Who the hell is that tosser? And how did anyone find his pronouncements?
Does he know that the whole world was a very different place nigh on two generations ago? Would he know, for example, that the idiot Foot wanted to re-introduce exchange controls in 1983? That would have been good. Anyway, it allows us the opportunity to revisit the Foot manifesto (which didn't include the bit about exchange controls by the way, although all the documents were printed up and ready to go, presumably because of the Labour Party's 1983 promise of a Brexit.) So, the longest suicide note in history. It's remarkably similar in many respects to the 2017 edition. It's here politicsresources.net/area/uk/man/lab83.htm should anyone fancy some mawkish reminiscence of "The New Hope for Britain". A young Jeremy Corbyn, in his first stint as an MP said the '83 manifesto was “a very interesting electoral platform but lots of people in the party were quite frightened of it”. Whereas Tony Benn took comfort by arguing that “for the first time since 1945, a political party with an openly socialist policy has received the support of over 8.5 million people. This is a remarkable development by any standards and it deserves some analysis.”
It is remarkable to look back now at that great orator, Michael Foot and see similar adoring crowds at that election campaign as our Jeremy gets now. In anything approaching normal times, the Labour party should be in with a strong shout this time round. But I suspect that the twin effects of the SNP's stranglehold on Scotland and the eagerly anticipated demise of UKIP as a political force would be sufficient to do for the party's chances even without the Corbyn effect. We shall see. (I'm still not voting.)
Is your point that 1983 was a long time ago, or that it wasn't?
Oh come on it's obvious innit. If you want to denigrate Labour under Corbyn it's perfectly acceptable to link it as far back as you like to make your point. Even suggest they will be "dragging us back to the 70's" if it helps. Maybe make a comparison to what the trains or utilities were like back then, that's a really useful and reliable indicator to throw into the mix and shows exactly what they would be like under public ownership now. Without doubt.
But never, ever compare the past performance of the Tories, even if only from a few years ago let alone under Thatcher. That's just unfair and not taking account of the prevailing circumstances and environment!
Seriously I'm shocked you didn't know that rule Chizza!
Thanks @Bournemouth Addick - it's good to know I can rely on someone who can steer me clear. Sometimes my hypocrisy filter isn't properly attuned. I know that there's a set of rules we all have to adhere to when criticising politicians from the left of centre. And, stupidly, I often assume we stick to the same rules for other politicians too.
But that can't be the case, can it?
Because if it were true, then we would have to criticise the Home Secretary as well as Diane Abbot for not knowing - say - how much policemen earn.
But she'd never get caught on camera making up figures about police officers' salary. Would she?
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
I asked for some evidence a few days ago. I searched and found a case of a single mother trainee nurse but that was it.
None was forthcoming from those bandying the statement around on here, just the usual comments.
Why not insist people pay for all education then, including primary and secondary?
If parents can't afford this their child gets access to a nimbus for one hour a day and 1 floppy disk per term
Nimbus...... you are showing your age young man!
I remember our pc at primary school year 6. Sat in this massive cabinet with something akin to shop window shutters that came down and were locked very securely every afternoon by ms Walsh
PC at primary school?? Ha ha ha !
All I can remember about it was that game where you have to get animals from one side of the river with bags of sand and you weren't allowed to have certain things on their own etc.
It was 92/93, I was what 10 going on 11. I fancied Jet from gladiators, we'd just returned to the Valley. I was allowed to go to night home games
That being 24/25 years ago, now I'm 35.
In 24/25 years from now I'll be trying to remember moderating the 2017 election thread. I'll be writing something like 'all I can remember is this fiiish character who had about 4/5 posts per page'
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Much of what you say resonates but it's generic comments like 'no fault of their own' which will never sway the centre voters that Labour needs to attract again. Of course this is true of many and probably the majority but not all.
I am reluctant to use personal examples as they miss the point, but my father-in-law lives entirely on benefits having pissed away a good career through reckless spending and professional misconduct.
In his case the fault is entirely his own and moreover you could have predicted it twenty years ago when he gave the clearly false impression of being very well-off.
