Forked tongue?

Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3
4
…
12

Forked tongue?
Topic Started: Oct 2 2014, 07:14 AM (3,884 Views)
RJD	Oct 2 2014, 07:14 AM Post #1
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Quote: Iain Duncan Smith’s disclosure that the teething problems have been resolved and that the Universal Credits system will be rolled out across the country ahead of the election was momentous. Many critics, not just on the Left, cheerfully predicted that Mr Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms would fail. They are now irreversible, and as a result Mr Cameron’s Coalition will be able to claim a place among Britain’s great reforming governments. Well considered the claims made in the lefty Press, bloggers and here one would think he has not a snowball in Hell's chance of achieving that objective. We will see if he meets his milestone, but he is correct in one claim and that is no future Gov. is going to unpick this system and as a consequence he will be able to claim he inflicted the reform welcomed by the vast majority, the next step for a new Gov. must be to make further inroads against those barriers to making work always a first choice.

Replies:
RJD	Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM Post #81
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	disgruntled porker Oct 2 2014, 07:22 PM RJD Oct 2 2014, 04:03 PM disgruntled porker Oct 2 2014, 07:56 AM Lewis Oct 2 2014, 07:37 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep Yes, it appears that ReJinalD takes great delight in any chance that the thumbscrews can be applied and the bottom end of society can be chastised for their abject inadequacies. To this end, he swallows all the govnt has to say on the subject hook, line, and sinker, without even giving it a second thought. You have evidence to back up your claims? Thought not, the usual drivel. Mr Pig restrain your imagination and try and stick with facts if you are able. Reggie, Reggie, Reggie. What proof do you need other than your own assertions in writing on this very forum (and the old one) which strongly advocate faster deeper cuts and the slashing of benefits to make the idle underclasses get off their arses and out to work? Mr Pig you do have a very slight grasp on the truth, yes I claim that we will regret not cutting out the deficit within a single Parliament, but I have never ever suggested that welfare should be cut for those that are deserving of our support as defined by the State. I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, as for those truly deserving I could find them more material support by cutting down on the profligacy of Big Nanny and ensuring that the free_loaders, which there are many, are cut loose. Those here that proclaim that all Claimants are deserving really are living with a delusion. Stinging the State is now riven through our society, even the so called professional classes have no shame in using the State as a bridge to full retirement. Yes it pinches, but it is an available life style choice. The claim that the UK is not generous is a joke, it is in international terms, the exact opposite. The problem we have is of expected entitlement and gratitude.



Stan Still	Oct 11 2014, 09:50 AM Post #82
Regular Member Posts: 1,705 Group: Members Member #23 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	Hear Hear



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:15 AM Post #83
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Gnikkk Oct 11 2014, 07:00 AM I have little sympathy for poor people, perhaps they should have tried harder at school. It does not take much to make anyone end up being poor so be careful what you wish for.



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM Post #84
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, Let me know where such a system exists RJD because it does not exist in Britain.



RJD	Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Post #85
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, Let me know where such a system exists RJD because it does not exist in Britain. But it did and still does but to a lesser extent. I could not describe the obvious simplicity of the situation as your dogma has made you blind to the bleeding obvious. This matter has been subject to hundreds of reports both here and in the a USA for threats decade, they even have given the situation a title all of its own. Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. You are, as they say, pi55ing into the wind.



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:39 AM Post #86
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. RJD they are neither generous or easy to obtain, which is the reason for most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision. That is causing severe hardship.



Steve K	Oct 11 2014, 10:44 AM Post #87
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, Let me know where such a system exists RJD because it does not exist in Britain. Oh yes it does For example take a look at the latest carer's allowance fiasco http://paullewismoney.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/carers-stuck-in-earnings-trap.html



jaguar	Oct 11 2014, 10:48 AM Post #88
Regular Member Posts: 980 Group: Members Member #26 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:39 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. RJD they are neither generous or easy to obtain, which is the reason for most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision. That is causing severe hardship. If as you say they are neither generous or easy to obtain, explain why thousands of immigrants literally risk their lives to enter the UK illegally, and many have died after passing several safe Countries?



