Labour supporters may be ignorant.

Yes, humptydumpty, because there have always been people who will be on that lowest rung of the ladder in terms of income. I lived in darned cardigans and hid from the rent man.

It's not desirable to have to make ends meet but so many of our generation, and those after us, as Annie has just mentioned, know what is is to make ends meet on a meagre income. It's hard.

Aggressive Labour/Momentum followers may imagine it is outrageous to struggle, (and they'll blame the government) but it's not a new phenomenon, unfortunately.

In making a case for the left they will ALWAYS use worse case scenarios, not best case ones, like working classes making head way and having realistic goals and aspirations, even on low incomes.

Between the gutter and Mayfair life there is a huge middle ground of people who want their concerns addressed too, but no, see how many times food banks are used in left wing contributors arguments as if they are the norm.

I wish that no one had to use food banks but how do you completely eradicate poverty? There are measure a government can take to raise money for services but even then there are those who will struggle no matter how much intervention is provided. That's a fact of life sadly.

Those people are not the norm. Their plight needs addressing but so do SO many others.

Pray tell what political ideology completely wipes out struggle? Where did it happen and when?

Corbyn's promises may well tempt many "ordinary" voters , but paying for them could be another matter.

And once again Trisher you are spouting WORST CASE SCENARIOS, as if every other person in the UK knew this sort of awful deprivation and as though it is the personal fault of government.

It isn't.

But Day6 it is the government's fault. This government has been in power for 7 years now and our incomes are at pre2008 levels. Millions of people in this country do know that level of deprivation and some of them are 2nd generation. The government is responsible for every single decision it makes.

This government does not have the political will to -

1. Provide the money for the NHS to improve services.
2. Fund the building thousands of social housing homes.
3. Fund infrastructure outside of London.
4. Fund Social Care
5. Raise Income Tax even 1p to fund some of these much needed things.

I could go on. Every single decision taken by this government means it lacks the political will to do something else. Things could be different if the government had the political will to make it happen. It does not.

That is why I hope the Labour Party does get into power because then we might see some decisions being made that help the disadvantaged and poorer people who are the worst affected by the decisions made by this government.

And borrow billions which will be around the necks of our grandchildren

Trisher thinks the seventies were better than now , no, there were no food banks, not as many benefits,

Have you seen how much the Tory government has increased the debt by borrowing? More each month of austerity. And nothing done with it. Labour have promised to borrow to invest, which will have returns in both economic and social matters. And their manifesto was fully costed, if you remember.

Remembering their manifesto is no problem, believing it? difficult

Yes, Annie we need to borrow to invest in the country to stimulate the economy. The current approach isn't exactly a roaring success is it?

Annie where is the logic in not believing a costed manifesto, but believing in the current government which has revised forecast after forecast, reneged on promise after promise, brought in policy after policy not even in its manifesto? I too lived through the 70s and I felt more secure under a Labour government than I ever have under a Tory government.

Wilma, when have I ever said I believe anything the present government has said?

I await a reply, I will not accept untruths about me , I do not lie and expect the same courtesy in return

Annie I was not saying any untruths about you and I'm taken aback that you should think this of me. I simply asked you why you find it hard to believe a costed manifesto? Isn't it logical to think you prefer the status quo in this case? I assure you that no offence was intended and I hope my posting history on GN backs me up.

Wilma, you said - where is the logic in not believing a costed manifesto but believing in the current government . You addressed this to me . I do not support a Tory government but do not trust the Millitants who are controlling the Labour Party.

Do tell which government has carried out every promise in it's manifesto

Annie I know what I said. I was not intending to cause offence and I apologise if that's how my post made you feel. I will not be drawn in to an argument with you about this.

I do not think any other government's manifesto is relevant because it's the current government that concerns me.

Interesting that people think life was harder when they were younger. Is the attitude that we are supposed to take that there will always be people who are poorer? I have no complaints about that. BUT I do think it is reasonable to accept that even the poorest should have a place to live and should be able to eat without relying on charity. I remeber that there was a huge outcry when the film Cathy Come Home was first seen and there was much said about such a situation being unacceptable in a civilised society. Yet today over 50,000 families are in temporary accommodation. The numbers in B&B accommodation has increased by 300% in the last five years, and nothing is said. Possibly because there are landlords who are being paid thousands for substandard accommodation. And no-one says anything.
www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/24/homelessness-england-families-temporary-accommodation-bed-and-breakfast
If wanting proper homes for families makes me a rabid left winger then so be it.

