Anthony Higginbotham

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Post Reply
martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by martin_p » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:03 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:01 pm
The child looked hungry, you might find it easier to blame this present government & conveniently overlook other more simple explanations for children being denied square nutrional meals, yes I'm a parent & I know when I see hungry children & samsung S20 ultras.
What were the signs that the child was hungry, other than saying it? And since when have Greggs provided square nutritional meals?
Last edited by martin_p on Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ClaretAndJew
Posts: 8020
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
Been Liked: 2814 times
Has Liked: 503 times
Location: Earth

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by ClaretAndJew » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:03 pm

All lives matter

Stop sending aid abroad and help our own out

It's the parents fault for not feeding their kids!

bennitor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:07 pm
Been Liked: 56 times
Has Liked: 20 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by bennitor » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:04 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:01 pm
The child looked hungry, you might find it easier to blame this present government & conveniently overlook other more simple explanations for children being denied square nutrional meals, yes I'm a parent & I know when I see hungry children & samsung S20 ultras.
I'm not entirely convinced a Gregg's sausage roll meets the requirements for a "square nutritional meal"....
This user liked this post: Jakubclaret

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10841
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:05 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:01 pm
The child looked hungry, you might find it easier to blame this present government & conveniently overlook other more simple explanations for children being denied square nutrional meals, yes I'm a parent & I know when I see hungry children & samsung S20 ultras.
Maybe Jakubclaret is the answer to all our problems.

He can sort out sentencing for criminals and recognise which kids are hungry and need a free school meal.

Have you sent your CV to Boris?

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:06 pm

bennitor wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:04 pm
I'm not entirely convinced a Gregg's sausage roll meets the requirements for a "square nutritional meal"....
I agree, the poor lad looked that hungry anything would have done, I would have gone in & got him 1 but I was cash strapped literally my mobile was in my car.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by martin_p » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:08 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:06 pm
I agree, the poor lad looked that hungry anything would have done, I would have gone in & got him 1 but I was cash strapped literally my mobile was in my car.
You were cashed strapped and have a mobile phone? You need to look at your priorities mate.
This user liked this post: Greenmile

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10841
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:10 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:06 pm
I agree, the poor lad looked that hungry anything would have done, I would have gone in & got him 1 but I was cash strapped literally my mobile was in my car.
Not only will he spot hungry kids, he'll feed them too. We don't even need the government to provide free school dinners.

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by dsr » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:10 pm

bennitor wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:42 pm
And for this anecdote someone will be right along to provide you with one about a single, working parent who still has to utilise food banks. Which is why you have to look at the bigger picture and evidence base.

There were 4.2 million children living in poverty in the UK in 2018-19. That's 30 per cent of children, or nine in a classroom of 30 (cpag.org.uk) - so rather than looking at that mother and her refusal to buy the sausage roll, dig deeper into the reasoning behind it. What financial education did she receive at school, what were her wider attainment levels and if they were low, why?

You have to be forensic in your assessments and get past the anecdotes and face values of situations. She may have her priorities wrong but why is the question that's important for society.
Mind you, of those 9, 4 are overweight. I don't know where they're finding their food. :twisted:

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10841
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:11 pm

martin_p wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:08 pm
You were cashed strapped and have a mobile phone? You need to look at your priorities mate.
And a car.

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Rowls » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:18 pm

martin_p wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:23 pm
And what’s your plan when the NHS is overwhelmed as it inevitably will be?
The NHS will cope using the same methods it used for the wave of covid.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by martin_p » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:19 pm

Rowls wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:18 pm
The NHS will cope using the same methods it used for the wave of covid.
It coped by us having a complete lockdown and keeping case numbers down. Liverpool already have more cases in hospital than it had during the peak of the first wave but you want the relax lockdown measures?

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10088
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4161 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:20 pm

bennitor wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:04 pm
I'm not entirely convinced a Gregg's sausage roll meets the requirements for a "square nutritional meal"....

