I am not sure it’s for here. Putin? War with Europe is ok. I would say obliterate them. But we know he would hit the nuclear button.
1 Like
That’s fine, we’re not in Europe.
p.s. he’s never going to press the button but we’ll also never find out
I wasn’t directing this at you. It was the forum in general. If i have associated you in anyway then that was not my intention 
.
To clarify, are you saying I made the comment about Pensioners paying ‘for people with three kids’?
Could it be that the reason why a high number of my posts are ‘defending Pensioners rights’ is due to a lot of posters attacking their rights? If there was no one attacking their rights then there would be no reason to defend them?
What are my considerations to those who might lose out from the two child limit on benefits? And what of those arguments for pensioners can also apply?
I have no issue with the lifting of the cap or welfare in general. I accept others may have concerns but that’s not me shutting down the idea down. As we agreed, there could be an argument made for all people needing benefits.
Thank you for this. I will give them a read.
My bad @SBYM.
I was making a tongue in cheek comment regarding your post and to whom you were referring to, on the basis we all knew who you were referring to.
I didn’t mean to upset you.
Again, I agree with a lot of what you are saying and what I disagree with does not mean I am saying you are wrong. How we fix/address it across all sectors should be a priority
Take a hike why don’t you…..
good to see you are feeling better, you gave me a scare with your previous reply.
4 Likes
[quote=“redfanman, post:4243, topic:4542”]
Launch of the Inactivity and Youth Trailblazers in May this year.
Thousands of young people set to benefit from new support into work and training - GOV.UK
The Secretary of State for Department of Works and Pensions answering a parliamentary question in October confirming that the trailblazers were now all live, and had been extended for another year.
Youth Guarantee Trailblazer Scheme - Hansard - UK Parliament
So all of these links refer to the same scheme. This being £45m shared between 8 areas to encourage to youth unemployment. Same as the West Midlands link.
So the plans you refer to is just one plan, which is a measly £45m across 8 areas???
The only link that doesn’t refer directly to the Youth trailblazer scheme is your first link and this is nothing more than an assessment of where we are at.
Do you honestly believe that the links you have referenced, provide a given plan for the country and furthermore instill any optimism within the public? If you are personally reassured by the above then we have completely different expectations in our Government.
I rather suspect that the sort of person that thought Bernhard Manning was funny because of his off-colour humour is probably not going to be put off Farage because he was a racist prick.
3 Likes
Yup see above.
1 Like
Answer me honestly. Before you posted “I’m waiting for the denial” had you bothered reading any of the links provided by Redfanman?
You jumped on the back of his post without actually reading the links.
I challenge you to read the links and come back and demonstrate why I should be confident in what they have to say.
Quite so.
They love him for what he represents and what they believe he will deliver…
1 Like
Most of the country thought Bernard Manning was funny. He was ‘of his time’ as they say.
1 Like
Oh, entirely. He was a gifted comedian and admired by others who may have not have approved of his material. I think Ben Elton said as much when he was doing his left wing political material in the 1980s.
I think he could be summed up by Barry Cryer: “The thing about Bernard was that he looked funny, he sounded funny and he had excellent timing. It was just what he actually said that could be worrying.”
The problem was more that there were much lesser comedians at the time who thought that the racism was the funny thing. It actually wasn’t, and often he was simply reflecting the prevalent attitudes of his audience and effectively mocking them.
If you remember at the time, working men’s clubs where these guys would play usually had a “No swearing, no racism, nothing blue” rule, because they were still trying to be a family friendly environment. Manning had his own club for a reason.
3 Likes
Fucking hell, country is in a right state but seriously what the fuck is going on when people who are basically shit start changing the narrative and talking bs about the deep state ?
Fuck off you useless cunt .
9 Likes
The mad thing is when I saw an ad on tv for her show I couldn’t remember if she was Tory or Labour.
That’s where I am with politics in this country now, they are just 2 ends of the same turd.
