General Politics Thread

[Baxter Parp]

[NotThePars]

I... I didn't write the piece.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

You'll upset a lot of folk on here with that post.  It goes against the 'privileged pensioner' concept that most posters on here subscribe to, including those who should know better.
 

Not arguing the actual status of the UK state pension, but I will happily argue that today's pensioners are by an absolute mile, the most comfortably off of all age groups.

I don't think we're all that far away from seeing it means-tested either.

I... I didn't write the piece.

You forgot that Oaksoft is as thick as fucking pigshit.

[Granny Danger]

46 minutes ago, jupe1407 said:

 

Not arguing the actual status of the UK state pension, but I will happily argue that today's pensioners are by an absolute mile, the most comfortably off of all age groups.

I don't think we're all that far away from seeing it means-tested either.



You forgot that Oaksoft is as thick as fucking pigshit.

 

Incredible that you will:

1. Ignore the facts in the post made by Baxter Park;

2. Make a huge generalisation to try to support your own prejudices; and

3. In the same post accuse someone else as being as thick as pigshit.

There are many wealthy pensioners, many more are comfortably off and many are living in poverty or near poverty.  For you and others to try to portray them as a homogeneous group is lazy thinking.

The Tories no doubt love your general approach to this though.

 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Granny Danger

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Incredible that you will:
1. Ignore the facts in the post made by Baxter Park;
2. Make a huge generalisation to try to support your own prejudices; and
3. In the same post accuse someone else as being as thick as pigshit.
There are many wealthy pensioners, many more are comfortably off and many are living in poverty or near poverty.  For you and others to try to portray them as a homogeneous group is lazy thinking.
The Tories no doubt love your general approach to this though.
 

Calm down tiny tears.

Firstly, I literally acknowledged BP's post about the state pension.

Secondly, my opinion is based on carrying out hundreds, if not thousands of benefit checks for people of all ages. I have infinitely more experience of this stuff than you do, still, feel free to demonstrate your extensive experience in this field.

Thirdly, I wasn't recommending means testing of SP, however I do believe it will happen in the not too distant future.

Finally, my general approach to welfare is to do my best to obtain benefits for people who come to my work for help, pretty much the direct opposite of Tory thinking, you daft, angry old c**t.

[Granny Danger]

6 minutes ago, jupe1407 said:

 

Calm down tiny tears.

Firstly, I literally acknowledged BP's post about the state pension.

Secondly, my opinion is based on carrying out hundreds, if not thousands of benefit checks for people of all ages. I have infinitely more experience of this stuff than you do, still, feel free to demonstrate your extensive experience in this field.

Thirdly, I wasn't recommending means testing of SP, however I do believe it will happen in the not too distant future.

Finally, my general approach to welfare is to do my best to obtain benefits for people who come to my work for help, pretty much the direct opposite of Tory thinking, you daft, angry old c**t.
 

 

Your personal experience has no relevance on the level of pensioner poverty in Scotland or the UK so don’t suggest it does.  The implication that your personal knowledge overrides my statement about the level of pensioner poverty is nonsensical.

Making wide sweeping statements about pensioners, as you did, ignores and seeks to minimise that level of poverty.

I made no reference to means testing or potential means testing so I have no idea what you’re on about.

The reason it is a Tory argument is it seeks to differentiate between the need to address problems of  different groups in need.  Let’s concentrate on ‘pensioners’, or ‘low paid’ or ‘single parents’ or ‘students’; it pitches one group of disadvantaged against others.  Nothing the Tories like more is a bit of divide and rule.

If we managed the economy of this country properly we could address the need of the disadvantaged in all these groups rather than suggesting that some are a class of “comfortably off”.

Your need to retort to personal insults simply acknowledges the flaws in your position.