Lewis	Oct 11 2014, 10:50 AM Post #89
Senior Member Posts: 3,478 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, Let me know where such a system exists RJD because it does not exist in Britain. But it did and still does but to a lesser extent. I could not describe the obvious simplicity of the situation as your dogma has made you blind to the bleeding obvious. This matter has been subject to hundreds of reports both here and in the a USA for threats decade, they even have given the situation a title all of its own. Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. You are, as they say, pi55ing into the wind. What rubbish. The opposite is true of the statements in your last couple of sentences. What else do we expect from some out of touch Tory Central Office drone!



RJD	Oct 11 2014, 01:18 PM Post #90
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Lewis Oct 11 2014, 10:50 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 09:20 AM I object to the State designing systems of welfare that effectively discourage those that are capable of working from looking for such, Let me know where such a system exists RJD because it does not exist in Britain. But it did and still does but to a lesser extent. I could not describe the obvious simplicity of the situation as your dogma has made you blind to the bleeding obvious. This matter has been subject to hundreds of reports both here and in the a USA for threats decade, they even have given the situation a title all of its own. Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. You are, as they say, pi55ing into the wind. What rubbish. The opposite is true of the statements in your last couple of sentences. What else do we expect from some out of touch Tory Central Office drone! Pity you are ignorant of the reality of the situation and know absolutely nothing about the poverty trap and such. Lewis your only ability is to spew out the same jaundiced line day in day out ad nauseam. Gets a bit tiring when you offer nothing of interest to support your tired and misplaced dogma. Even though I find myself bed or chair bound with much free time on my hands I cannot see that for you redemption from ignorance is possible. You must be one



Stan Still	Oct 11 2014, 01:25 PM Post #91
Regular Member Posts: 1,705 Group: Members Member #23 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	Don't confuse them with facts , even the poorest people in the UK have a far higher standard of living than most other countries, if they ever bother to visit some of them I dread to think of what reality hitting them slap bang in the face would do to them and their egos.



RJD	Oct 11 2014, 01:30 PM Post #92
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:39 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. RJD they are neither generous or easy to obtain, which is the reason for most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision. That is causing severe hardship. I think you might, but should have noticed, that my claim was not an absolute one. Clearly those that think the UK is less than generous could take their chances elsewhere, however, I do not see queues at the exit gates. Sorry Mr Smurf but if you speak for that group you are portraying a very ungrateful lot as the UK is, relatively speaking, a very generous land. Pity so many abuse it. As for our Civil Service, after 13 years of NL dumbing down what do you expect. Anyway like me I do not think you talk for anyone as you too seem to have grown into the structure of your armchair. Think Labour is going to improve lives? If you do you have learned nothing from your post ww2 life.



Tytoalba	Oct 11 2014, 01:33 PM Post #93
Senior Member Posts: 7,586 Group: Members Member #36 Joined: Jun 29, 2014	Gnikkk Oct 11 2014, 07:00 AM I have little sympathy for poor people, perhaps they should have tried harder at school. The saying is that you only have to try 10% harder to go 100 percent futher so you could be right As in banking or saving, you cnnot take out what you don't put in. Its not always the childrens fault its the parents they live with , and the biggest losers are often those of single parents or broken homes.



