Please Sir - I want some more.

[Borchester]

Yes. And there's not much danger of badly educated poor people who can't even quote Latin, writing in to the letters page complaining about their energy bills there then I guess

What are you rattling on about?

If you are badly educated then you are poor, no matter how much you have in the bank.

And if you aren't eager to find out what you don't know, then you are as thick as shit regardless of how long you spent in a school room or a lecture theatre.

As Henry Royce, the patron saint of all petrol heads once said

"Whatever is rightly done, however humble, is noble."

[DeppityDawg]

[complete lack of irony] Yep, that's us caught bang to rights — Mrs likes Vogue, and I enjoy New Yorker magazine... [complete lack of irony]

Yes. And there's not much danger of badly educated poor people who can't even quote Latin, writing in to the letters page complaining about their energy bills there then I guess

[patman post]

Yes. It also has at least one impossibility snobby Conde Nast subscriber too

Do **** off.

Yep, that's us caught bang to rights — Mrs likes Vogue, and I enjoy New Yorker magazine...

[patman post]

Next time you are in London, take a trip to Stamford Hill. It is OK, but not the sort of place to get excited about.

That's a sentiment I might agree with — but I couldn't possibly say so for fear of Shomrim officers knocking on the door accusing me of being less than all-embracing in my acceptance of diversity...

https://redice.tv/news/shomrim-special-jewish-protection-task-force-deployed-in-london-vehicles-designed-to-look-like-police-cars

[Borchester]

Yes. It also has at least one impossibility snobby Conde Nast subscriber too

Do **** off.

To be fair, I don't think Pat is being a snob, just trying to wind you up.

Bear in mind that his folks took one look at how the Brothers and Sisters had fucked up the local schools and sent him off to George Town Comprehensive to learn how to read and write.

Next time you are in London, take a trip to Stamford Hill. It is OK, but not the sort of place to get excited about.

[DeppityDawg]

I see this forum has at least two Dacre Daily Mail disciples...

Yes. It also has at least one impossibility snobby Conde Nast subscriber too

Do **** off.

[T00ts]

I see this forum has at least two Dacre Daily Mail disciples...

Don't knock it!  

[patman post]

I see this forum has at least two Dacre Daily Mail disciples...

[T00ts]

You mean Martin Lewis.

LOL Hi DD - He does seem to winning the competition to be the most affective fear-mongerer. 

[DeppityDawg]

I guarantee the media today like every other day is full of dire predictions and fearmongering

You mean Martin Lewis.

[Sheepy]

It is all just about illustrating a society where we all both individually and collectively help those less fortunate than ourselves, and are in turn helped by those more fortunate.

And these are relevent points to make, though anyone who does not really believe in the common good but thinks it is all entirely due to personal responsibility is unlikely to see the relevance and might even resent it being pointed out.

I seriously doubt that is what it is about, except in the mind of the left, there is no such thing as the common good, in fact I guarantee the media today like every other day is full of dire predictions and fearmongering on behalf of the Westminster party and the globalists much the same thing anyway. 

[srb7677]

Forgive me if I'm crass and insensitive, but I'm not sure how doing personal wealth or poverty wheelies really adds to the debate...

It is all just about illustrating a society where we all both individually and collectively help those less fortunate than ourselves, and are in turn helped by those more fortunate.

And these are relevent points to make, though anyone who does not really believe in the common good but thinks it is all entirely due to personal responsibility is unlikely to see the relevance and might even resent it being pointed out.

[patman post]

Forgive me if I'm crass and insensitive, but I'm not sure how doing personal wealth or poverty wheelies really adds to the debate...

[srb7677]

What I find disturbing is that those in Labour who feel themselves need help turn around to the guy worse off and feel it is someone else's job rather than theirs.

For those of us who believe in a compassionate and fair society it is actually the job of everyone to help support those worse off than themselves, both collectively through taxation and benefits administered by a democratic state, and individually by helping those less fortunate than us on an individual level.

I myself am poor and struggling but there are those worse off than me. I earn enough to pay income taxes and think that paying them is fair enough. I cannot walk past a homeless person without giving them some cash if I have any, and when I buy food I regularly buy a few extra cans for the foodbank. Back when life was not such a struggle and had more free time, I used to be a Red Cross volunteer.

If I earned more I would pay more in tax which is fair enough. If due to sickness or overtime cuts I earned less I would pay less in tax and be more likely to require some welfare assistance. That too would be fair enough.

Were I ever to become super rich I would give millions to help the struggling. I would never forget my roots.

[T00ts]

That's also why I have been a Conservative supporter from my late teenage. Before that I was probably influenced by my parents and other elders who were/are more Left in their views — though I don't remember any of them being virulently political.

I think my conversion came about when I became aware of the discussion about equal pay for men and women on the same grades in teaching. I remember a union rep suggesting male teachers deserved higher salary because they were likely to get married and have a family to support, whereas a female was likely to leave and stay home to raise children when she married.

That's when I realised "Reactionary" was an adjective that could used to describe the Left as often as the Right.

Since then I've noticed how "progressive" politics often means raiding the earnings, savings, and possessions of the top levels to make the gap from the bottom strata appear less wide.

My support is for the main Tory ideal of striving to provide equal opportunity for all — even nurturing those who may need assistance to get those opportunities — but I do not support full-blown Socialism's destruction of independence of the individual and replacing it with state imposition of its one version of what's best on the masses...

I too came from strong Labour (left) stock and when I looked at it I simply couldn't see it. I have voted Conservative ever since. Blindly? No. I see the faults in all ideologies but so far the Cons. have had the same vision.