I could not possibly comment on your father-in-law's case, nor could I on any case of anyone who receives welfare, for whatever reason. It isn't my place to judge whether someone is entitled to financial support, nor is it anyone's place. This is why I feel strongly about sanctions and punishments against those who are reliant on welfare to live; there are far too many cases where people who are genuinely reliant on welfare payments for survival having their payments stopped and then suffering or even dying as a result. There is no possible way we can have a system where the person sitting in the welfare office can make the right call, 100% of the time. And if that person is working for a privately-owned company whose profit targets create horrible incentives to deny welfare to a certain proportion of claimants, leaving them without much needed funds for weeks on end, forcing them to either starve, freeze or turn to loansharks in the interim. No surprise that most appeals against such decisions are successful, but by then the damage has usually been done. Loansharks make an absolute mint out of the desperate and destitute and many people are forced to turn to them because the welfare system has let them down.
Regardless of your father-in-laws's mistakes, as someone living on these Isles I would hope that he has enough to give him food, shelter and warmth. I'm not sure what you feel an acceptable poverty rate is in this country, one of the richest countries in the world, but here are some figures:
- our poverty rate has been rising since 2010 and is nearing 20% - over a quarter of British children now grow up in poverty - up to a third of disabled people in the UK live in poverty - over two thirds of those reliant on benefits to live are in employment - the majority of those on benefits are never out of work for more than 12 weeks - over half of children in poverty live in a household with at least one working parent - the number of people being trapped in a poverty cycle (where their poverty perpetuates their inability to rise out of it and improve their situation) is increasing
Clearly, the government's mantra, and what Theresa May spouted the other day, that all you need to do is simply work your way out of poverty, is false; simply having a job has little effect on whether you are able to escape poverty. Their system of sanctions and financial punishment against those who they feel are not pulling their weight enough does not work either and in a way is sickening; they starve some poor to send a message to the rest. It sounds more like something from Game of Thrones than a policy of a 21st century developed country.
The question we should be asking ourselves isn't "do the poor deserve to have enough money to live" but "do the poor have enough money to live". The answer to that question is emphatically "No".
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Except it's not evidence, is it? HCA's are not nurses. Try searching Nursing Times like I did too. Trainee nurses are also not nurses. Interesting blind 'likes' by 'the magnificent 7' people who haven't looked closely enough.
To use Cambridge University as an example, they estimate the actual cost (to them) of providing an undergraduate education to be £18k pa on average - in other words even at £9k pa, the taxpayer is still providing a 50% subsidy.
And you of all people simply blithely accept that figure?
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
No that's not what I mean....
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Except it's not evidence, is it? HCA's are not nurses. Try searching Nursing Times like I did too. Trainee nurses are also not nurses. Interesting blind 'likes' by people who haven't looked closely enough.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Except it's not evidence, is it? HCA's are not nurses. Try searching Nursing Times like I did too. Trainee nurses are also not nurses. Interesting blind 'likes' by people who haven't looked closely enough.
Michelle Murray, a single mum of four from Wigan who has been an NHS nurse for 16 years and visited a food bank for the first time this month.
Danielle Tiplady, a nurse: "As a nurse, I see my colleagues go to food banks because of low pay".
Marina Down, 23, a single mum in London training to become a nurse, says her lowest point came when she was forced to visit a food bank with her daughter.
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Partly the public sector pay freeze since 2010, so no pay rises for the first few years followed by below inflation pay rises, and spiralling rents, particularly in London. I suspect also specific people's circumstances - if you're a single Mum and you're having to work shifts a significant chunk of your pay packet is going to be going on childcare, you can't just rent a room in a house share, and you're less able to do bank shifts to top up your pay. In that case they've been less able to absorb the effective pay cut and still make ends meet.
Had to skip a few pages but an alert from my good friend @Dippenhall has dragged me back in.
On privatization. I think it is really important to revisit the nature and effectiveness of privatized utilities. I think it is right for Labour to target railways and water in this respect.
There was a bloke in Thatcher's earliest cabinet ( John Moore?) who said that the success test would be if privatization created competition, which in turn delivered better service.
Right then. Has anyone recently tried the competitive alternative to South Eastern Trains? Or how much better does the competitive water to that supplied by Thames Water taste? Epic fail there, I submit.
In the case of railways it is the ludicrous type of privatization that is the main problem. @Dippenhall cites the German model. He presumably thinks Deutsche Bahn is a private company. Well it is , but who is the largest shareholder? the German State, with 93%. DB retains both the infrastructure and the core intercity network. Why? because Germany understands that a smooth, super fast intercity network is essential to keep that country moving and doing business. There are private operators on the edges of the network, sometimes with quite large chunks, and they keep DB on their toes, but if you want to get from Frankfurt to Jever, as I did a while back, you don't have to worry about multiple ticket prices of different operators. The ticketing system is national and transparent.