I am entirely convinced a Gregg's sausage roll has never met the requirement of a sausage

bennitor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:07 pm
Been Liked: 56 times
Has Liked: 20 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by bennitor » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:22 pm

dsr wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:10 pm
Mind you, of those 9, 4 are overweight. I don't know where they're finding their food. :twisted:
Jakubclaret at about 4pm outside Gregg's apparently :D

Granny WeatherWax
Posts: 2785
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:20 pm
Been Liked: 711 times
Has Liked: 88 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Granny WeatherWax » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:25 pm

Rowls wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:18 pm
The NHS will cope using the same methods it used for the wave of covid.
Full lockdown it is then

theboydonegood
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:52 pm
Been Liked: 8 times
Has Liked: 13 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by theboydonegood » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:36 pm

Elizabeth wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:06 pm
If kids go hungry look no further than their parents
If businesses go bankrupt look no further than their owners.

If banks lose millions on dodgy mortgages look no further than the shareholders

==== oh no NOT that kind of capitalism

TBDG

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10841
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:38 pm

bennitor wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:22 pm
Jakubclaret at about 4pm outside Gregg's apparently :D
You've got to admire his tactics though. Waving sausage roll buying sums of money around in front of a penniless single mum. I might try it myself.

fidelcastro
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 2195 times
Has Liked: 2176 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by fidelcastro » Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:43 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:38 pm
You've got to admire his tactics though. Waving sausage roll buying sums of money around in front of a penniless single mum. I might try it myself.
I'm sure I can't be alone in thinking that Jakubclaret has made that story up.

:(

ArmchairDetective
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:16 am
Been Liked: 397 times
Has Liked: 367 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by ArmchairDetective » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:01 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 9:51 pm
To right, churning children out for some is down to a fine art every 9mths as sure as eggs, the practicalities of how to raise a large family responsibly isn’t even a consideration, I’d personally cap all benefits exceeding 2 children to discourage abusing the system. Not the children’s fault I feel sorry for them.
I have to disagree Jakubclaret, and with some other posters on this thread too.

People are right to point the finger at parents, and the parents' parents. But no child should be punished for their parent's mistakes. Each child is born as a blank slate and the way to break the cycle is to support the child to achieve more than their parents did. That requires mental, emotional and occupational development. But for anyone to achieve that they need to have their basic needs met first (food, water, sleep etc). It doesn't really matter whether this comes from Marcus Rashford's admirable cause or from somewhere else (ideally it would involve parents making changes, though easier said than done), but it needs to be there to give the kids any sort of chance.

We'll achieve nothing by taking away the support that's going to break that cycle. I don't believe it's a lost cause, but I do think that some don't give the cause a chance and think that because they were able to endure hard times that others should be able to endure it too. Yes some might abuse the system, but what good is leaving people hungry going to do? We should be giving children the chance to endure hard times and come out stronger at the end. Because by taking away support like food packages/tokens etc all we're doing is adding to the problem and in a few years we'll wonder why there's another generation of parents who we need to point the finger at.
These 2 users liked this post: Jakubclaret Burnley1989

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by dsr » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:09 pm

ArmchairDetective wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:01 pm
I have to disagree Jakubclaret, and with some other posters on this thread too.

People are right to point the finger at parents, and the parents' parents. But no child should be punished for their parent's mistakes. Each child is born as a blank slate and the way to break the cycle is to support the child to achieve more than their parents did. That requires mental, emotional and occupational development. But for anyone to achieve that they need to have their basic needs met first (food, water, sleep etc). It doesn't really matter whether this comes from Marcus Rashford's admirable cause or from somewhere else (ideally it would involve parents making changes, though easier said than done), but it needs to be there to give the kids any sort of chance.

