How are all these folks catching Covid ?

[silver fox]

Covid, is it?

Those on low pay receive Universal Credit - previously tax credits and child benefits. Those in work before being furloughed have received 80% of their pay from the government - most of whom will now have to sign on unemployed. The greater majority of these according to the BBC are those under eighteen years of age.

As I have offered -if there are any parents in genuine hardship - I will personally help them out. OK?

You rely on your imagination and media speculation - I will rely on my experience and knowledge - fair enough?

Have you ever worked in deprived areas?

No idea as to your experience, but the knowledge you display on here is all too often sadly lacking, OK?

A good idea is to check out government sites, not noted for being speculative.

[Desert Region]

Agreed.

On the newspaper front, I'd say it's more a case when of the Daily Star seems the most vociferous critic of the government, you know we've gone very wrong. As for the Mail, when a newspaper is so blatantly anti-immigrant, anti-benefit claimant and anti-Labour, it's impossible not to have an opinion, for or against. Whatever the reason you read it, or the Sun or Mirror, it's your quid or however much it is.

The 'even Maggie wasn't as bad as..' lines are true. I loathe her with every fibre of my being, but I'd genuinely rather she was PM right now. I'd rather there was a whole cabinet of Thatchers right now than the shitshower we currently have.

One trying to kill off miners, one trying to kill off minors.

I think they covered the Rashford situation quite well on QT last night. The talentless Nicky Morgan's retort of 'well Labour should be more polite in the Commons' (paraphrasing) when asked how she could let kids go hungry was quite telling. As Bridget Phillipson said "So, kids go hungry this Christmas because you don't like the parliamentary process?". Prime whataboutery from Nicky lickspittle. A poor representative of the government, given the situation.

Good input from the panel and audience, really. The Nobel laureate twice using the word 'unconscionable' at the governments handling of the economy and the virus. The children's commissioner was tactful, but supported Rashford.

Whatever his reason for taking on this issue, though it seems he's from a poor background and saw the struggles of hungry kids himself, it is beyond my comprehension that anyone would argue with him, or belittle his efforts. Sure, it's ultimately down to parents to feed their kids, but a decade of austerity has taken its toll. Poverty is at Victorian levels and rising. Workers have to claim benefits. Some are homeless. We are a wealthy country. This simply should not be an issue.

Catchy wordplay with the minors and miners comparison, and I'm surpirsed you sincerely would rather have Maggie as PM now.

The "Margaret Thatcher, milk snatcher" nickname followed her through her political career. Why you would rather entrust a politician who took away free milk during term time from children to be someone who would grant additional meals outside term time to children smacks as a way of painting a worse picture of the present politicians. This Government and Prime Minister have been poor enough on present day terms.

Yes, anytime Nicky Morgan is wheeled out to contort herself into trying to put a positive spin on anything is never a convincing sight.

But anyway, yes, it's all besides the point really. I agree that's it's pathetic to have voted against the motion and at some point I just don't see how the Government won't be changing tack on this issue. I hope they do, and I hope they do it quick, as I agree that it's simply the right thing to do.

[Toodles McGinty]

Good.
Local charities helping local schools.

Free school meals in the holidays funded by the government is not sustainable long term.

Look at the figures.
1 million extra requests for free in term school meals in term time since 2019.

84,700 more children in the school system since 2018 and will continue rise as more children enter secondary school.

Need is going to increase whilst we live with Covid.


https://assets.publishing.service.go..._Main_Text.pdf

Not charities. Local people. Local businesses. Decent people.

Billions of pounds of public money given to companies set up with no capacity to provide goods and services, but they are well connected to the government isn't sustainable.

Billions of pounds spent on track and trace systems that don't work isn't sustainable.

10 years of austerity, plunging 14+ million people into the worst poverty since Victorian times, isn't sustainable.

Allowing multinational companies to pay zero tax, or less tax than one of their employees, isn't sustainable.

Feeding millions of poverty stricken school kids, who will then go on to work, pay tax, pay national insurance, support the economy, is the very definition of sustainable. It's an investment in the future.

Kids who aren't fed properly do less well in school. So do less well in work. Will grow up doing less well physically and emotionally. Which will eventually impact on the NHS, on welfare, on income.

There are few things that are a better, more sustainable investment than future generations.

But you'd like to 'see the Football Association providing school meals', so I'm not sure about your version of sustainability.