I have no idea how the Germans do their water, but it surely is a key natural asset too. How can you possibly introduce competition into water? And if you can't, where is the benefit? It surely is a key strategic resource which should be in our hands. i was going to say in State hands. But of course water, like most of our energy, is now in State hands. The French State.
I am glad Labour have put this on the agenda. Nobody is happy with all aspects of any party's manifesto ( except the Ukippers pre 23 June, I suppose) , but these proposals on re-nationalization give me renewed resolve to vote for the excellent Clive Efford on June 8th.
The retail element of the water industry for non-household (Business Retail) opened up to competition in April. It is anticipated that household will follow suit. So there is now competition in the retail side for business if they think they can achieve cheaper prices or receive better service elsewhere, and there have been some new entrants to the market, but for most the margins are small.
Had to skip a few pages but an alert from my good friend @Dippenhall has dragged me back in.
On privatization. I think it is really important to revisit the nature and effectiveness of privatized utilities. I think it is right for Labour to target railways and water in this respect.
There was a bloke in Thatcher's earliest cabinet ( John Moore?) who said that the success test would be if privatization created competition, which in turn delivered better service.
Right then. Has anyone recently tried the competitive alternative to South Eastern Trains? Or how much better does the competitive water to that supplied by Thames Water taste? Epic fail there, I submit.
In the case of railways it is the ludicrous type of privatization that is the main problem. @Dippenhall cites the German model. He presumably thinks Deutsche Bahn is a private company. Well it is , but who is the largest shareholder? the German State, with 93%. DB retains both the infrastructure and the core intercity network. Why? because Germany understands that a smooth, super fast intercity network is essential to keep that country moving and doing business. There are private operators on the edges of the network, sometimes with quite large chunks, and they keep DB on their toes, but if you want to get from Frankfurt to Jever, as I did a while back, you don't have to worry about multiple ticket prices of different operators. The ticketing system is national and transparent.
I have no idea how the Germans do their water, but it surely is a key natural asset too. How can you possibly introduce competition into water? And if you can't, where is the benefit? It surely is a key strategic resource which should be in our hands. i was going to say in State hands. But of course water, like most of our energy, is now in State hands. The French State.
I am glad Labour have put this on the agenda. Nobody is happy with all aspects of any party's manifesto ( except the Ukippers pre 23 June, I suppose) , but these proposals on re-nationalization give me renewed resolve to vote for the excellent Clive Efford on June 8th.
The retail element of the water industry for non-household (Business Retail) opened up to competition in April. It is anticipated that household will follow suit. So there is now competition in the retail side for business if they think they can achieve cheaper prices or receive better service elsewhere, and there have been some new entrants to the market, but for most the margins are small.
My issue with this remains, as it does for transport, that basic requirements have been sold off to, often, foreign state owned companies and the massive profits they drive out of U.K. consumers helps them subsidise their services in their own countries.
Put it this way, even after we leave the EU, we will still be sending them billions by turning on a tap or travelling to work. Foreign states can make public services work. Get out of your pre-conceived mind-sets, on both sides, and make it work here.
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
No that's not what I mean....
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
The short answer is I don't know, but being a single parent seems to be the reason. Nurses are used as an example for emotive reasons, you and I do our jobs to increase the profit of a business they help people and save lives. £100k in 13 years, nice!
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
No that's not what I mean....
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
I guess we all have different lives.
Maybe you get married and have a couple of kids but your partner dies or leaves you. Meanwhile your elderly parents get ill and turn to you for some financial help.
So you get a job as a nurse because it's what you were trained to do...
I don't think someone in this situation has done anything wrong.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Except it's not evidence, is it? HCA's are not nurses. Try searching Nursing Times like I did too. Trainee nurses are also not nurses. Interesting blind 'likes' by people who haven't looked closely enough.
Michelle Murray, a single mum of four from Wigan who has been an NHS nurse for 16 years and visited a food bank for the first time this month.
Danielle Tiplady, a nurse: "As a nurse, I see my colleagues go to food banks because of low pay".
Marina Down, 23, a single mum in London training to become a nurse, says her lowest point came when she was forced to visit a food bank with her daughter.
Names and details. Is this evidence enough?
Taking those 3 examples, one is a single mum and a student, so the issues isn't a nurse on 21.5k but someone not earning anything (due to being a student) and bringing up a child alone, where is the father and what can we do to help students in that position? I suspect the London aspect doesn't help.
