told.
Your line of interregation obviously showed that you didn't readily accept it, but why would you? I am someone you don't know telling of something you don't believe goes on, going on, with no more than my word to prove it- best pour scorn, most would
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Not sure where the racial stereotyping is there. It's mostly referring to the the Welsh Conservatives on this site who are apoplectic at their inability to buy a kettle or a toilet seat in a shop right now. Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
Taffy was a Welshman, Taffy was a thief ... We are thieves you know, nicking legs of beef and petrol.
balla(r)ds .... Robin Hwd .... We do speak a funny language, haha ...
Anyhow, carry on doing your Bernard Manning impression, you obviously enjoy it.
(Also, I believe only Big_G is a Conservative amongst the Welsh posters).
You never quite answered my question as to where you're posting from ... while giving us in Wales liberally of your wisdom & your funny stories about your kettle.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
Not only that, but take North Carolina for a second. Let's assume turnout is 75%. (Which would be amazingly high.)
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%) vs 36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
Turnout in 2016 was 69% so 75% is not beyond the bounds of possibility.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
A bird in the hand is better than Trump grabbing your bush. Or something like that.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
Not only that, but take North Carolina for a second. Let's assume turnout is 75%. (Which would be amazingly high.)
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%) vs 36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
Ballpark Biden 53%, Trump 44% on those figures. If that is the case, we're looking at MO and IN moving columns too. Not likely. But your point is well taken - Biden odds of winning NC from this point far exceed Trump's
Indiana isn't going to go to Biden, last time round it was called precisely one hour in at the same point as Kentucky though...
Yeah. Both look iffy. On Trafalgar - Trump picking up 28.8% of registered Democrats in THIS election? And 61.9% of non-partisans? Does not pass the smell test.
Trafalgar crosstabs look utter garbage . Even though there was a little oversampling of Dems in the Gravis poll the crosstabs look plausible . There is absolutely no way that nearly 30% of registered Dems are going to vote for Trump and this looks like a Trafalgar effort to make the orange lunatic feel better !
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Not sure where the racial stereotyping is there. It's mostly referring to the the Welsh Conservatives on this site who are apoplectic at their inability to buy a kettle or a toilet seat in a shop right now. Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
Taffy was a Welshman, Taffy was a thief ... We are thieves you know, nicking legs of beef and petrol.
balla(r)ds .... Robin Hwd .... We do speak a funny language, haha ...
Anyhow, carry on doing your Bernard Manning impression, you obviously enjoy it.
(Also, I believe only Big_G is a conservative amongst the Welsh posters).
You never quite answered my question as to where you're posting from ... while giving us in Wales liberally of your wisdom & your funny stories about your kettle.
Nicking legs of beef? Petrol? I grew up in a rough area, but I don't remember any of that going on. That "balla(r)ds" gag was flashback humour to a misspelling that someone made on this site a day or two ago.
Oh, and I live in the midlands these days, but I'm from near Newport. Yes, the Welsh Newport. So yeah, I'm a taffy too, although not in the eyes of people from up the valleys who seem to regard Newportonians as a sort of English fifth column.
How exactly does a bunch of Yahoo's honking horns make the average waiting-in-line voter think "Those are the kinda guys I want to associate myself with"?
Well quite - My incredibly obnoxious old neighbour had a vote leave sign outside his house. I was a late breaker for remain in that one.
Have a friend in rural Skagit County, Washington who uses the same method to decide who to vote for in local races.
He check out the signs his neighbor has on his property - then votes exactly the opposite.
With those numbers, I’d definitely prefer to have them banked. The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
Not only that, but take North Carolina for a second. Let's assume turnout is 75%. (Which would be amazingly high.)
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%) vs 36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
Or if we go to raw numbers, of the 3.2 million voted, Biden should have about 1.95 million to Trump’s 1.15 million.
Last time, Trump won by 2.36 million to Clinton’s 2.19 million. Even assuming a higher turnout this time (which seems all but certain), that sort of lead is pretty healthy for Biden. Even with 80% turnout, that’d be, what, a total of 5.5 million votes cast?
