Extreme poverty ‘will double by Christmas’ in UK because of Covid-19

[Sheepy]

Lets face it, the very people moaning about poverty now, are the very ones who have helped create it by Covid paranoia and now want to police it with reporting anyone and everyone.

[srb7677]

I'll be clear about my point. You have called another poster an "ignoramous" because he has a different view to you, and on top of that, you then go on to accuse him of not caring if people starve.

I called Nick an ignoramus because spouting non-evidenced bollocks about how the poor are all taking the piss out of the rest of us and better off than hard working people -like some two bit pub bore - is in my view ignorant in the extreme.

And at 11.54 am on 14th September Nick said this in this very thread....

If I had my way it would be like China where if you don't get up and earn enough to eat then tough.

So in other words if you don't earn enough to eat you starve, is what would happen if he had his way. The assumption being of course that all those not working are out of work through laziness, which also ignores the fact that millions of people in work are still living in poverty.

As for the rest of your post, DD, I am overwhelmed by it's verbosity which cannot but help lend a semblance of ranting to it. It is too much to respond to in detail. I lack both the time and the inclination.

[papasmurf]

so lets keep the discussion factual.

The problem is you refuse point blank to do that because you just will not accept the size of the problem when even when the government own data shows the size of the problem.
The organisations you so despise base their reports on government data.
If you can back up your Daily Heil type rantings with some referenced evidence please feel free.

[DeppityDawg]

What it actually shows is that you are a callous ignoramus steeped in Daily Mail style social propaganda. When in fact the truth is far more nuanced. Whilst there are those who attempt to take the piss they are rarely living the life of riley. And millions are genuinely suffering, some driven onto the streets. Fact is though - and this is the evil truth - you don't actually give a shit anyway. They could all starve to death as far as you are concerned.

You talk about DM propaganda, then go on to write hyperbolic comments like "millions are genuinely suffering". Could you be more specific? How are you defining suffering and do you have any specific links to prove this? Otherwise that is simply your own bias and 'propagabda". After your comment about the Daily Mail, don't expect to be able to post Joseph Rowntree or Trussel trust type links or anything with a political agenda. Hard facts please ONS data or independent sources to qualify why your opinion that "millions suffer" is somehow more valid (or in your eyes definitely more f cking noble) than his?

I am not ignoring you. Just been working long hours and finding statistics can  be time consuming (and I suspect hardly anyone bothers to read the links anyway). But I will return to this when I have more time. Suffice it to say right now the the Trussel Trust etc are far more reliable than the frigging Daily Fail. They are not equal comparisons. Are you one of those - champion of the working classes - who thinks working class poverty does not exist? That some do not end up homeless? Or do you like Barry think there are only 10 cases of poverty in the entire country? I mean, FFS, even the homelessness figures dwarfs the figure of 10. I could find more people than that sleeping rough in my home city alone.

I'll be clear about my point. You have called another poster an "ignoramous" because he has a different view to you, and on top of that, you then go on to accuse him of not caring if people starve. The former is based on a difference of opinion, and the latter is a plain insult of which there is no evidence in this thread - unless you can demonstrate where Nick said any such thing?

This is all the more difficult to understand - firstly because we had a long conversation the other day when you claimed that people insulting you over things that weren't true is what upsets you - yet here you are, perfectly willing to insult another posters intelligence based on emotives rather than factual comments - you would be the first to complain and take personally any such comment that was directed at you. And secondly, because many of us read the Daily Mail, and I can only assume from what you've written that we are all ignoramus's and don't care about people starving.

Let's be clear about something else too. You (and others) snootily declaring the DM to be "social propaganda" is par for the course on political forums, but lets not pretend the "Guardian", the somewhat comically named "Independent" and such publications as the Huffington Post are paragons of truth. They are not. They are no more and no less biased towards a political agenda than the Daily Mail - the difference here is that I won't insult your intelligence by dismissing them as "pandering liberal echo chambers" or such like, but it could be easily done. What I accept is that people can have a different opinion to me, and they may read many different publications (as I try to do), without being idiots or callous cretins who would see people starve. That is the big problem now with much left wing thinking - the constant moral posturing and the willingness to mock and insult other people's sincerely held beliefs simply because they don't agree with liberal left orthodoxy. If you want to be treated with respect and courtesy, then I suggest you take a good look at yourself first and see how others might interpret your comments

I've already showed how no organisation is beyond (or shouldn't be beyond) critical analysis - the Trussel Trust et al, charities and NGOs etc, employ people, many of whom are earning a damn sight more than you or I, and who could be said to be "specialists" in their chosen subject (greivance might be a better word), but that doesn't make them unbiased, nor does it mean they don't actively seek to encourage the belief that there is always a need for their "services"

Finally, as for homelessness, poverty and "working class champions", don't even think you can go there with me, LeftyLib, because I'll fecking embarrass you - I experienced poverty and lack of opportunity as a child, and I know it exists. Its the emotive wording of predominantly left leaning organisations and commentators like you, using words like "extreme" and "millions are suffering" without factual measures. Poverty is relative in this country - people don't starve to death and very few have nothing - so lets keep the discussion factual. We can all find homeless people in our home towns and cities, but that is a complex subject, because much of that involves alcohol, drugs and/or mental illness - there are few if any families "sleeping on the streets". The telling of a story with statistics and figures is often subjective, being as much about how they are presented (or by what is omitted) as anything else

As I've told you before, I'm not bothered whether I'm liked or not, but I've tried hard to present this post with respect for your opinion, even though I disagree with it - you, the poster who spent a lot of the last couple of weeks complaining about how others treat him and his views. The least you can do is try and do the same with other posters and stop deeply insulting other people because they don't agree with you

[Sheepy]

Well of course you have Smurf, of course you have.