Lewis	Oct 11 2014, 01:53 PM Post #94
Senior Member Posts: 3,478 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 11 2014, 01:18 PM Lewis Oct 11 2014, 10:50 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:17 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep But it did and still does but to a lesser extent. I could not describe the obvious simplicity of the situation as your dogma has made you blind to the bleeding obvious. This matter has been subject to hundreds of reports both here and in the a USA for threats decade, they even have given the situation a title all of its own. Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. You are, as they say, pi55ing into the wind. What rubbish. The opposite is true of the statements in your last couple of sentences. What else do we expect from some out of touch Tory Central Office drone! Pity you are ignorant of the reality of the situation and know absolutely nothing about the poverty trap and such. Lewis your only ability is to spew out the same jaundiced line day in day out ad nauseam. Gets a bit tiring when you offer nothing of interest to support your tired and misplaced dogma. Even though I find myself bed or chair bound with much free time on my hands I cannot see that for you redemption from ignorance is possible. You must be one Same old oft repeated diatribe, same old insults. Better disregarded altogether.



disgruntled porker	Oct 11 2014, 02:20 PM Post #95
Older than most people think I am. Posts: 1,945 Group: Members Member #31 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	Lewis Oct 11 2014, 01:53 PM RJD Oct 11 2014, 01:18 PM Lewis Oct 11 2014, 10:50 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Quoting limited to 4 levels deep What rubbish. The opposite is true of the statements in your last couple of sentences. What else do we expect from some out of touch Tory Central Office drone! Pity you are ignorant of the reality of the situation and know absolutely nothing about the poverty trap and such. Lewis your only ability is to spew out the same jaundiced line day in day out ad nauseam. Gets a bit tiring when you offer nothing of interest to support your tired and misplaced dogma. Even though I find myself bed or chair bound with much free time on my hands I cannot see that for you redemption from ignorance is possible. You must be one Same old oft repeated diatribe, same old insults. Better disregarded altogether. Quite.



Affa	Oct 11 2014, 02:56 PM Post #96
Senior Member Posts: 11,999 Group: Members Member #58 Joined: Jul 26, 2014	Quote: Those here that proclaim that all Claimants are deserving really are living with a delusion. I do not believe there is anyone here that believes benefit cheating is acceptable. But how can it ever be argued that the way to prevent these cheating the system is to make benefits inadequate (unattractive), to make qualifying for benefits subject to even harsher criteria? Too often debates get hijacked by such false arguments that enter into personal insults about what someone does or does not regards as morally acceptable practice - I know that there are posters here that hold to an ideology that is imo despicable, but that does not force me to despise these individuals ........ though I will not disregard that possibility either. Edited by Affa, Oct 11 2014, 03:00 PM.



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 03:00 PM Post #97
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Stan Still Oct 11 2014, 01:25 PM Don't confuse them with facts , even the poorest people in the UK have a far higher standard of living than most other countries, There is no near European Country with anything like the same number of people having to resort to food banks. I am afraid it is you who are out of touch.



Steve K	Oct 11 2014, 04:01 PM Post #98
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:39 AM RJD Oct 11 2014, 10:36 AM Let's face facts Mr Smurf relatively speaking, the benefits paid in the UK are extremely generous and not that difficult to obtain. RJD they are neither generous or easy to obtain, which is the reason for most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision. That is causing severe hardship. And do you have links to back those 2 separate 1 million numbers?



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 04:33 PM Post #99
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 04:01 PM And do you have links to back those 2 separate 1 million numbers? I have posted them several times:- This is just the Trussell Trust it does not include all food banks:- http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-figures-top-900000 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm140616/debtext/140616-0003.htm#14061637000003 16 Jun 2014 : Column 933 Although I have to go on what the Minister said on that occasion, that might or might not have been an entirely accurate reflection, given that in the same evidence session the same Minister told us that although there had been a slight backlog at that time because of the implementation of some of the Harrington recommendations, everything was back on track and by the summer—the summer of 2012—there would be no backlog of ESA assessments. Two years later, however, there are now apparently 700,000 people awaiting an assessment as new claimants. http://www.pcs.org.uk/en/department_for_work_and_pensions_group/dwp-news.cfm/personal-independent-payment-pip-backlogs-lead-to-staff-transfers 18 June 2014 DWP have recently published statistics for the first year of PIP live running. These show that 349,000 new PIP claims have been received but only 83,900 claims have had a decision made. This backlog of claims has understandably received much public criticism, with stories of many claimants having to wait months for a decision to be made on their PIP claim and then wait even longer if they seek a reconsideration or appeal. These delays are unacceptable and are causing real suffering for claimants.



