Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2025 9:52 am
This is so f*cking predictable.
Every single time someone even the teensiest little bit slightly left of centre, not towing the Established line, picks up a little bit of support, then boom. In they come.
Maybe the problem is with immediately adopting people who are “a teensy bit left of centre” who grow a conscience then quickly monetise it?
I mean, come on… “Gary’s Economics” - it’s a brand, isn’t it?
Who has been adopted? It's the message I'm interested in, not the messenger.
The problem is absolutely with those on the right who want to silence the message being distributed.
Hoover Attack wrote: ↑Mon Mar 24, 2025 9:52 am
This is so f*cking predictable.
Every single time someone even the teensiest little bit slightly left of centre, not towing the Established line, picks up a little bit of support, then boom. In they come.
Maybe the problem is with immediately adopting people who are “a teensy bit left of centre” who grow a conscience then quickly monetise it?
I mean, come on… “Gary’s Economics” - it’s a brand, isn’t it?
Who has been adopted? It's the message I'm interested in, not the messenger.
The problem is absolutely with those on the right who want to silence the message being distributed.
I support the cuts to benefits provided it is targeting those that take advantage. But she would be better getting the economy moving. We are living in a growth economy with no growth. That’s not likely to end well.
I support the cuts to benefits provided it is targeting those that take advantage. But she would be better getting the economy moving. We are living in a growth economy with no growth. That’s not likely to end well.
I support the cuts to benefits provided it is targeting those that take advantage. But she would be better getting the economy moving. We are living in a growth economy with no growth. That’s not likely to end well.
It’s not.
You need to provide some evidence then. I have , as many do , know of a case where benefit is given and in my view wrongly. There will be many instances where we are too soft and it is to the detriment of others more deserving and government finance. As you have read , we are spending more than is being generated. We are in recession despite figures being massaged to indicate otherwise and tough decisions need to be made.
"I know one case". Brilliant, this one anecdotal example is all the evidence we need. Hoover on the other hand, needs to provide reams of peer reviewed data which I will nevertheless ignore because f*** 'em.
I support the cuts to benefits provided it is targeting those that take advantage. But she would be better getting the economy moving. We are living in a growth economy with no growth. That’s not likely to end well.
It’s not.
You need to provide some evidence then. I have , as many do , know of a case where benefit is given and in my view wrongly. There will be many instances where we are too soft and it is to the detriment of others more deserving and government finance. As you have read , we are spending more than is being generated. We are in recession despite figures being massaged to indicate otherwise and tough decisions need to be made.
Indeed. Tough decisions such as taxing the wealth, which Labour don't seem prepared to do...
Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 7:52 am
"I know one case". Brilliant, this one anecdotal example is all the evidence we need. Hoover on the other hand, needs to provide reams of peer reviewed data which I will nevertheless ignore because f*** 'em.
I didn’t see we need one anecdote. I said I know one as I am sure many do. It needs a shake up and it’s hilarious that it’s your beloved party that’s doing it. The people’s party
Why do people keep going along with the idea that making poor people poorer is in any way a “tough decision” for the people who nevertheless always find the courage to make such cuts happen?
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:10 am
Why do people keep going along with the idea that making poor people poorer is in any way a “tough decision” for the people who nevertheless always find the courage to make such cuts happen?
It's the old "this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" that the teacher would say before administering the cane to some poor unfortunate bottom (while hoping no-one notices their hard on).
Could also say "I know you're going to have to go hungry now, but can't you think of me - all the agonising about making you hungry is putting me right off my fois gras"
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:10 am
Why do people keep going along with the idea that making poor people poorer is in any way a “tough decision” for the people who nevertheless always find the courage to make such cuts happen?
It's the old "this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" that the teacher would say before administering the cane to some poor unfortunate bottom (while hoping no-one notices their hard on).
Could also say "I know you're going to have to go hungry now, but can't you think of me - all the agonising about making you hungry is putting me right off my fois gras"
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:08 am
Why shouldnt the person you know be on benefits?
A daughter of a friend of mine is an alcoholic ( recovering but relapsing ) , she has three children under nine by different fathers , and she receives £2000 a month and has done for at least the last five years. Her parents could afford to keep her and have bought her a house. It’s one example of what we are spending and on whom. It may be that they are targeting groups such as this. I can’t make sense of what they propose to target but , in the grand scheme of things , I doubt it will save much
CEB2ElectricBoogaloo wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:10 am
Why do people keep going along with the idea that making poor people poorer is in any way a “tough decision” for the people who nevertheless always find the courage to make such cuts happen?
It's the old "this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" that the teacher would say before administering the cane to some poor unfortunate bottom (while hoping no-one notices their hard on).
Could also say "I know you're going to have to go hungry now, but can't you think of me - all the agonising about making you hungry is putting me right off my fois gras"
Long slender neck wrote: ↑Thu Mar 27, 2025 9:08 am
Why shouldnt the person you know be on benefits?
A daughter of a friend of mine is an alcoholic ( recovering but relapsing ) , she has three children under nine by different fathers , and she receives £2000 a month and has done for at least the last five years. Her parents could afford to keep her and have bought her a house. It’s one example of what we are spending and on whom. It may be that they are targeting groups such as this. I can’t make sense of what they propose to target but , in the grand scheme of things , I doubt it will save much
So you don't know what benefits she actually receives, for what reasons, or the family's exact personal or financial situation. Safe to file this under "I don't actually have any evidence".
[quote="Proposition Joe" post_id=430244 time=1743068347 user_id=160]
[quote="George M" post_id=430241 time=1743067972 user_id=1036]
[quote="Long slender neck" post_id=430237 time=1743066495 user_id=197]
Why shouldnt the person you know be on benefits?
[/quote]
A daughter of a friend of mine is an alcoholic ( recovering but relapsing ) , she has three children under nine by different fathers , and she receives £2000 a month and has done for at least the last five years. Her parents could afford to keep her and have bought her a house. It’s one example of what we are spending and on whom. It may be that they are targeting groups such as this. I can’t make sense of what they propose to target but , in the grand scheme of things , I doubt it will save much
[/quote]
So you don't know what benefits she actually receives, for what reasons, or the family's exact personal or financial situation. Safe to file this under "I don't actually have any evidence".
[/quote]
You really are a cretin. I have known the family for 30 years. I have known the daughter since she was born. The father talks to me about it and I do know all of the elements you claim I don’t. Troll someone else and bore off
Genuinely interested in the "without having a negative impact on services" caveat to that question. I would bet a hefty amount that those same people would also decry the current state of those same services.
