Newsnight on Welfare

White Dee and Will Hutton are on though, and someone who runs a food bank.

Yes but the Government should be prepared to defend their record - the ones you mention aren't standing for election and by refusing, they prevented the Labour Party from challenging them

I agree, GrannyTwice. Tomorrow we will probably hear the Tories complain that they were not allowed on Newsnight.
I actually found myself clapping Will Hutton, a very weird experience as I am on my own.
I was so angry when watching the man who had lost his job at the age of 59 and had to use a food bank after being sanctioned by a young kid for not applying for enough jobs. The house he was living in was disgusting. Nobody should have to live in those conditions.

Just seen this, GrannyTwice.

voxpoliticalonline.com/2015/04/21/tories-run-from-welfare-debate-after-camerons-marr-show-disaster/

I didn't know anything about the 'debate' in question, as DH chooses all the TV in our house. Just as well I didn't see it, as my blood pressure probably couldn't have taken it!

I've just had a look at the last link you gave us, DJ. It sums up so well what some of us have known for quite a while about the effects of the welfare changes and also the Tories avoidance of all situations where the realities (including all their lies over supposed savings) might come to light.
Why oh why are the mainstream media not getting this information out there? It really needs to be out there for all to see before it's too late.

Could it be that much of the media is owned by those who have no wish to rock any boats??

I think that the Tories are busy shooting themselves in the foot with their reluctance to debate issues.

I have long since forgotten why the Tories are not in debates.

Apparently Cameron was interviewed on Radio 4 this morning by a group of young voters. He was asked if he could live on the minimum wage, and could not say what it was.
He also said something about how much his party was doing for the homeless, whereupon a young woman told him that she had ended up homeless because the DWP said they could do nothing for her.

This story of the poor guy is awful, as was the story of the woman who took her own life because of the bedroom tax. Enough said.

I do wish that all politicans had a firmer grasp of figures.
They are supposed to run the economy of the country, and all other departments. I wouldnt let some of them near my household accounts.

Ah but soon, they have exactly the grasp they want of the figures they want. Have you heard the joke about accountants going for an interview? First candidate goes in - just one question - what does 2 and 2 make? 4 says the candidate. Thank you - next and so on -all with same result. Finally number 5 goes in - what does 2 and 2 make ? The candidate replies - what number did you have in mind ? He got the job of course. The other joke about figures and politicians is supposed to have happened with Churchill and I think Ian Macleod ( who was his junior PPS). Churchill wanted the statistics on trends in infant mortality. He makes it clear that he needs what he calls 'political statistics' which means he said 'that I want you to provide statistics that prove that less babies died when I was PM then when anyone else was. That young man' he apparently boomed 'is a political statistic'

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

You are getting very annoying Pension 60, go away....

Your posts are too long. No-one stays interested in them long enough to agree or disagree. Have you tried condensing all of this verbiage into one short memorable sentence?

Well done GNHQ.

I am looking forward to the new "Ruth Goodson?" reality TV series about living in poverty in Victorian times with Ann Widdicome, Angus Deayton, Tyger double barelled name soon to be shown - the contrast between then (only a short time ago in real historical times) and now, will shock so many people. Not saying we "have never had it so good" but a hovering thought in the background of my mind.

They should have Nick Hewer and Margaret whatshername ( not meaning to be discourteous, but I really cannot remember her surname) taking real poor people to live in Victorian hovels, just to find out how close it really is.

They could come and live in Beamish for a month.

I am not sure that the two can be compared.
Those living today, have regular money coming into the households, week by week.
But yes, if it is getting spent on past debts or drugs or whatever, then their living abode is not likely to be great.

There are comparisons with how they live now to then.
Sort of made me realise that money is not all the answer really.

Those little farm cottages in Beamish are absolute luxury durhamjencompared to the living conditions many would have lived in at the time. Actually a hundred times better than the 2 rooms I lived in as a child in the 1960's. Although I do see where you are coming from.

Even a little more money would have lifted the Victorian poor out of the gutter and into what would have seemed to them unimaginable luxury. Don't knock it - money may not be all, but it does buy food and clothes.

What they were in need of was a fair return for their work, in money and consideration, and a social structure where they were not exploited. Many Victorians agreed and worked to reform things.

Also, do remember that these dreadful conditions had been considered OK for the poor for centuries ("The poor you have with you always" said around 30AD) The Victorians did not invent poverty, but better travel and communications exposed it.

I was Googling for "Victorian benefactors" to add to my previous post when I found this article. An interesting view. "Charity" has gained a different aspect over the last century and a half to the one the writer describes.
www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/social-justice/welfare-and-charity-lessons-from-victorian-england.html