Steve K	Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM Post #100
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Well thanks but both your 1 million figures are comprehensively demolished by those links The first talks to 900,000 visits, which is not the same as needs, will include repeat visits and is of course not 1 million The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. If IDS had made such errors posting "most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision." you'd say he was a liar. as the thread title says . . . . .



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 05:33 PM Post #101
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. I posted THREE links. The latter two add up to a million.



Lewis	Oct 11 2014, 05:45 PM Post #102
Senior Member Posts: 3,478 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM Well thanks but both your 1 million figures are comprehensively demolished by those links The first talks to 900,000 visits, which is not the same as needs, will include repeat visits and is of course not 1 million The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. If IDS had made such errors posting "most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision." you'd say he was a liar. as the thread title says . . . . . The link to the Trussell Trust clearly states and I quote: 913,138 people received three days’ emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in 2013-14 compared to 346,992 in 2012-13 That does not include the other providers of foodbanks. From that as PS correctly stated that we can easily assume that the numbers needing three days in 2013-2014 were in excess of 1 million. What's the betting that 2014-15 will be even worse. Eat your words Stevie Boy!



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 05:55 PM Post #103
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 2 2014, 07:14 AM Well considered the claims made in the lefty Press, bloggers and here one would think he has not a snowball in Hell's chance of achieving that objective. He hasn't got a snowballs chance in hell, RJD he lied about the national roll out of Universal Credit to the Conservative Party conference and the entire nation:- He told conference that: “Universal Credit has now rolled out in the North West of England – to couples, shortly to families, to more than 1 in 8 jobcentres by Christmas – safely and securely as we always said. “But, Conference, today I can announce more. “I can announce that we are going to accelerate the delivery of Universal Credit… “… from the New Year, bringing forward the national roll-out through 2015/16 to every community across Great Britain.” The only problem with this was the two vital words missing from IDS’ speech, but present in the DWP press release – the roll out will only be for ‘single jobseekers’. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/plans-announced-for-accelerated-rollout-of-universal-credit-after-success-in-north-west In other words: not for couples; not for families; not for people in work; not for people too sick and disabled to work. IDS went on to say: “Secure national delivery… yet at the same time, delivering life change at a local level: “strengthening community partnerships, helping vulnerable households… “… getting people into a job quicker and staying in work longer… “… not just helping the economy but reducing child poverty as well. “Bringing up to £35 billion in economic benefits to Britain over the next decade… “… making a lasting difference to people’s lives… “… now and for generations to come. “Friends – Universal Credit is going nationwide – we are going to finish what we started.” In truth, the national rollout will not affect ‘vulnerable households’ because it’s only for single claimants. It also won’t reduce ‘child poverty’ because it’s only for single claimants. And ‘universal credit’ isn’t going nationwide, only a small fraction of it is. So, was this a straightforward lie or just weasel words? We leave you, the reader, to make up your own mind. But here’s one final piece of evidence. In his ministerial statement on 5 December 2013 – which has mysteriously disappeared from the parliament website - IDS announced the revised timetable for the rollout of universal credit, which was itself a massive slowdown from the original plan. The document is deliberately vague about the timetable, but it does state: “Meanwhile, we will expand our current pathfinder service and develop functionality so that from next summer we progressively start to take claims for universal credit from couples and, in the autumn, from families. Once safely tested in the 10 live universal credit areas, we will also expand the roll-out to cover more of the north-west of England. This will enable us to learn from the live running of universal credit at scale and for more claimant types, including the more vulnerable and complex. “These steps continue our progressive approach—test, learn, implement—as we deliver this flagship programme. “Our current planning assumption is that the universal credit service will be fully available in each part of Great Britain during 2016, having closed down new claims to the legacy benefits it replaced; with the majority of the remaining legacy case load moving to universal credit during 2016 and 2017.” So, the most recent plan was to run full versions of universal credit – including for ‘the more vulnerable and more complex’ claimants - in the north west of England and then expand out across the country. Now, it seems, only the simplest of claims will have been rolled out across the country by April 2016. There is then absolutely no possibility whatsoever of a ‘test, learn, implement’ rollout of the massively more complex full universal credit across the whole country by the end of 2016. So what IDS was announcing sounds very much to us like another setback for the rollout of universal credit. The reality is that there is absolutely no evidence that IDS, Freud and their wealthy friends are ‘going to finish what we started’ in 2017, or indeed at any time in the next decade.