[Toodles McGinty]

Catchy wordplay with the minors and miners comparison, and I'm surpirsed you sincerely would rather have Maggie as PM now.

The "Margaret Thatcher, milk snatcher" nickname followed her through her political career. Why you would rather entrust a politician who took away free milk during term time from children to be someone who would grant additional meals outside term time to children smacks as a way of painting a worse picture of the present politicians. This Government and Prime Minister have been poor enough on present day terms.

Seriously, DR, overall I would rather have Thatcher and her government than this one. Not saying she'd feed kids any more than this cabal, but in general terms, yes.

They were in government for the purpose of governing. As detestable as I found them then, it is preferable than an entitled hack and a cabinet elected for one single issue. This is simply the worst PM and worst government in living memory, probably longer. The network of cronyism is staggering. The misuse of public funds is criminal. Literally, according to the Good Law Project.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Labour was or would be wonderful. I'm not a drooling sycophant when it comes to politicians of any colour. I believe they are there to serve and when we see fault, are there to be criticised, regardless of party.

Interesting article here, regarding the PM and his ilk at uni. Sums it all up, for me. Bluster and bull$h!t, totally uninterested, uninformed and incapable, but keep the plebs in their place.

[Hamble]

Not charities. Local people. Local businesses. Decent people.

Billions of pounds of public money given to companies set up with no capacity to provide goods and services, but they are well connected to the government isn't sustainable.

Billions of pounds spent on track and trace systems that don't work isn't sustainable.

10 years of austerity, plunging 14+ million people into the worst poverty since Victorian times, isn't sustainable.

Allowing multinational companies to pay zero tax, or less tax than one of their employees, isn't sustainable.

Feeding millions of poverty stricken school kids, who will then go on to work, pay tax, pay national insurance, support the economy, is the very definition of sustainable. It's an investment in the future.

Kids who aren't fed properly do less well in school. So do less well in work. Will grow up doing less well physically and emotionally. Which will eventually impact on the NHS, on welfare, on income.

There are few things that are a better, more sustainable investment than future generations.

But you'd like to 'see the Football Association providing school meals', so I'm not sure about your version of sustainability.

The Football Association already backs Rashford and raises money for various charities plus they hold fund raising events with celebs and children care more about them than politicians.

State provision

Asking the government to fund free school meals in the holidays for 2.4 million children as well as term time and increasing year on year is not sustainable.

Why do you not what free school meals in the holidays to be a permanent charity?

Fixed term extensions are not the answer.
Each time the gov extends it is harder on families to withdraw them.

Contempt for charities already providing support and meals to children in the holidays is not fair.

Just because the subject is a crisis at the moment does not mean other good people have not given their time and energy in helping a subject everyone cares about.

[said]

Pubs and cafes step in to help after MPs reject hungry kids.

"Cafes, pubs and restaurants across the country have stepped up to offer free school meals for local children during half term, after MPs rejected a campaign started by footballer Marcus Rashford.

A vote on the measures was backed by Labour and made its way to Parliament this week, but it was defeated by 322 votes to 261.

Now dozens of hospitality businesses have shown they "stand with Rashford, not the 322", by supporting families during the school holidays."

Not clueless attention seekers and their fantasy dripping butties. Not heartless, soulless government apologists for whom the Tories can do no wrong, so they take a swipe at a young man (and his profession) for actually trying to feed hungry kids. Not backbench gutless sycophants terrified of a whip-wielding Cabinet of ghouls and their puppet master. These people. Probably already struggling themselves under insufficient support measures. Small businesses, run by ordinary decent folk, doing right regardless of their political leanings.

Local councils with their funding already cut to the bone.

This gladdens my heart. This makes me proud of this country.

And completely, sickeningly ashamed of this government.

Edited: On Rashford's Twitter feed more and more businesses and councils are offering help. Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster and more by the hour. Brilliant.

Those struggling to make ends meet, responsibly taking care of their own children after working long and tiring hours every single day - the silent tax payers, will be so pleased to hear that. These are the section of the population who are totally ignored.

Why do you think so many of the Conservatives rejected these 'Free School Meals'? These are people, normal humans, many of whom came from working class backgrounds. Do you think perhaps, they understand and know more than you do?

At what point will parents be expected to take responsibility for themselves or should they be entitled to having everything given to them on top of being given additional welfare payments?

