General Election June 8th

[vonkeynotvenky]

That woman's journey fascinates me.

Corbyn must love the woman. But incredibly she gets to be a councillor after being a member of that outfit, cross party scoundrels who do anything for power.

 

[SWP's back]

How come so many are living in poverty?

Because poverty is now defined as not being able to go on a foreign holiday or take your kids to the cinema as opposed to feed and clothe oneself.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Corbyn must love the woman. But incredibly she gets to be a councillor after being a member of that outfit, cross party scoundrels who do anything for power.

I'm putting party politics to one side; I'm talking about her journey. Absolutely incredible. She talks so frankly about her former life. Doesn't try to justify or dramatise it. I find that admirable. People can change.

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

I'm putting party politics to one side; I'm talking about her journey. Absolutely incredible. She talks so frankly about her former life. Doesn't try to justify or dramatise it. I find that admirable. People can change.

You're a more understanding person than me my friend, I can't see past the fact she was a member of the IRA, I wonder if she ever entered into politics in Dublin where she is from?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

You're a more understanding person than me my friend, I can't see past the fact she was a member of the IRA, I wonder if she ever entered into politics in Dublin where she is from?

We all have a different way of looking at the world, mate. There's no right or wrong way to do that.

 

[Damocles]

Because poverty is now defined as not being able to go on a foreign holiday or take your kids to the cinema as opposed to feed and clothe oneself.

Which is exactly right.

Relative poverty based on median household income is only non-stupid way of defining poverty.

Otherwise we'd be saying that having 1 potato means you're not in poverty like the 1300s.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Which is exactly right.

Relative poverty based on median household income is only non-stupid way of defining poverty.

Otherwise we'd be saying that having 1 potato means you're not in poverty like the 1300s.

If you had a potato in the 1300s, you were on a different continent.

 

[The perfect fumble]

 

[Mike N]

If you had a potato in the 1300s, you were on a different continent.

Very good!

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

If you had a potato in the 1300s, you were on a different continent.

It was a different world then....

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It was a different world then....

I'm always the master of understatement.

 

[SWP's back]

Which is exactly right.

Relative poverty based on median household income is only non-stupid way of defining poverty.

Otherwise we'd be saying that having 1 potato means you're not in poverty like the 1300s.

I'm not saying it isn't correct. I'm explaining to Law74 how 'poverty' can increase whilst GDP increases.

Many still think poverty means what it did in Victorian times or what it means even now in the Sudan.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

Which is exactly right.

Relative poverty based on median household income is only non-stupid way of defining poverty.

Otherwise we'd be saying that having 1 potato means you're not in poverty like the 1300s.

An absolutely ludicrous point of view. Everyone would have to have the same income in your world view to avoid poverty, utterly ludicrous.

Going to the cinema and on holiday is a luxury people have to earn. It's shameful that these days people consider not having high-end luxury as a sign of poverty. Not being able to eat after selling all your luxuries is a sign of poverty,

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Your opinion mate - i strongly disagree - think they have done a good job.

Have your kids' schools started asking you for voluntary contributions yet?

 

[SWP's back]

Have your kids' schools started asking you for voluntary contributions yet?

Have yours?

 

[SWP's back]

I don't think wibbly wobbly may will last long as leader of the opposition, & not sure if Bojo will be up to the task or not.

I don't think she will be in a position to prove you right or not.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Have yours?

Mine are both well out of school but yes they did when they were there.

 

[cibaman]

It means they will bin it, or Corbyn will do his level best to bin it, it's what he's preached and agitated for all his life.
They've been put in an intolerable position, with a leader who flat out refuses to say he'd use a nuclear deterrent,
but has had to bow to the unpalatable fact that the PLP know that won't wash, so comes out with his 'Acceptance of the party's wishes.'
Well, such dissembling nonsense may put the issue on the back burner, but to have a leader of the country who has no intention of using
its deterrent, makes renewing it totally pointless, if they had said exactly that, and gone with the saving £30 billion or whatever,
to be spent on more vote winning goodies, I could understand it.

Surely if he became PM and the party policy was still to renew trident he would have to resign?

 

[GeekinGav]

got a ballot in the post yesterday for Stalybridge Members of Parliament. Is that my vote for the GE? only had Cons, Labour, LibDems and Green Party on it.

Left it on the table as i dont trust Corbyn, Wibbly Wobbly (assume thats May) was invisible as a leader of the people taking 13 hours after the attack to address the people (i know she was probably working behind the scenes couldn't spare a few minutes of face time to reassure the public?). Farron, i don't know what century he's living in or nor does he know what century the rest of us are living in.

i just dont know and still feel raw this week to make a logically decision instead of an emotional backlash one.

 

[SWP's back]

Mine are both well out of school but yes they did when they were there.

Given your political bent I will assume that was under Thatcher?