The situation is simple for me. I can not support a government which legislates policy of which the consequences are detrimental to the most disadvantaged and the poorest in our society.

Such a pity we have to hear tales of nurses and police officers having to use food banks .

Trisher all you listed concerns others as much as rabid left wingers , not all trust rabid left wing governments though, I do not.

Neither can I Wilma, but I cannot support the front bench of the official opposition party either

Is the attitude that we are supposed to take that there will always be people who are poorer?

It's not an attitude though, is it?

All the positive thinking in the world doesn't change things, unfortunately, nor can any government concentrate solely or spend solely on one sector of society.

Yes, those struggling should be aided and since my childhood in the 1950s and 1960s things have improved incredibly in the way we care more and do more for those with little , those who are disadvantaged. We talk more about struggle than we ever did.
The "I know my place" sketch comes to mind and we have over the years broken down social barriers by dint of education, awareness and opportunity. I grew up at a time when people were too proud to claim benefits . There was a stigma attached to them so we grew up knowing our efforts mattered if we wanted to get on in the world. Consciousness has been raised and positive discrimination and intervention is now more widespread. The food banks, needed by those who don't have the income to buy food for whatever reason is an intervention that has only recently existed. The shame that some need to use them is a problem not easily solved. The reasons why people don't have food are many and varied and lifestyle is often a cause of poverty, even in a welfare state. It's a truth many on the left don't embrace and a reason why many will be on the streets for much of their lifetime, many will be homeless, many will need handouts. There isn't just one way to live and of course we have an obligation to look out for those who don't manage life so well, for whatever reason.
Many have moved on because of advocates, opportunities, and schemes which they have taken advantage of, all ways out of poverty. You can lead a horse to water though, but you cannot make it drink and this is true of the way people function as well. This is why we will never eradicate poverty no matter how much money we throw at the problem. We have a duty to keep plugging away though, and we do and no longer is there only one party for the working class.
Having a conscience and caring is not the preserve of the militant left wing but the way they spew hatred for anyone who doesn't vote as they do is counter productive. They alienate those who once voted Labour.

I certaintly have been alienated by the militant left wing.

the inability of the far left here to accept and respect others disagree with their militant views,

I am concerned about the power .Len McClusky will be handed yet am accused of being against unions followed by a lecture on the birth of unions.

Should unions have had the power to demand Lord Robbins should not resign after the deaths of over 100 children, should unions have had the power to make a village pay for the removal of unsafe tips? They did both.

It is an attitude Day6 much as you may wish it wasn't. What really upsets me is that the generation who grew up with the protection of the Welfare State introduced by a Labour Party, far more Left wing than anything in existance now, would deny this protection to others.
We had, free school meals for all unemployed, (in school holidays as well), free healthcare, free education including university and college, with support for expenses, proper social housing and standards for it. As an example, there used to be rules in social housing for the ages at which siblings could share a bedroom. It was 10 year for eldest. How do I know? When my brother was 10 we moved from a 2 to a 3 bed house because it was considered unsuitable for us to share a room. Now families are housed in 1 B&B room and can stay there for over a year.
Families were poor but supported, now they are left to survive as best they can.

Big difference in the number going to university in 1945 and 2017.

And the 1945 labour government were voted out after one term

We cannot compare the health care available in 1948 and 2017, when I was ayoung a parent in a care home was something to be ashamed of. The first knee replacement was carried out in 1968 not 1848

Why shouldn't we compare it Annie? Possibly because although we are a much richer country the level of health care provided is so much poorer than that in 1948 when we were still suffering the huge cost of a war, when there were district nurses, mobile midwives and even home helps?

"What really upsets me is that the generation who grew up with the protection of the Welfare State introduced by a Labour Party, far more Left wing than anything in existance now, would deny this protection to others."

That is rubbish. The creation of the welfare state almost 90 years ago was a one off and momentous leap forward in social care because before it, nothing existed to support the poor.

It has existed for DECADES and in my lifetime I have seen schools, hospitals, social housing, clinics etc, etc being built. Population explosion has seen so many institutions unable to cope with demand, but the problems have been recognised and in the recent budget the chancellor committed £44 billion to housing in the 2018 budget.
No one has been denied the umbrella of the welfare state but it has many more demands made of it of late because over successive governments, including Labour, it hasn't been funded properly.