If you are going to be like that back on ignore you go, I really cannot be bothered with idiots like you.

It won't last Smurf just like your bullshit.

[papasmurf]

Well of course you have Smurf, of course you have.

If you are going to be like that back on ignore you go, I really cannot be bothered with idiots like you.

[Sheepy]

Oh well that is bugger then, you could have helped out otherwise.

I had been doing just that for a long time in various ways until I started shielding.

Well of course you have Smurf, of course you have.

[papasmurf]

Oh well that is bugger then, you could have helped out otherwise.

I had been doing just that for a long time in various ways until I started shielding.

[Sheepy]

that will get you out and about smurfy, feeding the hungry and poor should do it, might do you good.

I am shielding until advised otherwise by the local medical practice.  I have stated so many times so stop making such comments.

Oh well that is bugger then, you could have helped out otherwise.

[papasmurf]

that will get you out and about smurfy, feeding the hungry and poor should do it, might do you good.

I am shielding until advised otherwise by the local medical practice.  I have stated so many times so stop making such comments.

[Sheepy]

Well, generally they're well protected aren't they, not that well protected compared to others of course but you wouldn't "go after" them unless you had a death wish, or a wish to end up in prison.

The damage they are doing pales in comparison to the damage others are doing elsewhere by siding with our enemies, like with Russians and stuff to try and hurt us.
That puts them squarely in the wrong doesn't it.

I forgot the 400 hot meals a day for deprived children being organised from the same building during school holidays and the pandemic. He never mentions that either.

that will get you out and about smurfy, feeding the hungry and poor should do it, might do you good.

[papasmurf]

Well, generally they're well protected aren't they, not that well protected compared to others of course but you wouldn't "go after" them unless you had a death wish, or a wish to end up in prison.

The damage they are doing pales in comparison to the damage others are doing elsewhere by siding with our enemies, like with Russians and stuff to try and hurt us.
That puts them squarely in the wrong doesn't it.

I forgot the 400 hot meals a day for deprived children being organised from the same building during school holidays and the pandemic. He never mentions that either.

[papasmurf]

I mean, FFS, even the homelessness figures dwarfs the figure of 10. I could find more people than that sleeping rough in my home city alone.

Everyone involved in trying to deal with homelessness agrees the rough sleeper numbers are woefully under reported.
I could in normal circumstances find I suspect 60 rough sleepers within a mile of my home. There are numerous bunkers and similar left over from WW2 to  provide shelter. It would take a lot of resources to find them.

[srb7677]

What it actually shows is that you are a callous ignoramus steeped in Daily Mail style social propaganda. When in fact the truth is far more nuanced. Whilst there are those who attempt to take the piss they are rarely living the life of riley. And millions are genuinely suffering, some driven onto the streets. Fact is though - and this is the evil truth - you don't actually give a shit anyway. They could all starve to death as far as you are concerned.

You talk about DM propaganda, then go on to write hyperbolic comments like "millions are genuinely suffering". Could you be more specific? How are you defining suffering and do you have any specific links to prove this? Otherwise that is simply your own bias and 'propagabda". After your comment about the Daily Mail, don't expect to be able to post Joseph Rowntree or Trussel trust type links or anything with a political agenda. Hard facts please ONS data or independent sources to qualify why your opinion that "millions suffer" is somehow more valid (or in your eyes definitely more f cking noble) than his?

I am not ignoring you. Just been working long hours and finding statistics can  be time consuming (and I suspect hardly anyone bothers to read the links anyway). But I will return to this when I have more time. Suffice it to say right now the the Trussel Trust etc are far more reliable than the frigging Daily Fail. They are not equal comparisons. Are you one of those - champion of the working classes - who thinks working class poverty does not exist? That some do not end up homeless? Or do you like Barry think there are only 10 cases of poverty in the entire country? I mean, FFS, even the homelessness figures dwarfs the figure of 10. I could find more people than that sleeping rough in my home city alone.

[Borg Refinery]

I don't want it to turn into that, I do love England indeed and care about so many people, and I guess it just upsets me to see things turn out like this is all.

Frankly, I don't wonder the (Tory) MP where I live appears to have gone into hiding. He has not got the excuse he does not know the damage his government has done and is doing. He runs charity for vulnerable adults, which has a "soup kitchen" and a food bank in the same premises.

Well, generally they're well protected aren't they, not that well protected compared to others of course but you wouldn't "go after" them unless you had a death wish, or a wish to end up in prison.

The damage they are doing pales in comparison to the damage others are doing elsewhere by siding with our enemies, like with Russians and stuff to try and hurt us.
That puts them squarely in the wrong doesn't it.