Trump would need to win the remaining votes in a ratio of 2:1 to win
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Not sure where the racial stereotyping is there. It's mostly referring to the the Welsh Conservatives on this site who are apoplectic at their inability to buy a kettle or a toilet seat in a shop right now. Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
Taffy was a Welshman, Taffy was a thief ... We are thieves you know, nicking legs of beef and petrol.
balla(r)ds .... Robin Hwd .... We do speak a funny language, haha ...
Anyhow, carry on doing your Bernard Manning impression, you obviously enjoy it.
(Also, I believe only Big_G is a Conservative amongst the Welsh posters).
You never quite answered my question as to where you're posting from ... while giving us in Wales liberally of your wisdom & your funny stories about your kettle.
You seem very confused? Isn't the "balla(r)ds" a reference to the typo in RCS's joke the other day about Singer Songwriters?
As for the rest? You're definitely reading something that isn't there IMO...
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
I have never understood why people prefer M and S to Asda. Similar quality, but far pricier.
Mind, I only shop at Asda at Christmastime now, because I love those Yule Logs they do. Otherwise, it’s Morrison’s.
I think choice and quality are far better in M&S apart from standard items. Better certainly for household goods , brands, drink etc but no comparison on some other choices / quality goods.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Because those on the right have a dimmer view of human nature than those on the left. (It doesn’t mean that they are wrong though.)
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Based on the same thing that makes you think its not. When my son was growing up I knew a fair amount of kids that weren't fed properly by parents on benefits and those that claimed to be poor. They always seemed to have a car though, and nice clothing whereas my other half and I bought our clothing in charity shops and I walked 4 miles to work and back each day. Thats what I base my feelings on. Somewhere along the lines many adults became more selfish and there luxuries come first.
I don’t think anything - I don’t know. I’d like you to provide data if you can rather than anecdotes which are meaningless.
Regardless I don’t actually care if some feckless people are “rewarded” if it means those who genuinely need help get help.
But that is my point the kids of parents of the feckless won't be helped. I know of know statistics sadly that tell us how many are genuine cases like Kurts friend and how many are feckless which would inform the argument.
If 80% are like Kurts friend then the extra is justified. As we are helping a lot if 20% are like Kurt's friend then we need other ways of helping the kids.
I also pointed out that many parents in similar or worse conditions because they aren't getting uc and are in jobs will not be getting these fsm vouchers but are being asked to subsidise them through taxes which is hardly fair
In the middle of a pandemic, when millions of families are likely to experience, or have experienced an income shock this year, and we know that (for example) food bank demand has skyrocketed, a simple scheme is needed now. In the same way Sunak came up with the furlough earlier in the year, knowing it would not be particularly well targeted.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
They are provided as vouchers for Asda, and the parents drive up to the school in Range Rovers and ask can they have ones for Marks and Spencer instead - this is according to my girlfriend, who grew up receiving FSM, at the school she works at
Drive up to where? It's all Online.
The parents drive up to the school to ask if they can spend them in M&S
But there's a bigger issue here. For things like this, is it better that some undeserving get the freebie, or that someone deserving doesn't? And how much effort and money should go into separating the sheep and goats?
Trimmed to the part I wanted to answer.
The issue here primarily is not whether the undeserving get it. The problem is whether it is tackling the issue.
My view is if you give parents that are wasting money rather than feed their children extra money it is likely to be just more money to waste.
At that point we need to know if those are the majority of those undernourished kids or a small minority. If a small minority then we are mostly addressing the issue. If however its say 70% of malnourished kids are down to the parents wasting money then we are just making ourselves feel like we have done something.
We don't have stats to know either way I suspect only anecdote as not even sure how you would find out.
Personal experience from when I was a parent of a school age child was those kids you could tell weren't being fed properly the parents mostly didnt seem to stint on their own luxuries.
I no longer come in contact with many parents but see little reason why it will have changed. I do come in contact with a fair few people on UC who complain about how they can't make money reach the end and I notice most of them have the latest mobiles and are on these 50£ a month contracts to keep up to date. Whereas I am on an old note 3 I got for 80£ from CEX and sim only deal from giff gaff costing 10£ a month
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Ah, good old unfunny, racial stereotyping ...
