We need a coup

Maizie You're right. The Civil War is much more interesting. I've just read the two Tradescant novels by Philippa Gregory, the second of which covers the Civil War. The attitudes of Charles 1 remind me of one or two posters on this thread.

Why not start a new thread in a different forum?

Quoted a previously deleted post.

Grany

Yes I think a Labour government would have done much better. That's all I have to say.

I agree the Tories are scum. You can get your own bag.

This post has made my day, thank you Grany! And I'm not even a Labour voter

I really don't understand why you're all even bothering to try to reason with the ultra unreasonable..

Why don't we discuss something more interesting like Cromwell, Parliament and the Civil War? Or how this government is bypassing parliament to destroy democracy? It has far more bearing on your lives than the illiberal outpourings of the ultra right...

Yes I think a Labour government would have done much better. That's all I have to say.

I agree the Tories are scum. You can get your own bag.

To me, it's all like watching some twisted comedy show. It' so bad, I simply can't entirely believe it's real:

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/ng-interactive/2020/sep/26/stephen-collins-on-boris-johnsons-masterclass-cartoon

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Grany

We are not talking about all governments this thread is specifically about this UK corrupt tory government which as you can see if you read another tread Another overview of what's happened just this week in government a lot Have you read at least some of it? And also this thread earlier on about how useless Johnson and co are.

Also You cannot predict when you have children you can't always plan for them everyone's circumstances are different Some people have better marriages. Better economic circumstances That's all.

Do you really think a Labour government could do any better especially given the situation we are now in with the results of a pandemic to deal with. Keir Starmer is a better option than Marxist Corbyn but not much. Did you read what happened in government this week when Angela Rayner really showed how she deals with being Deputy Leader of the Labour Party?
What an embarrassment !!!!

sparklingsilver28

^I do understand where Janpt is coming from^. It isn't just a question of children it is how secure is your life as a whole, home, job and savings. Many young women have babies when their is no secure home, job or savings, and that is irresponsible to say the least. Those with children who fall on hard times through no fault of their own a different issue entirely.

Thank you for your support and understanding. I have little support on here which is a majority left wing site but my opinion is as valid as everyone else's and I will not go quietly.

We are not talking about all governments this thread is specifically about this UK corrupt tory government which as you can see if you read another tread Another overview of what's happened just this week in government a lot Have you read at least some of it? And also this thread earlier on about how useless Johnson and co are.

Also You cannot predict when you have children you can't always plan for them everyone's circumstances are different Some people have better marriages. Better economic circumstances That's all.

I do understand where Janpt is coming from. It isn't just a question of children it is how secure is your life as a whole, home, job and savings. Many young women have babies when their is no secure home, job or savings, and that is irresponsible to say the least. Those with children who fall on hard times through no fault of their own a different issue entirely.

sparklingsilver28

^Unfortunately, Grany there have always been corrupt governments of all shades.^ In addition, rich and well off have always taken care of their own kind.^

I cannot name a Prime Minister from an ordinary family background in my life-time: Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, who did not come out of the job without having made millions. Millions on a salary, according to some in today's standard modest £150,000. Tony Blair an astonishing example - I believe his about £75,000 p.a. A jolly sight more than the average man or woman, but certainly no enough to have accumulated his property portfolio. And before someone quotes "Cherry" pull the other one that has bells on.

Thank you for posting a more balanced view. Would the left wingers on here prefer Marxist Corbyn or his crony Mc Donnell ? Corbyn obviously thinks rules are made to be broken. Last seen at a dinner party for eight. I won't even bother to detail Deputy Leader Angela Rayner's behaviour I'm sure it's well known.

janpt If all this country had to worry about was a bunch of layabouts claiming benefits for their many children, life would be good. Its a drop in the ocean. Stop worrying about it. There's no point in getting angry about it because it will always be there, and its inconsequential.

The city nearest to me used to be the teenage pregnancy capital of the UK. People actually thought the girls were having children to claim the benefits. While I'm sure a tiny proportion of these young women were doing that, the vast majority were stuck in a cycle of poverty and unplanned parenthood that they couldn't see any way out of.

I think sparklingsilver28 you will find that most of them make money in public speaking when they leave office.

How many times do people have to be told - lots of people who have children and are claiming benefits have found they are in dire consequences through no fault of their own; when they decided to have children they were in employment/were a two parent family/were not ill etc. Circumstances change. Not every one on benefits is a feckless scrounger. My dad had a good job and was the first in our street to own a car (1950s). He buggered off when I was 6 weeks old, leaving my mother with a baby, and a 5 and 8 year old. She had no skills and had to take up 3 part-time low skilled jobs (at the same time), but still couldn't make ends meet. Some people's callous view of benefit claimants is just breathtaking. They appear to have no social conscience at all. And THEY talk about us being indoctrinated!

Unfortunately, Grany there have always been corrupt governments of all shades. In addition, rich and well off have always taken care of their own kind.^

I cannot name a Prime Minister from an ordinary family background in my life-time: Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair, who did not come out of the job without having made millions. Millions on a salary, according to some in today's standard modest £150,000. Tony Blair an astonishing example - I believe his about £75,000 p.a. A jolly sight more than the average man or woman, but certainly no enough to have accumulated his property portfolio. And before someone quotes "Cherry" pull the other one that has bells on.

Alegrias2

*Perhaps some people should have thought about the future and if they could cope in any eventuality before they had these children.*

In that case nobody will ever have any children, ever. If you're in a hole Janpt, stop digging.

You have chosen to miss the point. People don't always think of the scenarios which they need to take account of before making decisions. I am not in a hole. I am just making a valid point which you refuse to accept.

Perhaps some people should have thought about the future and if they could cope in any eventuality before they had these children.

In that case nobody will ever have any children, ever. If you're in a hole Janpt, stop digging.

Elegran

We were all just answering your posts with the facts - that most parents receiving benefits actually had the children BEFORE they got into the difficulties that meant they could no longer cope. After insisting on repeating that they shouldn't have had them, now you say that was what you meant all along. At which point did you change your tune to agree with US?

This is what I said earlier today!

Perhaps some people should have thought about the future and if they could cope in any eventuality before they had these children. I suppose they knew that someone else would provide.

This is what I said earlier today !

Perhaps some people should have thought about the future and if they could cope in any eventuality before they had these children. I suppose they knew that someone else would provide.

Rishi What's the new slogan to follow Eat out to help out?

Starve a kid to save a quid

It is a politician's tactic to change sides in mid-argument and then claim that you never said your first statement at all.

We were all just answering your posts with the facts - that most parents receiving benefits actually had the children BEFORE they got into the difficulties that meant they could no longer cope. After insisting on repeating that they shouldn't have had them, now you say that was what you meant all along. At which point did you change your tune to agree with US?

sparklingsilver28

Those children already born need and should be freely fed and if parents unable to do so society has to provide. Put that out of the way and let us deal with a real issue.

There was a time when a majority of parents had children they could afford. That philosophy has completely disappear, and children being brought into the world by those without the means to support and care for themselves let alone children. In a world where family planning advice freely and openly available. Instances of child neglect and cruelty a regular stain on this accepted free for all.

At last someone else who agrees with me. It's a bit wearying on here having to argue every valid point with the majority of left wing posters who think it's alright to keep paying out benefits to people who do not have the common sense to limit their families to how many children they can afford to keep and just expect the tax payer to fund them.

You don't get much free now a days It's all a big struggle for most with only the rich getting richer. 10 years of a corrupt Tory government, have you heard? sparklingsilver28 thoses were better times you are talking about.