Steve K	Oct 11 2014, 09:13 PM Post #104
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 05:33 PM Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. I posted THREE links. The latter two add up to a million. The latter two clearly overlap and the first of which is just as clearly a wild arsed guess by a Labour MP Lewis Oct 11 2014, 05:45 PM Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM Well thanks but both your 1 million figures are comprehensively demolished by those links The first talks to 900,000 visits, which is not the same as needs, will include repeat visits and is of course not 1 million The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. If IDS had made such errors posting "most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision." you'd say he was a liar. as the thread title says . . . . . The link to the Trussell Trust clearly states and I quote: 913,138 people received three days’ emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in 2013-14 compared to 346,992 in 2012-13 That does not include the other providers of foodbanks. From that as PS correctly stated that we can easily assume that the numbers needing three days in 2013-2014 were in excess of 1 million. What's the betting that 2014-15 will be even worse. Eat your words Stevie Boy! "Stevie Boy" how droll. Well Looby Lou-is perhaps you might want to question the Trussell trust a bit closer. They notoriously do not keep good records and go for publicity. As the Daily Mrror said: "The number of food parcels given out last year by the Trussell Trust alone nearly tripled from 346,992 to 913,138. And 330,205 of those went to children. Another 182,000 are being donated each year by just 45 independent food banks, according to a recent survey." And as the Trussell Trust itself admits: "Foodbank clients can receive a maximum of three foodbank vouchers in a row (each voucher can be redeemed for at least three days food). Clients can receive up to nine vouchers per year, " So it could be as little as 125,000 people receiving food parcels, certainly not 1 million. And as stated we don't know how many of those actually NEED those parcels as opposed to CHOOSE the free food. 2 million my arse, wild hyperbole by PS Edited by Steve K, Oct 11 2014, 09:15 PM.



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:19 PM Post #105
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 09:13 PM And as stated we don't know how many of those actually NEED those parcels as opposed to CHOOSE the free food. No-one can choose to go to a food bank, they have to be issued with a voucher. If you are so f ing sceptical I suggest to volunteer as a helper at a food bank, it would change your attitude somewhat. I also suggest you email this lady:- kath.paddison@manchester.ac.uk and request a copy of this report. (I am NOT allowed to quote any of it.) Again you may learn something. K. Purdam, E. Garratt and A. Esmail University of Manchester, Draft 2014 Hungry? Food Insecurity, Social Stigma and Embarrassment in the UK HungryFoodStigmaDraftpaperOct2014.pdf Related press release:- http://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/news/article/?id=12916 Edited by papasmurf, Oct 11 2014, 10:47 PM.