The other is a single mum of 4 who is a nurse, so again the issue isn't necessarily a nurses wage but the fact someone earning £21.5k a year trying to bring up and pay for a family of 5 on her own, where is the father of the 4 children and what has changed to make her now need to visit a food bank? In the past 7 years her annual net pay has increased by around £1500 a year. I suspect other changes have caused this, maybe the fathers done a bunk, we don't know though.
The last one is a nurse who know other nurses who visits food banks but we don't know their circumstances. But if a nurse on 21.5k is going to food banks due to that low pay then anyone earning that or less is and that's a fair proportion of the UK population.
So none of these are specific to nurses or someone earning close to the national average but have i suspect other influences.
I'm 100% behind nurses should be better paid for the job they do and I'd be happy to pay for that, but we need to look at the wider picture on food banks than headlines of 'nurses visit food banks' as I know many people earning less than nurses who don't.
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
No that's not what I mean....
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
Firstly no one has said there are "tonnes" of nurses using food banks.
Secondly, you do not know for certain whether someone is using a food bank (or not) because they are hardly likely to admit to you, a more senior colleague, if they or another colleague were. People using food banks do so out of desperation and are unlikely to want it known around the office if they are.
Nurses are on a higher wage than the grads starting in our agency... Speaking to someone on our grad scheme today and absolutely none of them are using food banks. Why do we always hear that nurses are using food banks?
Because it's a national embarrassment and a disgrace.
No that's not what I mean....
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see another one nyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
The short answer is I don't know, but being a single parent seems to be the reason. Nurses are used as an example for emotive reasons, you and I do our jobs to increase the profit of a business they help people and save lives. £100k in 13 years, nice!
I started on £14.5k in my first year out of Uni as an exec at my first agency - that was 2004. And as I said I don't look back at that time and remember being poverty stricken. Granted I never had the two kids I have now, but I am sure back then even if I was with my now wife I would have realised they don't fit on the budget sheet. My car was strictly there to get me from a to b and that therefore was reflected in what I paid for it. I didn't eat like a king - wasn't exactly visiting Waitrose every week. But I seem more conscious now of looking at the shopping receipt every night than I did back then.
Even now it is a case of live within my means. Missus doesn't allow any credit card balance to ever carry over more than 1 month. No car payments to last more than 2 years and balance at end must be affordable on less than one month of credit card payments. Have to save a certain amount every month.
I have friends who head off on holidays and are piling it up on cards. Holidays that I couldn't always afford yet I know they have far less money incoming. Getting cars on finance deals that are crazy in structure..... it's that kind of spending that will cause people issues in the long run.
If everyone lived within their means then there would arguably be less pressure on the benefits system meaning those who needed it the most genuinely got the help.
Much of what you say resonates but it's generic comments like 'no fault of their own' which will never sway the centre voters that Labour needs to attract again. Of course this is true of many and probably the majority but not all.
I am reluctant to use personal examples as they miss the point, but my father-in-law lives entirely on benefits having pissed away a good career through reckless spending and professional misconduct.
In his case the fault is entirely his own and moreover you could have predicted it twenty years ago when he gave the clearly false impression of being very well-off.
I could not possibly comment on your father-in-law's case, nor could I on any case of anyone who receives welfare, for whatever reason. It isn't my place to judge whether someone is entitled to financial support, nor is it anyone's place. This is why I feel strongly about sanctions and punishments against those who are reliant on welfare to live; there are far too many cases where people who are genuinely reliant on welfare payments for survival having their payments stopped and then suffering or even dying as a result. There is no possible way we can have a system where the person sitting in the welfare office can make the right call, 100% of the time. And if that person is working for a privately-owned company whose profit targets create horrible incentives to deny welfare to a certain proportion of claimants, leaving them without much needed funds for weeks on end, forcing them to either starve, freeze or turn to loansharks in the interim. No surprise that most appeals against such decisions are successful, but by then the damage has usually been done. Loansharks make an absolute mint out of the desperate and destitute and many people are forced to turn to them because the welfare system has let them down.