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
Not sure where the racial stereotyping is there. It's mostly referring to the the Welsh Conservatives on this site who are apoplectic at their inability to buy a kettle or a toilet seat in a shop right now. Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
Taffy was a Welshman, Taffy was a thief ... We are thieves you know, nicking legs of beef and petrol.
balla(r)ds .... Robin Hwd .... We do speak a funny language, haha ...
Anyhow, carry on doing your Bernard Manning impression, you obviously enjoy it.
(Also, I believe only Big_G is a Conservative amongst the Welsh posters).
You never quite answered my question as to where you're posting from ... while giving us in Wales liberally of your wisdom & your funny stories about your kettle.
You seem very confused? Isn't the "balla(r)ds" a reference to the typo in RCS's joke the other day about Singer Songwriters?
As for the rest? You're definitely reading something that isn't there IMO...
That was it! I couldn't remember who made the spelling mistake, but yes, it was that Singer-songwriter thread. A few people make jokes about dystopia and car crashes but I think those went over a most people's heads.
I see Trump is 3 pts ahead in Florida, Arizona, Michigan
Remarkably 50/47 in all 3
What does it take for a "pollster" to be downgraded mid campaign?
It is rather transparent, isn't it? I guess if the Biden biggie happens that will be the end of "Trafalgar". Career change required. Perhaps Trump Corp will have something.
Post EDay reckon that Trumpsky Corp employees will be limited to a) bankrupcy attorneys and b) grief counselors.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
They spend too much time in the company of accountants?
Nicking legs of beef? Petrol? I grew up in a rough area, but I don't remember any of that going on. That "balla(r)ds" gag was flashback humour to a misspelling that someone made on this site a day or two ago.
Oh, and I live in the midlands these days, but I'm from near Newport. Yes, the Welsh Newport. So yeah, I'm a taffy too, although not in the eyes of people from up the valleys who seem to regard Newportonians as a sort of English fifth column.
... flashback humour ... I really must come and see your act, when COVID allows.
If you live in England, then ... concentrate your worries on what is going on there? Plenty to get your teeth into.
Leave the Welsh to worry about Wales & the Scots to worry about Scotland.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Based on the same thing that makes you think its not. When my son was growing up I knew a fair amount of kids that weren't fed properly by parents on benefits and those that claimed to be poor. They always seemed to have a car though, and nice clothing whereas my other half and I bought our clothing in charity shops and I walked 4 miles to work and back each day. Thats what I base my feelings on. Somewhere along the lines many adults became more selfish and there luxuries come first.
I don’t think anything - I don’t know. I’d like you to provide data if you can rather than anecdotes which are meaningless.
Regardless I don’t actually care if some feckless people are “rewarded” if it means those who genuinely need help get help.
But that is my point the kids of parents of the feckless won't be helped. I know of know statistics sadly that tell us how many are genuine cases like Kurts friend and how many are feckless which would inform the argument.
If 80% are like Kurts friend then the extra is justified. As we are helping a lot if 20% are like Kurt's friend then we need other ways of helping the kids.
I also pointed out that many parents in similar or worse conditions because they aren't getting uc and are in jobs will not be getting these fsm vouchers but are being asked to subsidise them through taxes which is hardly fair
In the middle of a pandemic, when millions of families are likely to experience, or have experienced an income shock this year, and we know that (for example) food bank demand has skyrocketed, a simple scheme is needed now. In the same way Sunak came up with the furlough earlier in the year, knowing it would not be particularly well targeted.
Time enough for micromanaging later.
A simple scheme was implemented though....all claimants of UC got an extra 20£ a week. That would include most of those on FSM. Now its lets give them more. If the 20£ extra a week still left all these malnourished children what makes you think another 15£ is going to make a difference.
I really wouldn't have an issue with it if I believed that most of those malnourished children wouldn't be after its implemented.
A periodic reminder: Sweden 586 deaths per million; Czech Republic 194 deaths per million.
The graph is daily deaths per million and is pretty meaningless. And the tweet is from an expert in courts and moral reasoning, apparently.