We'll achieve nothing by taking away the support that's going to break that cycle. I don't believe it's a lost cause, but I do think that some don't give the cause a chance and think that because they were able to endure hard times that others should be able to endure it too. Yes some might abuse the system, but what good is leaving people hungry going to do? We should be giving children the chance to endure hard times and come out stronger at the end. Because by taking away support like food packages/tokens etc all we're doing is adding to the problem and in a few years we'll wonder why there's another generation of parents who we need to point the finger at.
A traditional argument against food parcels rather than money for people on benefits was that it took away the dignity and self worth of the recipients. It was considered more humane, if that's the word, to provide them with the necessity for living in cash terms and let them make their own mind up what to spend it on, exactly as people not on benefits could do.

Maybe the pendulum is swinging away from cash benefits and towards benefits in kind.

ArmchairDetective
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 1:16 am
Been Liked: 397 times
Has Liked: 367 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by ArmchairDetective » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:20 pm

dsr wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:09 pm
A traditional argument against food parcels rather than money for people on benefits was that it took away the dignity and self worth of the recipients. It was considered more humane, if that's the word, to provide them with the necessity for living in cash terms and let them make their own mind up what to spend it on, exactly as people not on benefits could do.

Maybe the pendulum is swinging away from cash benefits and towards benefits in kind.
Interesting response dsr. I can't claim to know much about the process of providing tokens or cash, or the views of those in receipt, but it's hard to disagree with autonomy as part of the process in principle. I guess I was triggered by some of the comments on here to speak up for support in general for vulnerable children and families, rather than specifically in favour of tokens or parcels (as misleading as my post might have been in that sense).

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by dsr » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:24 pm

ArmchairDetective wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:20 pm
Interesting response dsr. I can't claim to know much about the process of providing tokens or cash, or the views of those in receipt, but it's hard to disagree with autonomy as part of the process in principle. I guess I was triggered by some of the comments on here to speak up for support in general for vulnerable children and families, rather than specifically in favour of tokens or parcels (as misleading as my post might have been in that sense).
It's a sort of combined discussion really. One part as to whether children whose parents are too poor or otherwise unable to feed them should get free school meals in the holidays; the other part on how long term to solve the problems of desperately poor parents (in both senses of the word poor).
Last edited by dsr on Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rdp2eps
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2020 8:55 pm
Been Liked: 18 times
Has Liked: 22 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by rdp2eps » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:24 pm

Elizabeth wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:44 pm
Many of the comments in the last 12 hours have come from the generation that is responsible for the breakdown in society we see today.
An interesting thought , how many of those comments have actually come from people aged between 70 and 75 do you suppose ? they represent the generation of policy authors and decision makers who have done so much to colour our modern world ... rightly or wrongly the student generation of the 60s .. the idealists , the protestors and the otherwise sound of mind / free of LSD are the ones you need to question if you don’t approve of what has developed since ...

Slightly tongue in cheek but there is more than an element of truth there
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

bennitor
Posts: 87
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:07 pm
Been Liked: 56 times
Has Liked: 20 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by bennitor » Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:55 pm

rdp2eps wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:24 pm
An interesting thought , how many of those comments have actually come from people aged between 70 and 75 do you suppose ? they represent the generation of policy authors and decision makers who have done so much to colour our modern world ... rightly or wrongly the student generation of the 60s .. the idealists , the protestors and the otherwise sound of mind / free of LSD are the ones you need to question if you don’t approve of what has developed since ...

Slightly tongue in cheek but there is more than an element of truth there
Generalisation here but I'd imagine the idealists/protestors would fall on the left of politics. Which opens up a wider discussion about representation in our political system.

I would suggest it's generally harder for a left leaning party to take power with the current system we have (and media bias). You also have Lib Dems perennially splitting the left, centre left and central votes which makes it even harder.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by nil_desperandum » Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:13 pm

Siddo wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 3:21 pm
A 66 year old guy left the Company last year. No savings, no private pension, lived all his life in rented accommodation, opted out of the government scheme as he couldn't afford to pay his contributions. His sole income is the state pension of £163 per week.

He has been back on numerous occasions asking for a job. He cannot afford to live on his pension alone.