Lewis	Oct 11 2014, 10:22 PM Post #106
Senior Member Posts: 3,478 Group: Members Member #10 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 09:13 PM papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 05:33 PM Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. I posted THREE links. The latter two add up to a million. The latter two clearly overlap and the first of which is just as clearly a wild arsed guess by a Labour MP Lewis Oct 11 2014, 05:45 PM Steve K Oct 11 2014, 05:20 PM Well thanks but both your 1 million figures are comprehensively demolished by those links The first talks to 900,000 visits, which is not the same as needs, will include repeat visits and is of course not 1 million The second talks to ~ 265,000 awaiting a decision and that is woefully less than 1 million. If IDS had made such errors posting "most of the 1 million plus needing food banks, plus the 1 million who have been waiting a year for an ESA or PIP decision." you'd say he was a liar. as the thread title says . . . . . The link to the Trussell Trust clearly states and I quote: 913,138 people received three days’ emergency food from Trussell Trust foodbanks in 2013-14 compared to 346,992 in 2012-13 That does not include the other providers of foodbanks. From that as PS correctly stated that we can easily assume that the numbers needing three days in 2013-2014 were in excess of 1 million. What's the betting that 2014-15 will be even worse. Eat your words Stevie Boy! "Stevie Boy" how droll. Well Looby Lou-is perhaps you might want to question the Trussell trust a bit closer. They notoriously do not keep good records and go for publicity. As the Daily Mrror said: "The number of food parcels given out last year by the Trussell Trust alone nearly tripled from 346,992 to 913,138. And 330,205 of those went to children. Another 182,000 are being donated each year by just 45 independent food banks, according to a recent survey." And as the Trussell Trust itself admits: "Foodbank clients can receive a maximum of three foodbank vouchers in a row (each voucher can be redeemed for at least three days food). Clients can receive up to nine vouchers per year, " So it could be as little as 125,000 people receiving food parcels, certainly not 1 million. And as stated we don't know how many of those actually NEED those parcels as opposed to CHOOSE the free food. 2 million my arse, wild hyperbole by PS Well your analysis proves nothing Childish Steve. For people to need to make multiple visits to a food bank means they must be in serious dire straits.



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:30 PM Post #107
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Lewis Oct 11 2014, 10:22 PM For people to need to make multiple visits to a food bank means they must be in serious dire straits. The maximum is three times per year PLUS The Trussell Trust is just the biggest food bank provider not the only one, there are 15 food banks in Cornwall:- http://www.cornwallworks.org.uk/cornwall-works/foodbanks-in-cornwall.html The Trussell Trust only operate 10 of them.



Tytoalba	Oct 11 2014, 10:45 PM Post #108
Senior Member Posts: 7,586 Group: Members Member #36 Joined: Jun 29, 2014	jeevesnwooster Oct 2 2014, 06:48 PM Affa Oct 2 2014, 06:23 PM Stan Still Oct 2 2014, 04:58 PM According to White Dee she had £212 left over every week from her benefits, she also stated that none of her friends who were in full time work could say the same I have no idea if she was speaking with a forked tongue or not, she also thought that IDS was doing a good job and was doing what needed doing her opinion take it with her if you don't like it. The correct quote is 'I probably get a weekly income of about £200. I know people that work there a**s off who haven't got half of that a week to live on. It is what p*** people off but it's not my fault unless I become an MP.' LOL! Classic mis-quoting and spin from the right-wing brigade That was her income .Now what other benefits did she receive, like free housing?



papasmurf	Oct 11 2014, 10:52 PM Post #109
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Tytoalba Oct 11 2014, 10:45 PM That was her income .Now what other benefits did she receive, like free housing? If you bothered to read all of the thread , £200 a week was what she got in benefits and has been explained in detail.



Steve K	Oct 11 2014, 11:08 PM Post #110
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Lewis Oct 11 2014, 10:22 PM Well your analysis proves nothing Childish Steve. For people to need to make multiple visits to a food bank means they must be in serious dire straits. So you calling me "Stevie Boy" was the height of maturity was it? Don't dish out what you don't want back I'm not doubting most that go to food banks are in dire straits, I've clearly shown that PS's 2 million is at best yet another loads of old wildly exaggerated tosh and quite possibly a blatant made up lie posted for desired dramatic effect. And the thread title is quite apply ""Forked Tongue" papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 10:30 PM . .The maximum is three times per year PLUS The Trussell Trust is just the biggest food bank provider not the only one, there are 15 food banks in Cornwall:- http://www.cornwallworks.org.uk/cornwall-works/foodbanks-in-cornwall.html The Trussell Trust only operate 10 of them. So now you are calling the Trussell trust liars. Which part of their " Clients can receive up to nine vouchers per year" do you need explaining to you? http://www.trusselltrust.org/resources/documents/Press/Mail-on-Sunday.pdf



Rich	Oct 11 2014, 11:59 PM Post #111
Senior Member Posts: 14,463 Group: Members Member #30 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	"We await your erudite musings with anticipation!" You might, I certainly do not.