There is surely a lot of bollox spouted by experts and idiots, the constant drone of how great Sweden have done is unbelievable, they have a crap death rate apart from the very worst, they are multiple times Scotland and they have not done well.
It's an enterprising band of Welsh Conservatives who plan to turn the oil into plastic for toilet seats and kettles. They will distribute them to the grateful masses who otherwise have no choice but to squat when they poop, and drink cold tea. In the future, balla(r)ds will be sung about these modern-day Robin Hwd heroes.
Yes, I can see it out of the window. It was sailing round in circles with a helicopter over it, but that’s gone and it’s just sitting out there offshore now. The local news is reporting it is Nigerian and the issue was stowaways rather than a hijacking. I would imagine a naval vessel has been sent out to intercept it, although i can’t see anything out there yet, nor on ship finder.
I no longer come in contact with many parents but see little reason why it will have changed. I do come in contact with a fair few people on UC who complain about how they can't make money reach the end and I notice most of them have the latest mobiles and are on these 50£ a month contracts to keep up to date. Whereas I am on an old note 3 I got for 80£ from CEX and sim only deal from giff gaff costing 10£ a month
It's pretty obvious that there are lots of kids with real problems in getting adeauate nutrition, and lots of parents who don't spend money wisely, with some overlap in families. The former seems the more serious problem, so I favour a simple system tied to food (e.g. vouchers), and if some of it is wasted, that's a cost of addressing the issue and not really a big deal - it's still mostly going to help poorer families. It's like the argument that one shouldn't help after a tsunami because some money might be misappropriated - you can factor that in and still feel it's worth doing.
Nicking legs of beef? Petrol? I grew up in a rough area, but I don't remember any of that going on. That "balla(r)ds" gag was flashback humour to a misspelling that someone made on this site a day or two ago.
Oh, and I live in the midlands these days, but I'm from near Newport. Yes, the Welsh Newport. So yeah, I'm a taffy too, although not in the eyes of people from up the valleys who seem to regard Newportonians as a sort of English fifth column.
... flashback humour ... I really must come and see your act, when COVID allows.
If you live in England, then ... concentrate your worries on what is going on there? Plenty to get your teeth into.
Leave the Welsh to worry about Wales & the Scots to worry about Scotland.
You see, that's why I didn't answer the first time around. Now I've IDed myself as being in the midlands but from Foreign Parts, all of a sudden nothing is my business any more. Not where I live, because I'm not from here. Not where I'm from, because I don't live there. That's how it works, isn't it?
All of my family live in Wales. Health policy in Wales affects the lives of my loved ones.
There's a lot of talk on here today of the feckless poor, always on the take, and neglecting their kids.
For a bit of balance, what about the feckless rich, always on the take, and neglecting their kids? Starting with the Prime Minister. And extending octopus-like to all the cronies with government contracts, and the tax-evading millionaires and billionaires that constantly fleece the rest of us. But of course their kids don't go hungry.
By comparison, Marcus Rashford is a paragon of virtuous citizenship.
I no longer come in contact with many parents but see little reason why it will have changed. I do come in contact with a fair few people on UC who complain about how they can't make money reach the end and I notice most of them have the latest mobiles and are on these 50£ a month contracts to keep up to date. Whereas I am on an old note 3 I got for 80£ from CEX and sim only deal from giff gaff costing 10£ a month
It's pretty obvious that there are lots of kids with real problems in getting adeauate nutrition, and lots of parents who don't spend money wisely, with some overlap in families. The former seems the more serious problem, so I favour a simple system tied to food (e.g. vouchers), and if some of it is wasted, that's a cost of addressing the issue and not really a big deal - it's still mostly going to help poorer families. It's like the argument that one shouldn't help after a tsunami because some money might be misappropriated - you can factor that in and still feel it's worth doing.
I would agree with you Nick if I believed that most of those kids would be fed. Sadly as I pointed out the extra 20 a week they already get doesn't seem to have had an effect...what makes you an extra 15 will?
This is also not a pandemic problem but a long term problem we should have addressed long ago by governments of all colours or any colour its been around since I was a kid. In the 21st century we shouldn't have this issue. This to me seems to be just shovel a little more cash and pat ourselves on the back and we will call it sorted and we don't care if it works or not.