Please don't assume that pensioners are rich. Not everyone has a property left to them or had a good job with commensurate benefits.
It would appear that you entirely misunderstood my post and it's context.
I was suggesting that these "angry people " who are so upset at the idea of feeding children came from that demographic.
I didn't imply that all pensioners were wealthy. (The opposite is the case), but I was suggesting that those who are defending the govt.probably haven't lost a lot of their income due to Covid.
If you're on minimum wage and then it's cut to 60% it's going to be difficult to feed your children as well as you did previously. (And previously it was probably a struggle).
Your previous posts seem to be in line with my thinking.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:38 pm

ArmchairDetective wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 5:01 pm
I have to disagree Jakubclaret, and with some other posters on this thread too.

People are right to point the finger at parents, and the parents' parents. But no child should be punished for their parent's mistakes. Each child is born as a blank slate and the way to break the cycle is to support the child to achieve more than their parents did. That requires mental, emotional and occupational development. But for anyone to achieve that they need to have their basic needs met first (food, water, sleep etc). It doesn't really matter whether this comes from Marcus Rashford's admirable cause or from somewhere else (ideally it would involve parents making changes, though easier said than done), but it needs to be there to give the kids any sort of chance.

We'll achieve nothing by taking away the support that's going to break that cycle. I don't believe it's a lost cause, but I do think that some don't give the cause a chance and think that because they were able to endure hard times that others should be able to endure it too. Yes some might abuse the system, but what good is leaving people hungry going to do? We should be giving children the chance to endure hard times and come out stronger at the end. Because by taking away support like food packages/tokens etc all we're doing is adding to the problem and in a few years we'll wonder why there's another generation of parents who we need to point the finger at.
Good post & I agree with that in the main.

fanzone
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pm
Been Liked: 226 times
Has Liked: 65 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by fanzone » Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:56 pm

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:20 pm
I am entirely convinced a Gregg's sausage roll has never met the requirement of a sausage
They are very good though

fanzone
Posts: 801
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pm
Been Liked: 226 times
Has Liked: 65 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by fanzone » Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:59 pm

The answer to all this is food in its form, be it opening schools for meals in holidays or food huts that family's can go to, the worst option is just to keep giving parents more and more money in the hope they then decide to buy food with the extra money given.

Burnley1989
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:19 am
Been Liked: 2274 times
Has Liked: 2153 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Burnley1989 » Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:01 pm

martin_p wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:19 pm
It coped by us having a complete lockdown and keeping case numbers down. Liverpool already have more cases in hospital than it had during the peak of the first wave but you want the relax lockdown measures?
My mother has been looking after COVID patients in Chorley ICU and said it’s packed, her 2 were extremely poorly
Last edited by Burnley1989 on Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:35 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:13 pm
It would appear that you entirely misunderstood my post and it's context.
I was suggesting that these "angry people " who are so upset at the idea of feeding children came from that demographic.
I didn't imply that all pensioners were wealthy. (The opposite is the case), but I was suggesting that those who are defending the govt.probably haven't lost a lot of their income due to Covid.
If you're on minimum wage and then it's cut to 60% it's going to be difficult to feed your children as well as you did previously. (And previously it was probably a struggle).
Your previous posts seem to be in line with my thinking.
Why would that be difficult? You would have 2 incomes or alternatively 1 income plus benefits, you can feed the children perfectly fine well you should be able to if you go about it the right way, you cook in bulk invest in a chest freezer buy some labels & a marker pen to date away you go, it’s a struggle because easy quick meals are preferred often the more expensive option. It’s how you go about doing things the money should be sufficient if applied properly.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by taio » Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:13 pm

martin_p wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 4:19 pm
It coped by us having a complete lockdown and keeping case numbers down. Liverpool already have more cases in hospital than it had during the peak of the first wave but you want the relax lockdown measures?
The NHS coped because it emptied hospitals, suspended elective care, brought in new ways of providing care and put in place revised rules and procedures. Such that occupancy at many hospitals was at 50% - 60% which is unheard of under normal circumstances.

