What's new
PNE Online
Welcome to PNE-Online. Why not register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox! You can also join up as a forum Patron to help support in the running costs of the forum.

Marcus Rashford

Snicky said:
He clumsily said in one instance it did.

Not all. More hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Oh come on, he's got form for being an absolute whopper, it wasn't clumsy and it wasn't out of context. I know you ain't no Tory so ffs why would you even for a second try to defend what he said? Its there in black and white with all the "context" you need. You're on the wrong end of this to try and defend him.
 
Took My Heart said:
That's one of the things that really gets to me. Justification for the government doing this always has a complementary narrative of, 'the money will just go on crack' or 'if they got a job / stopped spending their money on booze and big TV's' which is merrily rattling along.

A lot of people believe it too, until they end up on their arse or know someone deserving who has to access emergency / crisis level support then we get into treating the deserved poor as a special case.

Where basic human needs are concerned, if we live in anything like a society we need to challenge the narrative about 'undeserving scroungers' who almost exclusively are poor and working class because it makes it easier for the government to get away with collective punishment of largely defenceless people (in this case children from poor families, but also see treatment of the sick and disabled or 'unofficial' migrants - economic or refugee).
Click to expand...
Another superb post
 
Winkytinky said:
Oh come on, he's got form for being an absolute whopper, it wasn't clumsy and it wasn't out of context. I know you ain't no Tory so ffs why would you even for a second try to defend what he said? Its there in black and white with all the "context" you need. You're on the wrong end of this to try and defend him.
Click to expand...
I’m not because I can see what he has been trying to say. I don’t like the hyperbole and ott reactions.

I agree 100% that its essential that kids get fed, healthily and regularly. I also understand that kids are not to be punished for their parents inability, through own fault or not, to feed them.

What I’m struggling with is where does this end? If someone starts a similar campaign about kids not going to school having a decent breakfast, that will be the next anti gov stick. Feeding kids is not the governmen’s job, it’s the parents responsibility. It’s the govs job to ensure that the parents are able to.

Marcus Rashford has done a great job in highlighting this issue and making sure the most needy are not forgotten. But, against his specific wishes, this has become political. The whole “Tories are starving kids” “Tories voted against helping kids” is again hyperbole and OTT. The Labour motion on Wednesday was brought knowing that the Gov would vote against it, but did it anyway to make them look shit. (Like they need help)
The gov will say that they have provided an uplift of WTC and UC to help with feeding kids during this pandemic and they see this as a more targeted approach than just blanket giving money away to everybody including those that don’t really need it.

The gov and others see feeding kids as essential but they just see a different way of doing it.

It doesn’t make them evil, scum, child killers etc.

My twopenneth, if that makes me evil and a kiddy starver then so be it.
 
edgy said:
I am absolutely not defending but just looking at the wording
Could she have very clumsily meant she wishes the businesses success in that they may not need any further support?
Possibly
Maybe
Probably not !!!!
Click to expand...
They’re supposed to be intelligent people. She knew what she was saying, and meant every word.
 
edgy said:
I am absolutely not defending but just looking at the wording
Could she have very clumsily meant she wishes the businesses success in that they may not need any further support?
Possibly
Maybe
Probably not !!!!
Click to expand...
Sake Edgy, there's no clumsiness, it's her ideology. Look at her previous posts.
 
Snicky said:
I’m not because I can see what he has been trying to say. I don’t like the hyperbole and ott reactions.

I agree 100% that its essential that kids get fed, healthily and regularly. I also understand that kids are not to be punished for their parents inability, through own fault or not, to feed them.

What I’m struggling with is where does this end? If someone starts a similar campaign about kids not going to school having a decent breakfast, that will be the next anti gov stick. Feeding kids is not the governmen’s job, it’s the parents responsibility. It’s the govs job to ensure that the parents are able to.

Marcus Rashford has done a great job in highlighting this issue and making sure the most needy are not forgotten. But, against his specific wishes, this has become political. The whole “Tories are starving kids” “Tories voted against helping kids” is again hyperbole and OTT. The Labour motion on Wednesday was brought knowing that the Gov would vote against it, but did it anyway to make them look shit. (Like they need help)
The gov will say that they have provided an uplift of WTC and UC to help with feeding kids during this pandemic and they see this as a more targeted approach than just blanket giving money away to everybody including those that don’t really need it.

The gov and others see feeding kids as essential but they just see a different way of doing it.

It doesn’t make them evil, scum, child killers etc.

My twopenneth, if that makes me evil and a kiddy starver then so be it.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. Marcus has and well done to him
Good to see people who have a taller platform to get across a message without it being self serving
Seems a really nice guy
For me it’s all about keeping the inertia now and getting lots of long term initiatives
 
Snicky said:
I’m not because I can see what he has been trying to say. I don’t like the hyperbole and ott reactions.