A periodic reminder: Sweden 586 deaths per million; Czech Republic 194 deaths per million.
The graph is daily deaths per million and is pretty meaningless. And the tweet is from an expert in courts and moral reasoning, apparently.
It's worth reminding people that deaths lag infections by weeks, so it seems very likely that the Czech Republic's figures are going to rise by a lot. By my reckoning a few days ago they were already set to pass the UK's peak infection rate from the spring.
How certain are you that Trump will win Michigan @HYUFD ?
Well obviously I am not certain you can never be certain of anything with elections but I think Biden will pick up Pennsylvania and win the popular vote but Trump will hold 1 or both of Michigan or Wisconsin which would be enough to scrape home in the EC assuming he holds his other 2016 states
Doing some quick math, would appear this lady (first) voted for FDR in 1936.
Which was the year the Literary Digest "poll" said that Republican Alf Landon was gonna win the election; he ended up winning alright - two states. "As Maine goes, so goes Vermont" - FDR campaign manager Jim Farley.
NOTE that the Literary Digest had a pretty good track record previously, for example said that Roosevelt would beat Hoover in 1932.
SO by HYUFD the Literary Digest poll was "gold standard". Yet did NOT prevent them from getting it VERY wrong four years later.
AND at least the LD made its methodology AND crosstabs freely available, and did NOT use results as propaganda for one side or the other.
How certain are you that Trump will win Michigan @HYUFD ?
Well obviously I am not certain you can never be certain of anything with elections but I think Biden will pick up Pennsylvania and win the popular vote but Trump will hold 1 or both of Michigan or Wisconsin which would be enough to scrape home in the EC assuming he holds his other 2016 states
You haven’t answered my question though. How certain are you about Trump winning Michigan? 55%? 75%? 99%?
There's a lot of talk on here today of the feckless poor, always on the take, and neglecting their kids.
For a bit of balance, what about the feckless rich, always on the take, and neglecting their kids? Starting with the Prime Minister. And extending octopus-like to all the cronies with government contracts, and the tax-evading millionaires and billionaires that constantly fleece the rest of us. But of course their kids don't go hungry.
By comparison, Marcus Rashford is a paragon of virtuous citizenship.
Hear! Hear!
Some of the worst parenting that I have seen is from parents of kids in private schools. A friend is a school nurse at one, and does a lot of counselling. The stories are heartbreaking.
So @Pagan2 do you intend to “teach people how to budget” by starving their children? Why should children be punished by the actions (or lack of) of their parents?
I don't think that they should be punished however the answer is not to give the parents even more money because they will simply waste that as well. The answer is to fix the problem and if you wish to argue we should have been fixing this problem years ago then I wouldnt disagree with you.
If the parents won't use the money they get which I hope you agree seems adequate the answer is perhaps to run a scheme where you remove some of the money and suppy a book of vouchers that the kids can have used in council approved outlets to pay for a meal for the child these could be handed directly to the child. Shovelling more money at the parents seems more like trying to douse a fire with petrol and rewarding their bad behaviour.
I don’t really disagree with you at all.
However that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be generous and bloody feed as many children as possible well during the middle of a global pandemic ffs.
They are children! We are throwing money at dodgy PPE suppliers and consultants left right and centre and yet you are quibbling over next to nothing, to feed children!
I offered an alternative solution which means the kids still get fed. The parents cant be trusted so take a portion out of the money and ensure it can only be used on feeding the child. You give the parents a 15£ food voucher all they are going to do is increase their wasting by 15£ a week and the child still wont get fed.
Who cares if you give feckless parents an extra £15 a week, during a global pandemic? It’s nothing in the grand scheme of things!
And the answer to my point that they will just waste the 15£ extra and the kid still likely wont get fed? None at all what a surprise
Are these not provided as vouchers for Aldi, Lidl etc. that can only be spent on food ?
Not sure how that won't end up with kids being fed better than today.
Some posts on here show some on here are totally isolated from a huge part of society, no doubt neither they nor any of the people they deal with were on free school meals and they certainly do not have friends who are genuinely suffering economically as they'd be far better informed about the reasons and would not post such nonsense they do so.