Affa	Oct 12 2014, 01:01 AM Post #112
Senior Member Posts: 11,999 Group: Members Member #58 Joined: Jul 26, 2014	Tytoalba Oct 11 2014, 10:45 PM jeevesnwooster Oct 2 2014, 06:48 PM Affa Oct 2 2014, 06:23 PM Stan Still Oct 2 2014, 04:58 PM According to White Dee she had £212 left over every week from her benefits, she also stated that none of her friends who were in full time work could say the same I have no idea if she was speaking with a forked tongue or not, she also thought that IDS was doing a good job and was doing what needed doing her opinion take it with her if you don't like it. The correct quote is 'I probably get a weekly income of about £200. I know people that work there a**s off who haven't got half of that a week to live on. It is what p*** people off but it's not my fault unless I become an MP.' LOL! Classic mis-quoting and spin from the right-wing brigade That was her income .Now what other benefits did she receive, like free housing? I never did get a reply to the correct pronunciation of Tytoalba, is 'Tit or Tight'? What your question presumes is that Ms White gets Housing Benefit in addition to what she declared, also presuming she lives in rented accommodation. Can you not make that same assumption of those she compared herself to? If she was being honest then these 'working poor' would also be entitled to help with paying the rent money. Your mistake, in not seeing the bigger picture, arises from only looking at what such as the Daily Mail reveal to you. Blame them for your prejudice! Oh; looked it up for myself = TIE-toh AHL-buh



RJD	Oct 12 2014, 02:07 AM Post #113
Prudence and Thrift Posts: 12,499 Group: Members Member #9 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 03:00 PM Stan Still Oct 11 2014, 01:25 PM Don't confuse them with facts , even the poorest people in the UK have a far higher standard of living than most other countries, There is no near European Country with anything like the same number of people having to resort to food banks. I am afraid it is you who are out of touch. Maybe if you determined the volume of charitable food despatched around Germany each week then you would not make such unsubstantiated claims. You also make a very lazy claim that food is the measure when it clearly is not, but it provides a very useful stick. You might make more headway with comparative real data across the European but I suspect you are concerned that these show up the UK in a much better light than you dare allow yourself to believe.



papasmurf	Oct 12 2014, 07:24 AM Post #114
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	RJD Oct 12 2014, 02:07 AM Maybe if you determined the volume of charitable food despatched around Germany each week then you would not make such unsubstantiated claims. Germany has state funded food banks, though RJD, funded by a hypothecated percentage of income tax. They are not like the Tory party denying it is the Tory party's doctrinal welfare reforms causing 50% of the need for food banks.



papasmurf	Oct 12 2014, 07:28 AM Post #115
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Steve K Oct 11 2014, 11:08 PM Which part of their " Clients can receive up to nine vouchers per year" do you need explaining to you? What part of can does not mean do don't you understand it does not apply to all , it is a tiny minority in dire circumstances probably some of those waiting for over a year for a benefit decision.



