FlyTheNest

seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

Total PoliticsVerified account
‏@TotalPolitics
Is Jeremy Corbyn turning into Tony Blair? http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/45200 ... -sun.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

Ukip has accused Iain Duncan Smith of adopting one of its manifesto ideas. Following the work and pensions secretary’s announcement that he is planning to place benefits advisers in food banks, Ukip’s Suzanne Evans said the party’s election manifesto said Ukip would “train and fund the cost of 800 advisers to work in 800 foodbanks, so the poorest in our society have free and easy access to timely help in their hour of need”.

seeingclearly wrote:That workhouse post is unbelievable, except it seems to be real. Pinching myself today to check I'm really conscious. Cameron's replies to Corbyn had me doing that too, tax credits or NHS and police? see what he is doing ?

rebeccariots2 wrote:

seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

IDS probably not thinking he even needs to consult any of the food bank organisers. He thinks he owns all 'welfare'.

'Food bank jobcentres': will DWP make charity handouts part of welfare state?
Iain Duncan Smith’s move to put jobcentre staff in food banks suggests a shift in outlook – and is tacit admission of link between welfare policy and food poverty
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... fare-state" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

... However, whether food banks and other charities will play ball with the DWP is another matter.

Organisations as diverse as Citizens Advice, cancer charities and the Royal British Legion have warned MPs that the millions they currently spend on supporting people left hungry and penniless by delays and errors in the welfare system is unsustainable and they cannot “shore up” DWP failings indefinitely.

Then there are the moral and logistical reservations. Food banks tend to see their service as a last resort and would recoil from the idea that they might be informally incorporated into the welfare state. Many refuse on principle to accept referrals direct from JobCentre Plus.

The same goes for food banks’ donors: would they be so happy to continue if they knew their food donations were covering for avoidable administrative and policy failings on the part of the DWP? Is the public ready for a US or Canadian-style reliance on food banks to be institutionalised in the UK?

With prescient timing, a Fabian Commission on Food and Poverty report published on Wednesday highlights exactly these dangers. It recommends that rather than expand the role of food banks, government policy should be directed at phasing them out by 2020...

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 12m12 minutes ago
Loud banging of desks as George Osborne enters Rm 14 for '22 grilling on tax credits. "That's for our benefit," says one veteran scribbler.

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 9m9 minutes ago
Chancellor kept waiting nearly 20 mins in corridor outside Ctte Rm 14 before being called in to face '22 on tax credits & battle with Lords.

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 4m4 minutes ago
After loud banging of desks & applause in '22, George Osborne begins speech to Tory MPs joking:"I'll have to come back when we win a vote!"

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 1m1 minute ago
Tory MP reveals why banging of desks was loudest close to doors of Rm 14 for George Osborne arriving at '22. "That's where the whips sit."

rebeccariots2 wrote:

Total PoliticsVerified account
‏@TotalPolitics
Is Jeremy Corbyn turning into Tony Blair? http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/45200 ... -sun.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Read it and see what you reckon. Good to have a giggle.

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

ohsocynical wrote:

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

I live for the day his comb-over gets lifted by the wind with a photographer there to catch it. It'll be nearly as good as the mickey mouse towel shot...The fat git.

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

PorFavor wrote:My Labour Party membership is due for renewal. The system claims not to recognise my membership number (they provided it, I've checked that it's the one on my card - and it is). I hope everyone else isn't having the same problem, or membership numbers will go down and not up.

TobyLatimer wrote:@RR2

Haven't touched it I swear. The pic was on my twitter feed a few minutes ago, relating to pmq's (no mention of his hair in the tweet) Although it does look a bit suspect - then again, the light plays funny tricks ...

ScreenShot00896.jpg

HindleA wrote:Did he have a separate bedroom and was it penalised;did his wife have to undergo an assessment ;referral for health "advice" and subjected to sanctions ;did he face income capping/reduction in income and have to explain himself.Such experiences,by such as he only make their policies more reprehensible,in my eyes.Honourable to them,a lifestyle choice subject to bemoaning and "behaviourial change" for us.

rebeccariots2 wrote:

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

Toby, is that real? Or have you photoshopped him to look worse than it actually is? Had no idea it was that thin, lank, ..... insert descriptor of choice.

rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?

seeingclearly wrote:This article by David Graeber caught my eye I have his very large book sitting on my shelf. Wondered what others think....