1 Like
Just another grift though, never mentioned anything about when she was part of the deep state and wanted to have glory by winning the tory leadership challenge etc to be PM.
The fact that this is being funded by american money as she like other former “pms” make money from the speech circuit etc…
She and other former pms are a pissing disgrace when they fuck up and then make out it was some mythological dark forces that stopped them achieving things…Liz you were shite..thats the truth.
3 Likes
No. Not originally. It was @LondonRich.
You then replied to my response to him…
So I replied to yours etc.etc.
You tell me. You barely mentioned anything to show your ‘workings’, while appearing to sympathise with other poster’s views that we shouldn’t be paying many of them benefits.
ooh, I don’t know, maybe some of these for starters?
or this?
You have stepped into responses that were initially directed at comments @LondonRich made. I’ve highlighted one above.
I think you replied to @Noo_Noo when he responded to this one.
Our initial responses have not been made to attack rights or propose cuts at all, but to highlight the obvious disconnect amongst some posters between the size of the benefits bill and why/where that money is being spent, and how those posters appear to be making allowances automatically for certain groups such as pensioners while others, usually those on working age benefits, they often view with disdain and so where they expect any cuts to fall.
If there is a discussion to be had on reducing the benefits bill, then it makes sense that it has to include spending on pensioners because of the proportion of welfare spending made to them, whether or not you argue for or against cuts for that specific group.
Do you know if it includes disability benefits as that might explain the difference?
According to figures from back in April on Gov.uk the expected figure for spending on pensioners is closer to £175bn (says it accounts for 55% of welfare spending)?
Guidance and methodology: Benefit expenditure and caseload tables - GOV.UK
And in a Parliament briefing from 2024/25 the figure given was 58% of welfare spending or £166bn with £14bn of that accounted by disability benefits.
Government support for pensioners - House of Commons Library
I don’t know the most recent figure but back in May OBR forecast about £200bn, about 16% of its revenues - that will presumably be from both individuals and businesses.
National Insurance Contributions (NICs) - Office for Budget Responsibility
I saw an article from a few years back that I think said that a man on average earnings pays enough contributions across their lifetime to account for around 55% of the pension income they get from the state. That figure may have since changed due to changes in state pension age/ National Insurance Contribution rate changes. I don’t know if that is just individual contributions or also from companies.
No, it isn’t just one plan. As the first link to the Get Britain Working paper shows. It is part of a range of work that is going on across the whole of government - there isn’t just one aspect to this, nor one department that owns all the responsibility. Opposition parties don’t just rock up to government with a fully costed schedule of work, with timetables set out. They have ideas and promises that they then ask officials to develop, cost and bring to fruition. It is natural then that it will sometimes happen in stages and can sometimes change direction where events lead it to.
Yes, most of the other links are on the Youth and Inactivity trailblazers as youth unemployment is a key focus of this government and that is the stuff I have seen most on the news and came up first with in the google search. It also gives you sight of its progress to date.
No, £45m is being spent to meet certain costs in those areas across the first year. They will have more funding for year two. As the last link to a BBC article shows the chancellor is committing £820m more in just last week’s budget to further the support being delivered.
Do you not remember the starting exchange?
I think they do adequately show the government has a plan, Is working to that plan, and funding is being made. I’ve seen more, however, I only intended in giving you a sample of what is available.
There is much more information out there that you can easily find if you so wish. I’m certainly not going to do anymore if you are not willing to look for your self or be more constructive in setting out why you don’t think these are adequate. How much of what I linked to did you read?
The links I provided also gives you an opportunity to see how things are going locally. I would be keen to see whether you notice any improvements in your area over the next three years. Government has sighted construction as an area they want to get more young people recruited into.
I doubt it will instil any immediate optimism because people will drive whatever narrative they wish, whether based on fact or not. And it’s pretty clear this government isn’t able to steer the narrative in its favour at this moment in time.
Again, apologies to all for length of post
6 Likes