Think on the FSM discussion people should declare what % of their friends at school were on FSM and what % of families they know today have kids on FSM.
Would give a very interesting insight as to how badly dislocated those people are from this part of society.
FWIW I reckon about a third of the kids on my road are on FSM and a similar number of my friends at school 30 years ago were.
I was expecting when I went to look at the figures to see the money was wholly inadequate and that I could see how people would be struggling to make ends meet. Instead I saw a figure that seemed more than adequate to me. I certainly had a lot less when I brought up my son and that was before things like working tax credits and on a single wage below the average wage. We managed and my son never went hungry
and plenty are not as fortunate as you
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
I imagine then that she must have a mortgage and therefore has to bear the cost of that. If that is the case then I would agree that the problem there is that mortgages arent covered by housing benefit.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
She lives a very basic live in a house she has a mortgage on.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
Then as I suggested the problem is her mortgage isnt covered by housing benefit and I agreed that was an issue. I believe and one time they would cover the interest. That I agree should be looked at. I also said in another post their is hard cases that aren't down to the parents being feckless. I just don't believe its the majority.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Based on what? Why does the right always think everyone is on the take?
Meanwhile Trump did campaign stops in Ohio, Wisconsin and NC yesterday and is holding a rally in New Hampshire today, remember in 2000 Gore's non stop final campaigning compared to Bush almost win him the presidency and same with Trump compared to Hillary in 2016 when it actually did win him the presidency
Comments
My neighbour has a 10 year old son.
Her husband recently left her.
She recently lost her job.
She still has all the expenses that she used to when she was in her (low paid) job and a husband living with her.
She struggles to make ends meet in a way I strongly expect many on here could never appreciate.
Without FMS she would be making some very hard decisions and probably be choosing not to pay some bills to enable her to feed her kid.
She should not be in that position.
Mind, I only shop at Asda at Christmastime now, because I love those Yule Logs they do. Otherwise, it’s Morrison’s.
I don’t care how it’s done, I just want it done.
If however she is renting then she should be getting her rent paid most of her council tax and have however much cash in hand depending on number of children each month. For 2 kids of school age that should be 1000. Now I don't know what these bills she has are but it sounds like she is paying for more than gas,electic,phone,internet and travel costs if she can't manage on that which is what you should be trimmed back.
When my son was young and we were struggling the first thing that went was the car, we trimmed back on electric and gas as far as possible. Went to the cheapest phone package. I walked to work each day rain and shine to save on travel costs etc. So yes I have been there. I see too many though that refuse to change the way they live when times get hard
Women and Democrats will therefore clearly make up a higher percentage of early voters this year than in 2016 as a result of Covid
Your preferred one of rewarding feckless parents does nothing for malnourished children as it will be merely seen as we can spend 15£ more a week on what we want.
And feckless parents absolutely should be demonised they are the actual problem. Malnourished kids are the symptom. That is why I also said the money used for the vouchers be docked off the money they receive.
And yes there are hard cases like Kurts friend which aren't the fault of the parent but I suspect very much its a low percentage.
She has no Sky TV, no car, no holidays, again, you are showing how dislocated you are from the real poor in this country by assuming that everyone has cash to have such luxuries, many many do not.
Other than gas, electric, water, council tax and the usual stuff she will not have any luxuries she is spending on.
I do not even think she has a mobile phone.
Maybe you should try to live in the shoes of those who really have nothing and you would have a very different view of how hard it is, at the moment you come across as a totally uncaring person who will do nothing to help her son who is in this position through no fault of his own.
It's all Online.
Trafalgar - +2 Trump
Gravis - +13 Biden
Looking at the corsstabs for Gravis it looks like republican's are under represented, so would explain the massive biden lead
https://gravismarketing.com/michigan-poll-results-2020/
However looking in to Trafalgar tabs is a shock, those results look like they have come from dreamland
https://i.ibb.co/9yjfvCT/Trafalgar-MI-102020.jpg
I would link to it but the link seems dead now
The population has risen a bit in the last four years, so shall we say 5 million this year? (You can choose a different number if you like, but that seems like a reasonable guess.)