"Since the start of Coronavirus, we have added over £9 billion to the welfare system. This has allowed us to increase Universal Credit by £1,000 a year; increase Local Housing Allowance and create a £180 million fund to help struggling families with their rent; create a £63 million fund for councils to use for local welfare assistance, and award of £16 million to food charities"This is all money that is going to families who are in need. You don’t hear Labour talking about this because that doesn't fit their anti-Tory narrative." Midland News.

It is people like you who are doing more harm than good. By ignoring common sense you are creating victims. Once you do that the situation expands exponentially until there are more people on welfare than there are in work. As a matter of course, all those who can, will take advantage of the sympathy and choose to become a victim. Welfare Benefits are at the most generous level that they have ever been. They are higher than the pay earned by many workers. Given the choice - would you choose to be on welfare and on higher money or would you choose to work for lower money? And given the choice, would you apply for free school meals or would you choose to buy your own child's meals? For far too long people have come to rely totally on system that was meant to be a safety net - it was never intended for people to live entirely on welfare benefits for the whole of their working lives. How many times have you and others said on this site - people should not be unemployed, they should be working? Yet you now use a different face - how is that?

[*concerned*]

Now this thread has gone off topic!

But, one of my mental 'queries' is this :

Family A, two adults and a 10yr old child are on Universal Credit

Family B, is also two adults and a 10yr old child and on Universal Credit

Yet, Family A struggle for some reason to not feed their child correctly, Family B can ?

All families on Universal Credit do not have children that go hungry and don't use Food Banks, only some of them, why does that happen ?

[Hamble]

Just wear a mask


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuFpglRjfvo

[local]

Now this thread has gone off topic!

But, one of my mental 'queries' is this :

Family A, two adults and a 10yr old child are on Universal Credit

Family B, is also two adults and a 10yr old child and on Universal Credit

Yet, Family A struggle for some reason to not feed their child correctly, Family B can ?

All families on Universal Credit do not have children that go hungry and don't use Food Banks, only some of them, why does that happen ?

Theoretically you can exist on benefits but it's beyond many of the people on them to work it out, they are often on benefits because of their own choices in life.

Some though have had a bad time and deserve our support, sorting out who belongs in which group is probably a waste of time.

Whatever your position no one could argue that some benefits are laughably low.

[gsgsgs]

Just wear a mask


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuFpglRjfvo

https://youtu.be/7dThiYFgI_g

[Hamble]

https://youtu.be/7dThiYFgI_g

Touche!
Love it.

[Alikado]

Now this thread has gone off topic!

But, one of my mental 'queries' is this :

Family A, two adults and a 10yr old child are on Universal Credit

Family B, is also two adults and a 10yr old child and on Universal Credit

Yet, Family A struggle for some reason to not feed their child correctly, Family B can ?

All families on Universal Credit do not have children that go hungry and don't use Food Banks, only some of them, why does that happen ?

There can be big differences in what is received, all families have different commitments many beyond their control.

[Toodles McGinty]

Those struggling to make ends meet, responsibly taking care of their own children after working long and tiring hours every single day - the silent tax payers, will be so pleased to hear that. These are the section of the population who are totally ignored.

Ignored by whom? Those struggling to make ends meet can claim tax credits or, God help them, Universal Credit. The majority of benefits claimants, outside of those permanently disabled, are probably working parents. It is disgusting that we live in a country where a full time job isn't enough to support a family.

Why do you think so many of the Conservatives rejected these 'Free School Meals'? These are people, normal humans, many of whom came from working class backgrounds. Do you think perhaps, they understand and know more than you do?

According to Nicky Morgan, they rejected the free meals because Rayner called one of them 'scum'. How many Tory MPs come from working class backgrounds? I understand billions have been sent in the past 8 months with virtually nothing to show for it. I understand that children who are starving will fail in their futures. I understand that food is a basic human right.

At what point will parents be expected to take responsibility for themselves or should they be entitled to having everything given to them on top of being given additional welfare payments?

You absolute Berk. This fantasy land that you exist in where all parents on benefits have cars, 55 inch TVs and all the luxuries they could want simply doesn't exist. I know people in poverty. Some have trouble even making claims because they don't have a phone or online access. They have the humiliation of food banks. They have a choice between food and energy bills. Basic JSA is £73 a week.

