Calling all Tories. Why do you Tory?

Ban-jani said:
Rather than deploying the tactics of the bullies on here, why don’t you actually say what’s wrong with my post and try and counter it?

The early 2020 budget, before Covid was the highest increase in public spending since Blair’s government. It’s not a controversial statement at all, it’s the truth.



www.google.co.uk

Budget 2020: Rishi Sunak turns on taps with £30bn splurge

Chancellor announces £12bn to fight coronavirus and £18bn on ‘levelling up’ in reversal of Tory orthodoxy
www.google.co.uk www.google.co.uk

Your problem is you’ve convinced yourself the Tories want to starve people to death and you cannot look beyond that. So when I give you facts that show there’s a difference between Cameron’s government and this one, you can’t see beyond your own red mist.

For the record I had a drink last night but I wasn’t really pissed. You’ve got no excuse to post the above at this time.

Now do you want to try and tell me why it’s bollocks and I am wrong, or do you want to continue shouting at me?
Click to expand...

No, my problem is not that I’ve convinced myself that the tories want to starve people to death. That’s either a deliberate misstatement of my position on your part, or a misunderstanding of it. I’ll let you be the judge of which, but neither is particularly impressive.

My position is that it is morally wrong for any government to refuse assistance to the neediest in our society. The fact that in other areas they do better does not excuse the fact that it is now government policy to turn people in need away and send them to food banks.

Do you deny that that is what is happening? Do you say that foodbanks are not necessary because anyone in a crisis situation can access government funding? Do you understand that food banks exist to meet the shortfall that government choices have created? Do you say that emergency funding, crisis loans, hardship payments and other short term emergency measures are available and people are just too lazy to access them?

Try to focus on the existence of foodbanks, because that is the fundamental issue I am discussing. There should be no need for their existence other than in a handful of cases where people are unable or unwilling to engage with the state. They have become, in ten short years, a necessity for hundreds of thousands of people. Are you really okay with that state of affairs? Whatever else they do right, whatever else they do wrong, it is immoral for any government to refuse to feed its people when they cannot feed themselves. The fact that people have to go to them, because the government will not help, is proof without need for further evidence that the government is breaching its most basic obligation to its people. The fact that it complies with other duties, eg the duty to defend the realm, or ensure the streets are policed, does not excuse this basic failing.
 
Chris in London said:
No, my problem is not that I’ve convinced myself that the tories want to starve people to death. That’s either a deliberate misstatement of my position on your part, or a misunderstanding of it. I’ll let you be the judge of which, but neither is particularly impressive.

My position is that it is morally wrong for any government to refuse assistance to the neediest in our society. The fact that in other areas they do better does not excuse the fact that it is now government policy to turn people in need away and send them to food banks.

Do you deny that that is what is happening? Do you say that foodbanks are not necessary because anyone in a crisis situation can access government funding? Do you understand that food banks exist to meet the shortfall that government choices have created? Do you say that emergency funding, crisis loans, hardship payments and other short term emergency measures are available and people are just too lazy to access them?

Try to focus on the existence of foodbanks, because that is the fundamental issue I am discussing. There should be no need for their existence other than in a handful of cases where people are unable or unwilling to engage with the state. They have become, in ten short years, a necessity for hundreds of thousands of people. Are you really okay with that state of affairs? Whatever else they do right, whatever else they do wrong, it is immoral for any government to refuse to feed its people when they cannot feed themselves. The fact that people have to go to them, because the government will not help, is proof without need for further evidence that the government is breaching its most basic obligation to its people. The fact that it complies with other duties, eg the duty to defend the realm, or ensure the streets are policed, does not excuse this basic failing.
Click to expand...
Hang on, just reverse a second, you have just come on this morning and gone in two footed on what I said last night. Calling it total bollocks and stating I was drunk and need to not post when I’ve had a drink.

All for what, me saying that actually the last Tory budget before Covid changed everything was the highest increase in public spending since Blair’s days?

I then backed it up with an article, from an anti-Tory newspaper no less, that contained statistics that showed the state was set to grow and to potentially levels even beyond Blair’s days.

Now you’ve chosen to sidestep that and rant about what you’ve constantly done for two days.

I am not being dragged in to hyperbolic rants that do not focus on facts, they focus on emotions based on opinion. I’ve just shown you why what you’re saying is wrong of this government and why Sunak’s position differentiates significantly from Osbourne’s ideology.
 
Ban-jani said:
Hang on, just reverse a second, you have just come on this morning and gone in two footed on what I said last night. Calling it total bollocks and stating I was drunk and need to not post when I’ve had a drink.

All for what, me saying that actually the last Tory budget before Covid changed everything was the highest increase in public spending since Blair’s days?

I then backed it up with an article, from an anti-Tory newspaper no less, that contained statistics that showed the state was set to grow and to potentially levels even beyond Blair’s days.

Now you’ve chosen to sidestep that and rant about what you’ve constantly done for two days.

I am not being dragged in to hyperbolic rants that do not focus on facts, they focus on emotions based on opinion. I’ve just shown you why what you’re saying is wrong of this government and why Sunak’s position differentiates significantly from Osbourne’s ideology.
Click to expand...

I’ve had enough of this. What I’ve said is perfectly clear, and as you’re a bright bloke I refuse to accept you can’t understand the point that the need for sections of the population to access foodbanks is an unacceptable failure of government whatever else they do.

Have a nice life.
 
Chris in London said:
I’ve had enough of this. What I’ve said is perfectly clear, and as you’re a bright bloke I refuse to accept you can’t understand the point that the need for sections of the population to access foodbanks is an unacceptable failure of government whatever else they do.

Have a nice life.
Click to expand...
You couldn’t even bring yourself to retract what you first posted to me this morning.

I refuse to believe it’s a black and white scenario, that is all I have said.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend, especially the football.
 
Chris in London said:
Bore off you utter twerp.

I was replying to Rascal.

I said if YOU were to write a post about what was wrong with Thatchers government. Ie if RASCAL was. Upset you did it, that some people don’t see your idol the way you do? Bless.

Social security rates have always been low, for obvious reasons, but whatever other criticisms can be made of Thatcher’s government, and whatever else she privatised, she never privatised the obligation to feed the people who couldn’t feed themselves.

Your world view seems to be that sending people to the charitable sector so they can feed themselves is a good thing. Do tell me if I’m wrong about that. And do explain why it is acceptable for the government to fail in that most basic duty.
Click to expand...
And you piss off, you know nowt. You said at least the Thatcher era fed everyone, or words to that effect, whoever you were talking to, I was actually criticising her, as I was there at the time, and many folk were really suffering, as your benefits
were fucking miserly, have you ever claimed, were you around then?
Tell us what you got, or any experience of someone you knew at the time,
and check the current yougov rates now.
I knew fucking plenty around that time who were absolutely skint, doing odd
jobs whilst claiming the pittance you got then on the sly, and fair play to them. My world view isn't 'sending' anyone anywhere, it's based on experiences at the time, tell us what yours are.
 
Ancient Citizen said:
And you piss off, you know nowt. You said at least the Thatcher era fed everyone, or words to that effect, whoever you were talking to, I was actually criticising her, as I was there at the time, and many folk were really suffering, as your benefits
were fucking miserly, have you ever claimed, were you around then?
Tell us what you got, or any experience of someone you knew at the time,
and check the current yougov rates now.
I knew fucking plenty around that time who were absolutely skint, doing odd
jobs whilst claiming the pittance you got then on the sly, and fair play to them. My world view isn't 'sending' anyone anywhere, it's based on experiences at the time, tell us what yours are.
Click to expand...
Bore off
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.