Lancashire's hospitals also have more Covid+ patients now than at the peak of the first wave. But that is because of mass in-hospital testing unlike before.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by nil_desperandum » Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:21 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 7:35 pm
Why would that be difficult? You would have 2 incomes or alternatively 1 income plus benefits, you can feed the children perfectly fine well you should be able to if you go about it the right way, you cook in bulk invest in a chest freezer buy some labels & a marker pen to date away you go, it’s a struggle because easy quick meals are preferred often the more expensive option. It’s how you go about doing things the money should be sufficient if applied properly.
Don't know the exact figures but if you're on minimum wage and its cut to 60% we're talking about a cut to about £5.50 an hour.
Where does the money come from to buy a chest freezer?
And it's not just poor people we're talking about now.
Some self employed and freelancers have had no income for 7 months.
They might get basic benefits but some may have huge outgoings based on their usual earnings.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:31 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:21 pm
Don't know the exact figures but if you're on minimum wage and its cut to 60% we're talking about a cut to about £5.50 an hour.
Where does the money come from to buy a chest freezer?
And it's not just poor people we're talking about now.
Some self employed and freelancers have had no income for 7 months.
They might get basic benefits but some may have huge outgoings based on their usual earnings.
I think you are painting the worse casebook scenario, the self employed are mostly booming the 1s that are quiet it's nothing to do with the virus, regarding the outgoings you can put things on temporary hold, people will get by by hook or crook, the chest freezer from argos ect I'd wager is substantially cheaper than there iphones there no doubt have.

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TVC15 » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:02 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:31 pm
I think you are painting the worse casebook scenario, the self employed are mostly booming the 1s that are quiet it's nothing to do with the virus, regarding the outgoings you can put things on temporary hold, people will get by by hook or crook, the chest freezer from argos ect I'd wager is substantially cheaper than there iphones there no doubt have.
Why do you constantly make things up ?
Self employed ‘mostly booming - really ? There is not one statistic or metric out there on self employed or small business data which suggests that to be the case.

As for your other comments you really are one bigoted odious idiot. Like all ignorant bigots when this debate comes up you bring out the usual rubbish about the mobile phone and sky subscription which relate to a tiny fraction of the population which attract the headlines. Look at the real data about how many of them are using food banks, the increasing number of them going to money lenders, how many people take the loan advance on universal credit, or the rapidly increasing numbers of people joining credit unions because they cannot get access to normal finance.

‘Buy a chest freezer’ - ffs what an absolute ignorant moron.

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by nil_desperandum » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:24 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 8:31 pm
I think you are painting the worse casebook scenario, the self employed are mostly booming the 1s that are quiet it's nothing to do with the virus, regarding the outgoings you can put things on temporary hold, people will get by by hook or crook, the chest freezer from argos ect I'd wager is substantially cheaper than there iphones there no doubt have.
TVC has already covered most points, but just for clarity, there are over 3 million self- employed / freelancers who haven't been able to earn a penny since March, and they haven't qualified for any of Sunak's support packages.
It's been confirmed today that there will still be no help for them.
Where's your evidence for self employed "booming"?
Edit: I'm not just referring to self employed.
If you're on minimum wage on PAYE and it's cut by 40% you're obviously going to struggle.
Ever wondered why it's called a minimum wage?
Last edited by nil_desperandum on Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Jakubclaret » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:30 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:24 pm
TVC has already covered most points, but just for clarity, there are over 3 million self- employed / freelancers who haven't been able to earn a penny since March, and they haven't qualified for any of Sunak's support packages.
It's been confirmed today that there will still be no help for them.
Where's your evidence for self employed "booming"?
The amount of self employed I see working, you try & get a decent plumber out tomorrow or the day after you'll be looking into the backend of next week, we'll move on mechanics I've just had to wait a week for a MOT & that's the closest after ringing around, I could go on, everybody is busy still working & practicing social distancing. TVC covered nothing apart from a futile exercise in his usual waffle he likes to spout.

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5229
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1623 times
Has Liked: 397 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:36 pm

The 3,741 kids in Burnley eligible for FSM would have cost about £2.20 per meal so that would be about £300,000 for the holiday meals that was outvoted yesterday (up to the end of Easter).