"Since the start of Coronavirus, we have added over £9 billion to the welfare system. This has allowed us to increase Universal Credit by £1,000 a year; increase Local Housing Allowance and create a £180 million fund to help struggling families with their rent; create a £63 million fund for councils to use for local welfare assistance, and award of £16 million to food charities"This is all money that is going to families who are in need. You don’t hear Labour talking about this because that doesn't fit their anti-Tory narrative." Midland News.

That's why a Tory MP didn't vote for free meals? They've had enough, let them eat cake? It isn't about Labour or Tory issue, you absolute thundertwunt. It's about kids eating. Millions more people are unemployed, thousands of businesses are shutting for good. The kids need feeding. £9 billion is sweet FA, they've already blown £12bn on track & trace that doesn't work. They've spaffed £100bn on HS2 to shave half an hour of the journey to Birmingham for a few businessmen. It isn't an anti-Tory narrative. If they were doing a good job, I'd say so.

It is people like you who are doing more harm than good. By ignoring common sense you are creating victims. Once you do that the situation expands exponentially until there are more people on welfare than there are in work. As a matter of course, all those who can, will take advantage of the sympathy and choose to become a victim. Welfare Benefits are at the most generous level that they have ever been. They are higher than the pay earned by many workers. Given the choice - would you choose to be on welfare and on higher money or would you choose to work for lower money? And given the choice, would you apply for free school meals or would you choose to buy your own child's meals? For far too long people have come to rely totally on system that was meant to be a safety net - it was never intended for people to live entirely on welfare benefits for the whole of their working lives. How many times have you and others said on this site - people should not be unemployed, they should be working? Yet you now use a different face - how is that?

Nobody wants to be on benefits. Most people want a job with a living wage. Workers are on benefits too, you steaming moron. Workers are homeless. Workers need help to feed kids. Whose fault is that?

Do you think a larger size font proves a point? D!(khead.

[said]

Ignored by whom? Those struggling to make ends meet can claim tax credits or, God help them, Universal Credit. The majority of benefits claimants, outside of those permanently disabled, are probably working parents. It is disgusting that we live in a country where a full time job isn't enough to support a family.



According to Nicky Morgan, they rejected the free meals because Rayner called one of them 'scum'. How many Tory MPs come from working class backgrounds? I understand billions have been sent in the past 8 months with virtually nothing to show for it. I understand that children who are starving will fail in their futures. I understand that food is a basic human right.



You absolute Berk. This fantasy land that you exist in where all parents on benefits have cars, 55 inch TVs and all the luxuries they could want simply doesn't exist. I know people in poverty. Some have trouble even making claims because they don't have a phone or online access. They have the humiliation of food banks. They have a choice between food and energy bills. Basic JSA is £73 a week.



That's why a Tory MP didn't vote for free meals? They've had enough, let them eat cake? It isn't about Labour or Tory issue, you absolute thundertwunt. It's about kids eating. Millions more people are unemployed, thousands of businesses are shutting for good. The kids need feeding. £9 billion is sweet FA, they've already blown £12bn on track & trace that doesn't work. They've spaffed £100bn on HS2 to shave half an hour of the journey to Birmingham for a few businessmen. It isn't an anti-Tory narrative. If they were doing a good job, I'd say so.




Nobody wants to be on benefits. Most people want a job with a living wage. Workers are on benefits too, you steaming moron. Workers are homeless. Workers need help to feed kids. Whose fault is that?

Do you think a larger size font proves a point? D!(khead.

For claimants there is a cut off point!

Who is it than cannot afford £2 a week for five days lunches for two kids.?

Take me to those people's houses where they cannot even afford food?

Your JSA has been changed toUniversal Credits and under the Conservatives it has been increased to £94. 79 per week as from last year.

Pensioners receive a third of what most people get - they manage!

Either you put up or shut up! Prove what you are claiming - or I will take you to some of Liverpool's deprived areas and open your eyes for you.

[gsgsgs]

For claimants there is a cut off point!

Who is it than cannot afford £2 a week for five days lunches for two kids.?

Take me to those people's houses where they cannot even afford food?

Your JSA has been changed toUniversal Credits and under the Conservatives it has been increased to £94. 79 per week as from last year.

Pensioners receive a third of what most people get - they manage!

Either you put up or shut up! Prove what you are claiming - or I will take you to some of Liverpool's deprived areas and open your eyes for you.

Having been made redundant in August I claimed JSA for a month and can confirm JSA is slightly more at £74.35 a week.