 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Your personal experience has no relevance on the level of pensioner poverty in Scotland or the UK so don’t suggest it does.  The implication that your personal knowledge overrides my statement about the level of pensioner poverty is nonsensical.
Making wide sweeping statements about pensioners, as you did, ignores and seeks to minimise that level of poverty.
I made no reference to means testing or potential means testing so I have no idea what you’re on about.
The reason it is a Tory argument is it seeks to differentiate between the need to address problems of  different groups in need.  Let’s concentrate on ‘pensioners’, or ‘low paid’ or ‘single parents’ or ‘students’; it pitches one group of disadvantaged against others.  Nothing the Tories like more is a bit of divide and rule.
If we managed the economy of this country properly we could address the need of the disadvantaged in all these groups rather than suggesting that some are a class of “comfortably off”.
Your need to retort to personal insults simply acknowledges the flaws in your position.
 

However my post simply stated that pensioners were better off than all other age groups. Are you saying this is not the case? Additionally, I'd be willing to bet the numbers of pensioners in both relative and absolute poverty will be far less than those of working age. Again, feel free to show this isn't the case. Try responding to the points made instead of hiding behind teary-eyed "Divide and rule" shite.

Your final statement about personal insults is frankly laughable, considering your previous for that, and aggression on this website [emoji38]

[git-intae-thum]

1 hour ago, jupe1407 said:

 

However my post simply stated that pensioners were better off than all other age groups. Are you saying this is not the case? Additionally, I'd be willing to bet the numbers of pensioners in both relative and absolute poverty will be far less than those of working age. Again, feel free to show this isn't the case. Try responding to the points made instead of hiding behind teary-eyed "Divide and rule" shite.

Your final statement about personal insults is frankly laughable, considering your previous for that, and aggression on this website





 

 

By and large they voted no/leave.

Little sympathy I'm afraid.

 

[John Lambies Doos]

Granny D... Hope you enjoying your holiday and not just your smart phone.

[DrewDon]

^ Yer mum. 

[John Lambies Doos]

^ Yer mum. 

 

^ Yer Sheep

[Granny Danger]

16 hours ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Granny D... Hope you enjoying your holiday and not just your smart phone.

Have done over 30 miles walking in three and a half days.  Posting on here is my way of decompressing between the sightseeing.

 

 

 

[Baxter Parp]

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-42320052?ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbc_breaking&ns_source=twitter&ns_linkname=news_central

UK inflation rate rises to 3.1%

[Suspect Device]

Aye but with wage growth at 2.2% we're only 0.9% worse off every year.

So that's OK then???

[Scary Bear]

Aye but with wage growth at 2.2% we're only 0.9% worse off every year.
So that's OK then???

What’s wage growth?

[jakedee]

What’s wage growth?

It's an average taken between directors,CEO's etc and ordinary workers.

[Suspect Device]

1 hour ago, Scary Bear said:

 

What’s wage growth?

 

 

Mine?

About -60%

 

 

Edit: Actually at the moment it's -100%

Edited December 12, 2017 by Suspect Device

[GTG_03]

I knew it. She's after the PM'S job. She doesn't care a jot about the people she's supposed to be representing, it's all about her career and that's it.
Rape clause? No problem for Ruth
Benefit cuts for the poorest? Bring it on.

If she actually became PM she will have to actually have some policies and answer questions though. Could be amusing.

NO 2ND REFERENDUM !!

[DublinMagyar]

I knew it. She's after the PM'S job. She doesn't care a jot about the people she's supposed to be representing, it's all about her career and that's it.
Rape clause? No problem for Ruth
Benefit cuts for the poorest? Bring it on.

If she actually became PM she will have to actually have some policies and answer questions though. Could be amusing.

NO 2ND REFERENDUM !!

Why? TM has no policies and doesn't answer questions

[btb]

17 hours ago, GTG_03 said:

 

 

 

I knew it. She's after the PM'S job. She doesn't care a jot about the people she's supposed to be representing, it's all about her career and that's it.
Rape clause? No problem for Ruth
Benefit cuts for the poorest? Bring it on.

If she actually became PM she will have to actually have some policies and answer questions though. Could be amusing.

NO 2ND REFERENDUM !!

 

It's clearly what she's been angling for since the last GE. I suppose the big question is whether she will have faith in the Tory revival in Scotland in that GE being repeated or whether she'll be off to a safe seat in the shires.

Edited December 13, 2017 by btb