Sunak’s new job support scheme far outstrips that, many times over. That’s great for poorer families in Burnley.

My preference, as I wrote on here yesterday, was to up the support to affected families through wage support, rather than through FSM. I do though also support funding more to foodbanks and reinstating things like Surestart. That for me is the best balance - Starmer’s proposal yesterday wasn’t, it reinforced dependency in too many people, which isn’t compassionate, it’s self defeating. The other thing that happens is that parents don’t always spend the vouchers on the kids, nor on healthy items. The only restrictions are they cannot be age-restricted products.

It’s quite ironic the vitriol the Tories are getting today when they have put in place the most socialist economic policies in many decades.

p.s. I’m not a huge fam of how the govt have dealt with this crisis in other regards
Last edited by CrosspoolClarets on Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: Somethingfishy

CrosspoolClarets
Posts: 5229
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1623 times
Has Liked: 397 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by CrosspoolClarets » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:46 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:24 pm
TVC has already covered most points, but just for clarity, there are over 3 million self- employed / freelancers who haven't been able to earn a penny since March, and they haven't qualified for any of Sunak's support packages.
It's been confirmed today that there will still be no help for them.
Where's your evidence for self employed "booming"?
Edit: I'm not just referring to self employed.
If you're on minimum wage on PAYE and it's cut by 40% you're obviously going to struggle.
Ever wondered why it's called a minimum wage?
Spot on, I know loads of consultants working for themselves or tiny firms and there is no work due to public sector bodies all working from home and / or not taking forward usual projects. This is at the same time as huge firms are making billions and getting handed mega contracts.

I know many who haven’t worked since March and haven’t had a penny in support because they pay themselves dividends (not as a huge tax saving, because running PAYE is messy with erratic earning patterns). These are people who in some instances earn about £50,000 per year, very decent but needs to keep rolling in to pay the bills. Others only normally earn £10k-£20k, semi retired and just keeping ticking over. We’re not talking rich people.

I also know loads of self employed who are quids in, with Sunak paying them many thousands for saying they are “affected” and they have had a far stronger year than normal. It hasn’t been fair, its been a mess by the Treasury. Everybody should have been entitled to minimum wage funding at least, if they were affected by the pandemic. Nobody should have fallen through the gaps.

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by TVC15 » Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:47 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 9:30 pm
The amount of self employed I see working, you try & get a decent plumber out tomorrow or the day after you'll be looking into the backend of next week, we'll move on mechanics I've just had to wait a week for a MOT & that's the closest after ringing around, I could go on, everybody is busy still working & practicing social distancing. TVC covered nothing apart from a futile exercise in his usual waffle he likes to spout.
Aye - I covered nothing but stated facts whilst you just made up a load of bigoted nonsense as per normal.
But rather than argue about it why don’t you post some evidence about your ridiculous generalisations based on struggling to get hold of a plumber or seeing some mother deny her son a Greggs sausage role.

You’re an absolute ignorant pr-ick...I pity for anyone who has to live with or anywhere near you.

Elizabeth
Posts: 4377
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 12:13 am
Been Liked: 1250 times
Has Liked: 1367 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Elizabeth » Thu Oct 22, 2020 11:19 pm

People can spout as much claptrap as they want but it doesn’t alter anything.
People are soft today and the sense of entitlement in the society we live in today is the root of the problem. Along with the value signalling we see prominently on this board from the same instantly recognisable posters.
They are quick to jump on posters who see it differently from them but that’s probably as fast as they move all day in the real world.
I have expressed strong views on this subject and respect those posters who disagree as strongly and have been able to express themselves in the correct manner.

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Spijed » Thu Oct 22, 2020 11:41 pm

Elizabeth wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 11:19 pm
People can spout as much claptrap as they want but it doesn’t alter anything.
People are soft today and the sense of entitlement in the society we live in today is the root of the problem.
A few weeks ago, no-one was complaining about the sense of entitlement regarding the furlough scheme.