We're at 3.2 million votes cast already in the state. Each weekday (so far) has seen turnout of a quarter of a million votes or more. There are six weekdays before election day.
Even if we assume that we're *only* going to see a million votes in the next 8 days (which would be a staggering deceleration), that would leave just 800,000 votes to come on polling day.
They are struggling to find the “proper” amount of Republicans in their samples, and that may be because they simply are less this time around.
Having been pretty poor most of my life I totally understand I still do without a lot of luxuries in my life such as a car. So please don't lecture me about not knowing what it is to be poor.
Your friends problem is that her mortgage isn't covered and that needs addressing.
Regardless I don’t actually care if some feckless people are “rewarded” if it means those who genuinely need help get help.
Remarkably 50/47 in all 3
What does it take for a "pollster" to be downgraded mid campaign?
And how would the school know? They don't administer it.
Would make more sense to contact the company awarded a £234 m contract
without tender. Whose name is on the e-mail received.
If 80% are like Kurts friend then the extra is justified. As we are helping a lot if 20% are like Kurt's friend then we need other ways of helping the kids.
I also pointed out that many parents in similar or worse conditions because they aren't getting uc and are in jobs will not be getting these fsm vouchers but are being asked to subsidise them through taxes which is hardly fair
Have you though of joining forces with the Donald and the Baron Cohen to make a racist film?
The yet to votes might either change their mind or be unable or unwilling to vote on the day. That might not be likely, but the likelihood is never going to be zero.
(I'm sure some surprising individuals with clever accountants do technically qualify for FSM... It certainly happened in the days of EMA.)
Knowing also how rushed things were in the spring, I understand why the 60% FSM primary school I knew best concluded that it was better to send vouchers to everyone who asked- there isn't qualification data for infant schools and there wasn't the time or staff to check.
But there's a bigger issue here. For things like this, is it better that some undeserving get the freebie, or that someone deserving doesn't? And how much effort and money should go into separating the sheep and goats?
Unless I missed something growing up and there was a stereotype about Welsh folk hijacking oil tankers?
That means the first 51% of voters split 61:36, while the next 24% will split 41:58.
So that's... 61% * 51% + 41% * 24% = 40.95% (out of total turnout of 75%)
vs
36% * 51% + 58% * 24% = 32.3%
Now, I have little doubt that the numbers won't be as stark as that. But the evidence from North Carolina, right now, is that Biden is ahead.
I had a quick look to see whether that was a real word, and it turns out it's Egyptian for "rich man", which I'm quite pleased with. Accidentally clever, that.
There are plenty of examples of all kinds of daft, selfish, corrupt, illegal and ludicrous behaviour all over the place from all kinds of people every day of the week.
Your line of interregation obviously showed that you didn't readily accept it, but why would you? I am someone you don't know telling of something you don't believe goes on, going on, with no more than my word to prove it- best pour scorn, most would
balla(r)ds .... Robin Hwd .... We do speak a funny language, haha ...
Anyhow, carry on doing your Bernard Manning impression, you obviously enjoy it.
(Also, I believe only Big_G is a Conservative amongst the Welsh posters).
You never quite answered my question as to where you're posting from ... while giving us in Wales liberally of your wisdom & your funny stories about your kettle.
That "balla(r)ds" gag was flashback humour to a misspelling that someone made on this site a day or two ago.
Oh, and I live in the midlands these days, but I'm from near Newport. Yes, the Welsh Newport. So yeah, I'm a taffy too, although not in the eyes of people from up the valleys who seem to regard Newportonians as a sort of English fifth column.
He check out the signs his neighbor has on his property - then votes exactly the opposite.
Last time, Trump won by 2.36 million to Clinton’s 2.19 million.
Even assuming a higher turnout this time (which seems all but certain), that sort of lead is pretty healthy for Biden.
Even with 80% turnout, that’d be, what, a total of 5.5 million votes cast?
Trump would need to win the remaining votes in a ratio of 2:1 to win
As for the rest? You're definitely reading something that isn't there IMO...
Time enough for micromanaging later.
The graph is daily deaths per million and is pretty meaningless. And the tweet is from an expert in courts and moral reasoning, apparently.