Regardless of your father-in-laws's mistakes, as someone living on these Isles I would hope that he has enough to give him food, shelter and warmth. I'm not sure what you feel an acceptable poverty rate is in this country, one of the richest countries in the world, but here are some figures:
- our poverty rate has been rising since 2010 and is nearing 20% - over a quarter of British children now grow up in poverty - up to a third of disabled people in the UK live in poverty - over two thirds of those reliant on benefits to live are in employment - the majority of those on benefits are never out of work for more than 12 weeks - over half of children in poverty live in a household with at least one working parent - the number of people being trapped in a poverty cycle (where their poverty perpetuates their inability to rise out of it and improve their situation) is increasing
Clearly, the government's mantra, and what Theresa May spouted the other day, that all you need to do is simply work your way out of poverty, is false; simply having a job has little effect on whether you are able to escape poverty. Their system of sanctions and financial punishment against those who they feel are not pulling their weight enough does not work either and in a way is sickening; they starve some poor to send a message to the rest. It sounds more like something from Game of Thrones than a policy of a 21st century developed country.
The question we should be asking ourselves isn't "do the poor deserve to have enough money to live" but "do the poor have enough money to live". The answer to that question is emphatically "No".
New York addick was right that personal examples miss the point - then he used that hypocritical three letter word - BUT and ignored his statement. Maybe we could build a big machine which can decide how deserving people are. Or maybe we should be less judgmental. We should all be fighting to get people out of poverty - that doesn't mean people shouldn't be rewarded for hard work and honest endeavour, but we are talking about those at the bottom.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Except in the evidence from the RCN to the NHS pay review board in the link, no.
Except it's not evidence, is it? HCA's are not nurses. Try searching Nursing Times like I did too. Trainee nurses are also not nurses. Interesting blind 'likes' by people who haven't looked closely enough.
Michelle Murray, a single mum of four from Wigan who has been an NHS nurse for 16 years and visited a food bank for the first time this month.
Danielle Tiplady, a nurse: "As a nurse, I see my colleagues go to food banks because of low pay".
Marina Down, 23, a single mum in London training to become a nurse, says her lowest point came when she was forced to visit a food bank with her daughter.
Names and details. Is this evidence enough?
Taking those 3 examples, one is a single mum and a student, so the issues isn't a nurse on 21.5k but someone not earning anything (due to being a student) and bringing up a child alone, where is the father and what can we do to help students in that position? I suspect the London aspect doesn't help.
The other is a single mum of 4 who is a nurse, so again the issue isn't necessarily a nurses wage but the fact someone earning £21.5k a year trying to bring up and pay for a family of 5 on her own, where is the father of the 4 children and what has changed to make her now need to visit a food bank? In the past 7 years her annual net pay has increased by around £1500 a year. I suspect other changes have caused this, maybe the fathers done a bunk, we don't know though.
The last one is a nurse who know other nurses who visits food banks but we don't know their circumstances. But if a nurse on 21.5k is going to food banks due to that low pay then anyone earning that or less is and that's a fair proportion of the UK population.
So none of these are specific to nurses or someone earning close to the national average but have i suspect other influences.
I'm 100% behind nurses should be better paid for the job they do and I'd be happy to pay for that, but we need to look at the wider picture on food banks than headlines of 'nurses visit food banks' as I know many people earning less than nurses who don't.
I think it is outrageous that many poor civil servants havent received a pay award above 1% since 2012 and that it was 0% for some years - not just nurses.
Comments
But that can't be the case, can it?
Because if it were true, then we would have to criticise the Home Secretary as well as Diane Abbot for not knowing - say - how much policemen earn.
But she'd never get caught on camera making up figures about police officers' salary. Would she?
I searched and found a case of a single mother trainee nurse but that was it.
None was forthcoming from those bandying the statement around on here, just the usual comments.
It was 92/93, I was what 10 going on 11. I fancied Jet from gladiators, we'd just returned to the Valley. I was allowed to go to night home games
That being 24/25 years ago, now I'm 35.
In 24/25 years from now I'll be trying to remember moderating the 2017 election thread. I'll be writing something like 'all I can remember is this fiiish character who had about 4/5 posts per page'
As I said before food banks are a national disgrace, and anyone using them should be a cause for criticism, but care should be taken when using emotive accusations.