Seems many were happy to be paid for sitting at home, doing nothing.

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by AndrewJB » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:24 am

fanzone wrote:
Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:59 pm
The answer to all this is food in its form, be it opening schools for meals in holidays or food huts that family's can go to, the worst option is just to keep giving parents more and more money in the hope they then decide to buy food with the extra money given.
Should the furlough pay also be paid out partly in food? That way we can be sure it won’t get spent on wine?

Spiral
Posts: 5005
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:37 am
Been Liked: 2518 times
Has Liked: 333 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Spiral » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:44 am

AndrewJB wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:24 am
Should the furlough pay also be paid out partly in food? That way we can be sure it won’t get spent on wine?
Wine...I think you've hit the nail on the head. Nobody cares how lower-middle class folks are spending their furlough pay, and fewer still are bothered how pensioners spend their state pension. At the start of this I thought it was ideology that was driving people's opposition to Rashford's cause, but now I'm more convinced it's just plain old fashioned disgust. If you're of a particularly spiteful disposition that disgust felt towards a person whom you believe to be 'lower' than you hardens your belief in your own virtue. That disgust creates separation in your own mind between them and you. No wonder people are keen to take up the opportunity to signal how much more virtuous they are than the 'scroungers'. The country is full of insecure, spiteful arseholes.
These 2 users liked this post: longsidepies THEWELLERNUT70

dsr
Posts: 15138
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by dsr » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:57 am

AndrewJB wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:24 am
Should the furlough pay also be paid out partly in food? That way we can be sure it won’t get spent on wine?
I fail to see how that would help. The suggestion on here is that children should be given free food because they are going hungry, and that the best way to ensure children get that food is to give it to them direct.

I don't see how stopping people from drinking wine is going to help hungry children.

Spiral
Posts: 5005
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:37 am
Been Liked: 2518 times
Has Liked: 333 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Spiral » Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:21 am

dsr wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:57 am
I fail to see how that would help. The suggestion on here is that children should be given free food because they are going hungry, and that the best way to ensure children get that food is to give it to them direct.

I don't see how stopping people from drinking wine is going to help hungry children.
The opposition on here to free school meals is rooted in the inference that people on low incomes or welfare are irresponsible with the money they have, and that this (it is boldly claimed, as though the plague doesn't exist) is the reason why children are going hungry. While nobody disputes that there are some awful, negligent parents around, this fact usually leads to the argument that welfare should be administered according to the whims of people who quite blithely believe they know better, usually manifesting in the argument that food vouchers should be given instead of money, without any hint of self awareness of their hypocritical, casual attitude towards how other forms of welfare are administered - such as state pensions, or more recently furlough. But fine, so be it. Food vouchers would be wonderful, and so on and so forth, but the problem with such a line of reasoning from such people is invariably the disconnect between their identification of a flaw in a system, and their willingness to implement an identified solution.

The argument goes: children go hungry because of bad parenting; then a solution is proposed which feeds children; then it is argued that this proposal should be rejected because of negligent parenting. See? There's a gaping hole right in the middle of that logic which people try to fill with spite and hatred and their disgust for other human beings whom they happen to be slightly more fortunate than at that precise moment. The justification made in the final straight for not supporting children is utterly incongruous with the assumed aim of supporting them, which can only lead one to conclude that people opposed to these kinds of policies couldn't actually give a toss about the kids, and are in fact quite willing to use them in a passive manner against the people they despise in society.

"Behold the misery these bad parents inflict upon their children...and see how I am not like them"
These 4 users liked this post: LDNBFC87 longsidepies Rileybobs THEWELLERNUT70

Damo
Posts: 4504
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:04 pm
Been Liked: 1777 times
Has Liked: 2761 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Damo » Fri Oct 23, 2020 2:28 am

When I read posts from people having a problem with the state ensuring kids get at least one decent meal per day, all I can think is that they really like arguing or that they are so far detached from the real world, that they shouldn't be allowed out
This user liked this post: nil_desperandum

SingaporeClarets
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 5:31 am
Been Liked: 43 times
Has Liked: 12 times
Location: The Little Red Dot

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by SingaporeClarets » Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:10 am

As I said earlier, if kids are going hungry the parents can allow them to holiday camps which can be properly funded.