The issue here primarily is not whether the undeserving get it. The problem is whether it is tackling the issue.
My view is if you give parents that are wasting money rather than feed their children extra money it is likely to be just more money to waste.
At that point we need to know if those are the majority of those undernourished kids or a small minority. If a small minority then we are mostly addressing the issue. If however its say 70% of malnourished kids are down to the parents wasting money then we are just making ourselves feel like we have done something.
We don't have stats to know either way I suspect only anecdote as not even sure how you would find out.
Personal experience from when I was a parent of a school age child was those kids you could tell weren't being fed properly the parents mostly didnt seem to stint on their own luxuries.
I no longer come in contact with many parents but see little reason why it will have changed. I do come in contact with a fair few people on UC who complain about how they can't make money reach the end and I notice most of them have the latest mobiles and are on these 50£ a month contracts to keep up to date. Whereas I am on an old note 3 I got for 80£ from CEX and sim only deal from giff gaff costing 10£ a month
https://twitter.com/em_sandy/status/1320399175960399874
In 2012 Obama/Biden won it by only 0.9% and it was the last state to declare and actually took a few days.
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1320404365790879749?s=20
At the point of 2,721,137 votes cast there were 77,252 votes from this cohort - they split 28,765 Dem ; 31,998 NPA/other ; 16,489 GOP in registration.
If you live in England, then ... concentrate your worries on what is going on there? Plenty to get your teeth into.
Leave the Welsh to worry about Wales & the Scots to worry about Scotland.
I really wouldn't have an issue with it if I believed that most of those malnourished children wouldn't be after its implemented.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1320377695692296192?s=20
https://twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1320394809320873987?s=20
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1320381379067215875?s=20
https://twitter.com/DavidKillion4/status/1320395732713615362?s=20
https://twitter.com/RobertCahaly/status/1320397640849362945?s=20
https://twitter.com/Faith_Salie/status/1320153269205929985
Your man on the spot, etc.
All of my family live in Wales. Health policy in Wales affects the lives of my loved ones.
https://twitter.com/thomaskaplan/status/1320388675885293568
For a bit of balance, what about the feckless rich, always on the take, and neglecting their kids? Starting with the Prime Minister. And extending octopus-like to all the cronies with government contracts, and the tax-evading millionaires and billionaires that constantly fleece the rest of us. But of course their kids don't go hungry.
By comparison, Marcus Rashford is a paragon of virtuous citizenship.
This is also not a pandemic problem but a long term problem we should have addressed long ago by governments of all colours or any colour its been around since I was a kid. In the 21st century we shouldn't have this issue. This to me seems to be just shovel a little more cash and pat ourselves on the back and we will call it sorted and we don't care if it works or not.
Biden taking a day off seems like a very sensible bit of chill time.
Which was the year the Literary Digest "poll" said that Republican Alf Landon was gonna win the election; he ended up winning alright - two states. "As Maine goes, so goes Vermont" - FDR campaign manager Jim Farley.
NOTE that the Literary Digest had a pretty good track record previously, for example said that Roosevelt would beat Hoover in 1932.
SO by HYUFD the Literary Digest poll was "gold standard". Yet did NOT prevent them from getting it VERY wrong four years later.
AND at least the LD made its methodology AND crosstabs freely available, and did NOT use results as propaganda for one side or the other.
Some of the worst parenting that I have seen is from parents of kids in private schools. A friend is a school nurse at one, and does a lot of counselling. The stories are heartbreaking.
https://twitter.com/prospect_uk/status/1320410040512249857?s=20
Meanwhile Trump did campaign stops in Ohio, Wisconsin and NC yesterday and is holding a rally in New Hampshire today, remember in 2000 Gore's non stop final campaigning compared to Bush almost win him the presidency and same with Trump compared to Hillary in 2016 when it actually did win him the presidency
https://twitter.com/LeoVaradkar/status/1320379523637104641?s=20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI1hHb4gxxQ&list=UUMP5_7v48WfDKfoirLCcNgQ&index=100
Those crosstabs are hilarious. Sadly the link doesn't work to have a closer look.