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ry-surplus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"...if the government runs a surplus, the private sector goes into deficit. If the government reduces its debt, everyone else has to go into debt in exactly that proportion in order to balance their own budgets. The chips are redistributed. This is not a theory. Just simple maths."

seeingclearly wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?

The core argument seems to be that you need some kind of balance between public and private to ensure tat money keeps going round and making more money. If not then things start winding down. I sort of understand this stuff on a broad level, detail in numbers does my head in, but it seems common sense to me, and having read and read everything I can find can only really think that any big anomalies come from the QE made to keep the banks going, and all the other stuff Osbourne and co base their policies on is very suspect. But none of this is out of range of anyones thinking, really, we head for the bust because there's not enough money in the system not to. Globally, I have no idea, but for us it seems as though our economy is based upon spending to generate anything. The last figures seem to support that, unless I've read everything radically wrong. For instance our construction industries output, surely the cure for that is to build more, creating jobs and some movement. Yet everything here is tightly controlled and immobile, and seems as unreal as everything else this government does, empty. The way the West Midlands for instance is described bears no connection with reality. Or the North. I expect you have your own view about Wales. Though people moving in affluent circles with good jobs at perceive things very differently, because for them things are still quite fluid.

HindleA wrote:Though I think I will give the waxing strips a miss.

TobyLatimer wrote:During my *ahem* research into Dave's palate, I came across this from the Graun 2012.

Comments btl really made me blink twice as they are in the older pre Julian format, looked a bit strange first glance.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/poll ... e-powerful" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ScreenShot00898.jpg

Tubby Isaacs wrote:That Private Eye thing looks a bit weak.

Capital allowances- dodgy huh?

Timing differences explained here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/ta ... iderations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the mention of sales and not profits too. And tax isn't paid on trading profits, but taxable profits anyway.

RogerOThornhill wrote:

When they're busily trying to target benefits to those who most need it, universal infants free school meals make no sense whatsoever.

What's more, the numbers we have who've signed up for FSM giving us the pupil premium dropped alarmingly with our year 1 this year -after all, why sign up for FSM when you're going to get it anyway?

RogerOThornhill wrote:

Tubby Isaacs wrote:That Private Eye thing looks a bit weak.

Capital allowances- dodgy huh?

Timing differences explained here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/ta ... iderations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the mention of sales and not profits too. And tax isn't paid on trading profits, but taxable profits anyway.

Yes, I was just thinking the same - they could do with a look at salary differentials between top and bottom to make a better point.

seeingclearly wrote:Hunger becoming institutionalised.

Yesterday, on the train, I was sitting with an open-faced man comfortable helping and singing quietly with another man in a wheelchair with rainbows decorating the wheels, his kin, more likely his friend, care worker, with the sun shining in the afternoon. No one was without what we needed. That's collective success. I love it.

ohsocynical wrote:Liz McInnes ‏@LizMcInnesMP 2 mins2 minutes ago London, England

Another debate lost; Junior Doctors' Contracts AYES 260 NOES 301. BUT Jeremy Hunt has stated that no junior doctor will lose pay.

Handful of Tory MPs turn up to Labour's Commons debate on saving the steel industry

Barely a dozen Tory MPs sat through a Commons debate to save British steel - but their colleagues remembered to vote against it.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ha ... ar_twitter

rebeccariots2 wrote:

seeingclearly wrote:

rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?

The core argument seems to be that you need some kind of balance between public and private to ensure tat money keeps going round and making more money. If not then things start winding down. I sort of understand this stuff on a broad level, detail in numbers does my head in, but it seems common sense to me, and having read and read everything I can find can only really think that any big anomalies come from the QE made to keep the banks going, and all the other stuff Osbourne and co base their policies on is very suspect. But none of this is out of range of anyones thinking, really, we head for the bust because there's not enough money in the system not to. Globally, I have no idea, but for us it seems as though our economy is based upon spending to generate anything. The last figures seem to support that, unless I've read everything radically wrong. For instance our construction industries output, surely the cure for that is to build more, creating jobs and some movement. Yet everything here is tightly controlled and immobile, and seems as unreal as everything else this government does, empty. The way the West Midlands for instance is described bears no connection with reality. Or the North. I expect you have your own view about Wales. Though people moving in affluent circles with good jobs at perceive things very differently, because for them things are still quite fluid.

Ah ... I think I see. Austerity and QE - horrible bedfellows - bust inevitable. Sounds like an exam paper question - Describe the relationship between austerity and QE - please pay attention to / compare and contrast the likely impacts on those with little or no money or inherited assets and those who work in the financial sector or have enough money to invest in said sector.