Stan Still	Oct 12 2014, 09:02 AM Post #116
Regular Member Posts: 1,705 Group: Members Member #23 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	papasmurf Oct 11 2014, 03:00 PM Stan Still Oct 11 2014, 01:25 PM Don't confuse them with facts , even the poorest people in the UK have a far higher standard of living than most other countries, There is no near European Country with anything like the same number of people having to resort to food banks. I am afraid it is you who are out of touch. Having been a member of a charity that assists children overseas for over 20 years I know that you are the one that is out of touch and dare not look reality in the face, once again you duck the issue of what real poverty is that exists in many countries. In the time it takes you to make a cup of coffee and type a post in here one child has died from drinking contaminated water something you and I take for granted, another will have starved to death, another because they have no access to a Doctor or can afford any medication for simple childhood ailments, orphaned in civil wars, forced to become soldiers as soon as they can carry an AK47 The list goes on and on and you know it, but are too afraid to admit it, one week of your state pension is more money then some entire families will ever see in months of back breaking work children included. There are millions and millions of people who have no idea where their next meal is coming from, let alone the day after and the day after that year in year out, many will never reach maturity or will watch many of their children or siblings die Your feigned indignation, political motivated propaganda and handwringing cuts no ice with me, you will probably eat more today for Sunday lunch than some families will have all week. And Food Banks that we know today were started for hungry kids living on the streets in Europe, there is a food bank near where I work the people I see attending are not gaunt or badly clothed appear healthy fit and well and some arrive in bloody cars they are that broke, you really are naïve if you think you are fooling anyone in here with your bull.



papasmurf	Oct 12 2014, 09:16 AM Post #117
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Stan Still Oct 12 2014, 09:02 AM Having been a member of a charity that assists children overseas for over 20 years I know that you are the one that is out of touch and dare not look reality in the face, once again you duck the issue of what real poverty is that exists in many countries. \| am more than aware of the poverty outside of Europe, I have been donating to several "hands on charities" for years, where I know the money and the expertise is going direct to where it is needed without corrupt officials and criminals taking most of it before it arrives. Using those people's plight to deny poverty in Britain is spurious and nothing to do with the subject under discussion. That the Tories doctrinal "welfare reforms" aimed directly at the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in Britain to have to resort to food banks is a national scandal and a disgrace. The DWP are sitting on datasets that show the reality of the policies because they know when the get a public airing there will be public uproar. They stand no chance of blocking their release until after the general election. Quite frankly people like you are part of the problem, not the solution.



Stan Still	Oct 12 2014, 09:30 AM Post #118
Regular Member Posts: 1,705 Group: Members Member #23 Joined: Jun 28, 2014	Well this working tax paying state pensioner is part of the solution by helping to pay for our welfare system as I have done so for over 50 years like millions of others. You retired some years ago and unless you are so rich and being taxed on your savings and pension you have not been contributing much if anything to the system for years.



papasmurf	Oct 12 2014, 09:36 AM Post #119
Senior Member Posts: 17,280 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	Stan Still Oct 12 2014, 09:30 AM unless you are so rich and being taxed on your savings and pension you have not been contributing much if anything to the system for years. I am not rich, but I am being taxed on my pension, I also like most other people am paying a large amount in VAT and fuel tax. None of that has anything to do with the doctrinal attack on the poor and vulnerable by the current government with Iain Duncan Smith wasting £billions in tax payers money on failing and failed welfare reform projects. Edited by papasmurf, Oct 12 2014, 09:39 AM.



Steve K	Oct 12 2014, 10:07 AM Post #120
Once and future cynic Posts: 33,990 Group: Admins Member #20 Joined: Jun 27, 2014	papasmurf Oct 12 2014, 07:28 AM Steve K Oct 11 2014, 11:08 PM Which part of their " Clients can receive up to nine vouchers per year" do you need explaining to you? ~~What part of can does not mean do don't you understand it does not apply to all , it is a tiny minority in dire circumstances probably some of those waiting for over a year for a benefit decision.~~ What part of can does not mean do don't you understand it does not apply to all , it is a tiny minority in dire circumstances probably some of those waiting for over a year for a benefit decision. Yet again the poster who says he has an IQ of 142 cannot get the quote right so I've had to correct that error by you. You unambiguously said the maximum was 3 times a year, you were wrong, the figure if 9 parcels a year. An honest man would hold their hands up and admit their error but seems that does not apply to you. Every time you do this PS you just bring further discredit to you and further harm to the cause of those you affect to support. Edited by Steve K, Oct 12 2014, 10:10 AM.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)

Create a free forum in seconds. Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3
4
…
12