I agree 100% that its essential that kids get fed, healthily and regularly. I also understand that kids are not to be punished for their parents inability, through own fault or not, to feed them.

What I’m struggling with is where does this end? If someone starts a similar campaign about kids not going to school having a decent breakfast, that will be the next anti gov stick. Feeding kids is not the governmen’s job, it’s the parents responsibility. It’s the govs job to ensure that the parents are able to.

Marcus Rashford has done a great job in highlighting this issue and making sure the most needy are not forgotten. But, against his specific wishes, this has become political. The whole “Tories are starving kids” “Tories voted against helping kids” is again hyperbole and OTT. The Labour motion on Wednesday was brought knowing that the Gov would vote against it, but did it anyway to make them look shit. (Like they need help)
The gov will say that they have provided an uplift of WTC and UC to help with feeding kids during this pandemic and they see this as a more targeted approach than just blanket giving money away to everybody including those that don’t really need it.

The gov and others see feeding kids as essential but they just see a different way of doing it.

It doesn’t make them evil, scum, child killers etc.

My twopenneth, if that makes me evil and a kiddy starver then so be it.
Click to expand...
You’re excusing the government for voting against feeding starving children.

Wow!
 
Nobber said:
They’re supposed to be intelligent people. She knew what she was saying, and meant every word.
Click to expand...
You could have stopped after your first paragraph. This is a short term measure that requires a long term solution but we are in a FUCKING PANDEMIC where people through no fault of their own are living on less than 80% of their poverty wages, this was one little, tiny, minute, thing this shithouse of a government could have done to take the burdon off just slightly. There is NO defence of the Tories on this matter.
 
Winkytinky said:
You could have stopped after your first paragraph. This is a short term measure that requires a long term solution but we are in a FUCKING PANDEMIC where people through no fault of their own are living on less than 80% of their poverty wages, this was one little, tiny, minute, thing this shithouse of a government could have done to take the burdon off just slightly. There is NO defence of the Tories on this matter.
Click to expand...
Not sure how I ended up quoting you Nobber 🤦‍♀️my post was in response to Snicky.
 
Winkytinky said:
You could have stopped after your first paragraph. This is a short term measure that requires a long term solution but we are in a FUCKING PANDEMIC where people through no fault of their own are living on less than 80% of their poverty wages, this was one little, tiny, minute, thing this shithouse of a government could have done to take the burdon off just slightly. There is NO defence of the Tories on this matter.
Click to expand...
And
As i suggested earlier charitable giving is going to take a really big hit. This will have a long term impact on many families in many ways
A root and branch of priorities is paramount
 
Snicky said:
I’m not because I can see what he has been trying to say. I don’t like the hyperbole and ott reactions.

I agree 100% that its essential that kids get fed, healthily and regularly. I also understand that kids are not to be punished for their parents inability, through own fault or not, to feed them.

What I’m struggling with is where does this end? If someone starts a similar campaign about kids not going to school having a decent breakfast, that will be the next anti gov stick. Feeding kids is not the governmen’s job, it’s the parents responsibility. It’s the govs job to ensure that the parents are able to.

Marcus Rashford has done a great job in highlighting this issue and making sure the most needy are not forgotten. But, against his specific wishes, this has become political. The whole “Tories are starving kids” “Tories voted against helping kids” is again hyperbole and OTT. The Labour motion on Wednesday was brought knowing that the Gov would vote against it, but did it anyway to make them look shit. (Like they need help)
The gov will say that they have provided an uplift of WTC and UC to help with feeding kids during this pandemic and they see this as a more targeted approach than just blanket giving money away to everybody including those that don’t really need it.

The gov and others see feeding kids as essential but they just see a different way of doing it.

It doesn’t make them evil, scum, child killers etc.

My twopenneth, if that makes me evil and a kiddy starver then so be it.
Click to expand...

Food banks started under the Tories. They prove that despite protestations they have not and will not provide for the fallout of their failed social policies. If you think that is that they are in fact failing and not just intended to make the poorest suffer. It's crapand totally disingenuous that they object to Marcus on the basis theres a better way of targeting the help.
 
edgy said:
And
As i suggested earlier charitable giving is going to take a really big hit. This will have a long term impact on many families in many ways
A root and branch of priorities is paramount
Click to expand...
You don't need to tell me that, tell/shout at the government, we've got 4 long years before we stand a chance of voting these bastards out, during that time child poverty will go up and small business that tried to help will go down the drain. I'm not even being dramatic.
 
portisheadpete said:
Food banks started under the Tories. They prove that despite protestations they have not and will not provide for the fallout of their failed social policies. If you think that is that they are in fact failing and not just intended to make the poorest suffer. It's crapand totally disingenuous that they object to Marcus on the basis theres a better way of targeting the help.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that the Toris WANT the poor to suffer? Why would they do that and what evidence do you have that they WANT it?

Evidence not opinion please.
 
Top