Regardless of your father-in-laws's mistakes, as someone living on these Isles I would hope that he has enough to give him food, shelter and warmth. I'm not sure what you feel an acceptable poverty rate is in this country, one of the richest countries in the world, but here are some figures:
- our poverty rate has been rising since 2010 and is nearing 20%
- over a quarter of British children now grow up in poverty
- up to a third of disabled people in the UK live in poverty
- over two thirds of those reliant on benefits to live are in employment
- the majority of those on benefits are never out of work for more than 12 weeks
- over half of children in poverty live in a household with at least one working parent
- the number of people being trapped in a poverty cycle (where their poverty perpetuates their inability to rise out of it and improve their situation) is increasing
Clearly, the government's mantra, and what Theresa May spouted the other day, that all you need to do is simply work your way out of poverty, is false; simply having a job has little effect on whether you are able to escape poverty. Their system of sanctions and financial punishment against those who they feel are not pulling their weight enough does not work either and in a way is sickening; they starve some poor to send a message to the rest. It sounds more like something from Game of Thrones than a policy of a 21st century developed country.
The question we should be asking ourselves isn't "do the poor deserve to have enough money to live" but "do the poor have enough money to live". The answer to that question is emphatically "No".
HCA's are not nurses.
Try searching Nursing Times like I did too.
Trainee nurses are also not nurses.
Interesting blind 'likes' by 'the magnificent 7' people who haven't looked closely enough.
I am saying that nurses earn more money than many other professions who don't seem to use food banks as widely.
My example being a group of graduate ad execs on 18.5k are not using a food bank yet we apparently have tonnes of nurses on more than that who are..
Do get me wrong I don't like to see anyone using food banks but what is the reason? I lived away from home when i was on less than 20k - rented a flat with my mate in Sidcup, lived within my means (which admittedly didn't involve luxuries but that's all I could afford at the time) but was never close to not being able to eat.
Living to your means seems to be the key for me... 13 years later I live on 100k more than that but in many ways I don't 'feel' richer in the sense of having loads of cash left over at the end of every month. The difference being that he holidays, TVs, cars etc that I couldn't afford I now can. So my income has changed - and that's the difference. I have the flex to do the luxury things on top of the basic staples such as rent and food. When I was on less than 20k - well I couldn't afford that so missed out. But was never close to not being able to eat as I made a conscious decision to only do other things I once that was taken care of.
Danielle Tiplady, a nurse: "As a nurse, I see my colleagues go to food banks because of low pay".
Marina Down, 23, a single mum in London training to become a nurse, says her lowest point came when she was forced to visit a food bank with her daughter.
Names and details. Is this evidence enough?
Put it this way, even after we leave the EU, we will still be sending them billions by turning on a tap or travelling to work. Foreign states can make public services work. Get out of your pre-conceived mind-sets, on both sides, and make it work here.
Maybe you get married and have a couple of kids but your partner dies or leaves you. Meanwhile your elderly parents get ill and turn to you for some financial help.
So you get a job as a nurse because it's what you were trained to do...
I don't think someone in this situation has done anything wrong.
The other is a single mum of 4 who is a nurse, so again the issue isn't necessarily a nurses wage but the fact someone earning £21.5k a year trying to bring up and pay for a family of 5 on her own, where is the father of the 4 children and what has changed to make her now need to visit a food bank? In the past 7 years her annual net pay has increased by around £1500 a year. I suspect other changes have caused this, maybe the fathers done a bunk, we don't know though.
The last one is a nurse who know other nurses who visits food banks but we don't know their circumstances. But if a nurse on 21.5k is going to food banks due to that low pay then anyone earning that or less is and that's a fair proportion of the UK population.
So none of these are specific to nurses or someone earning close to the national average but have i suspect other influences.
I'm 100% behind nurses should be better paid for the job they do and I'd be happy to pay for that, but we need to look at the wider picture on food banks than headlines of 'nurses visit food banks' as I know many people earning less than nurses who don't.
Secondly, you do not know for certain whether someone is using a food bank (or not) because they are hardly likely to admit to you, a more senior colleague, if they or another colleague were. People using food banks do so out of desperation and are unlikely to want it known around the office if they are.
Well done on your progression btw.
Even now it is a case of live within my means. Missus doesn't allow any credit card balance to ever carry over more than 1 month. No car payments to last more than 2 years and balance at end must be affordable on less than one month of credit card payments. Have to save a certain amount every month.
I have friends who head off on holidays and are piling it up on cards. Holidays that I couldn't always afford yet I know they have far less money incoming. Getting cars on finance deals that are crazy in structure..... it's that kind of spending that will cause people issues in the long run.
If everyone lived within their means then there would arguably be less pressure on the benefits system meaning those who needed it the most genuinely got the help.
What the Tories ever done for the rich.