Not only then are those kids being fed but we're ensuring they are being kept of the street, away from drugs and given access to all the right opportunities.

If we are going to spend money, that's where the money should be going.

Burnley1989
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:19 am
Been Liked: 2274 times
Has Liked: 2153 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by Burnley1989 » Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:11 am

Spiral wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 1:21 am
The opposition on here to free school meals is rooted in the inference that people on low incomes or welfare are irresponsible with the money they have, and that this (it is boldly claimed, as though the plague doesn't exist) is the reason why children are going hungry. While nobody disputes that there are some awful, negligent parents around, this fact usually leads to the argument that welfare should be administered according to the whims of people who quite blithely believe they know better, usually manifesting in the argument that food vouchers should be given instead of money, without any hint of self awareness of their hypocritical, casual attitude towards how other forms of welfare are administered - such as state pensions, or more recently furlough. But fine, so be it. Food vouchers would be wonderful, and so on and so forth, but the problem with such a line of reasoning from such people is invariably the disconnect between their identification of a flaw in a system, and their willingness to implement an identified solution.

The argument goes: children go hungry because of bad parenting; then a solution is proposed which feeds children; then it is argued that this proposal should be rejected because of negligent parenting. See? There's a gaping hole right in the middle of that logic which people try to fill with spite and hatred and their disgust for other human beings whom they happen to be slightly more fortunate than at that precise moment. The justification made in the final straight for not supporting children is utterly incongruous with the assumed aim of supporting them, which can only lead one to conclude that people opposed to these kinds of policies couldn't actually give a toss about the kids, and are in fact quite willing to use them in a passive manner against the people they despise in society.

"Behold the misery these bad parents inflict upon their children...and see how I am not like them"
Good post
This user liked this post: LDNBFC87

LDNBFC87
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 4:35 pm
Been Liked: 55 times
Has Liked: 382 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by LDNBFC87 » Fri Oct 23, 2020 6:40 am

Jakubclaret wrote:
Wed Oct 21, 2020 9:51 pm
To right, churning children out for some is down to a fine art every 9mths as sure as eggs, the practicalities of how to raise a large family responsibly isn’t even a consideration, I’d personally cap all benefits exceeding 2 children to discourage abusing the system. Not the children’s fault I feel sorry for them.

Deary me.

ClaretDiver
Posts: 2165
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 5:00 am
Been Liked: 553 times
Has Liked: 131 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by ClaretDiver » Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:56 am

SingaporeClarets wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 3:10 am
As I said earlier, if kids are going hungry the parents can allow them to holiday camps which can be properly funded.

Not only then are those kids being fed but we're ensuring they are being kept of the street, away from drugs and given access to all the right opportunities.

If we are going to spend money, that's where the money should be going.
I actually think this is a brilliant idea....I remember as a kid going to summer school where we got a lunch included and all sorts of activities. Fortunately for me my parents could afford the small fee for this but there were kids there that qualified for it to be free access for them....

I firmly believe that every child should have access to at least one nutritional meal a day no matter where it comes from. I have signed the petition but I have to admit that I have not looked deeply into the proposition as to how this would be delivered....does someone have a link to the actual mechanics of the proposal? TIA

AndrewJB
Posts: 3808
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:20 pm
Been Liked: 1159 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: Anthony Higginbotham

Post by AndrewJB » Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:07 am

dsr wrote:
Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:57 am
I fail to see how that would help. The suggestion on here is that children should be given free food because they are going hungry, and that the best way to ensure children get that food is to give it to them direct.

I don't see how stopping people from drinking wine is going to help hungry children.
The idea appears to be that by giving the children food directly, we prevent their parents from spending the money on other things. I’m asking why the same moral concern doesn’t operate with the parents who are receiving furlough money.

Post Reply