Its impossible to please Labour

I hate the argument that it costs more to mean test benefits so everyone gets them.

I'll take the money but would rather my pensioner neighbors get it or the poor and I'm not well off.
 
poolseasider said:
I hate the argument that it costs more to mean test benefits so everyone gets them.

I'll take the money but would rather my pensioner neighbors get it or the poor and I'm not well off.
Click to expand...
Well give your money away then. To one of your pensioner neighbours. Or a poor person. Problem sorted. 👍
 
poolseasider said:
I hate the argument that it costs more to mean test benefits so everyone gets them.

I'll take the money but would rather my pensioner neighbors get it or the poor and I'm not well off.
Click to expand...
And they've just announced 91,000 jobs to go, based purely on ideology and not the size of the caseload. That makes it so much easier to means test. Not.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Well they might. Then again they might say “Thank you very much. Much appreciated”.

Either way your conscience is clear and you can sleep easy. 👍
Click to expand...
poolseasider said:
I hate the argument that it costs more to mean test benefits so everyone gets them.

I'll take the money but would rather my pensioner neighbors get it or the poor and I'm not well off.
Click to expand...
So just give the benefit to everyone then and fuck the poor where if those that didn't need got it stopped they would get more.

Enjoy your 400 quid hope it makes you choke👍

Socialist my backside.
 
poolseasider said:
So just give the benefit to everyone then and fuck the poor where if those that didn't need got it stopped they would get more.

Enjoy your 400 quid hope it makes you choke👍

Socialist my backside.
Click to expand...
We weren’t talking about my £400.

We were talking about your £400 and where you’d prefer it to go.

So your choice. Give it away. Or keep it.

Or were you just virtue signalling?

By the way - I haven’t claimed to be a socialist since I was 19 and discovered that people are people regardless of the labels they claim.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
We weren’t talking about my £400.

We were talking about your £400 and where you’d prefer it to go.

So your choice. Give it away. Or keep it.

Or were you just virtue signalling?

By the way - I haven’t claimed to be a socialist since I was 19 and discovered that people are people regardless of the labels they claim.
Click to expand...
Because Mr Twisty strikes again nothing new here read my post it was a point that the poor should get all the money not everyone but because they don't mean test it.

But hey ho if your skint PM and I'll send the 400 over.🤪
Off to CL final.👍
 
Lala said:
It’s not up to the BBC to hold the government to account.

It’s up to the BBC to report the facts, which they generally do. What the electorate do with those facts is an altogether different matter.
Click to expand...

Of course it is. It's in the BBC's own editorial guidelines, section 4. "We must...hold power to account". The journalists behind Panorama don't sit and wait for AP or Reuters to hand them 'facts' to copy and paste. The BBC has a finite pool of resources in terms of time, money and investigative manpower and they use that to find their own stories, research and uncover what is going on on corridors of power - including the Government.
 
foggy said:
Of course it is. It's in the BBC's own editorial guidelines, section 4. "We must...hold power to account". The journalists behind Panorama don't sit and wait for AP or Reuters to hand them 'facts' to copy and paste. The BBC has a finite pool of resources in terms of time, money and investigative manpower and they use that to find their own stories, research and uncover what is going on on corridors of power - including the Government.
Click to expand...
Many of us have forgotten about Section 4, methinks. but you are absolutely right. 😁
 
Last edited:
foggy said:
Of course it is. It's in the BBC's own editorial guidelines, section 4. "We must...hold power to account". The journalists behind Panorama don't sit and wait for AP or Reuters to hand them 'facts' to copy and paste. The BBC has a finite pool of resources in terms of time, money and investigative manpower and they use that to find their own stories, research and uncover what is going on on corridors of power - including the Government.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree with holding to account on that scale, which goes on already.

The previous poster said the BBC doesn’t hold the government to account, so I suppose he and I are using the part of the definition of hold to account which means to punish.

They cant do that other than report what they find and ask questions. The rest is down to us.
 
Lala said:
Yes I agree with holding to account on that scale, which goes on already.

The previous poster said the BBC doesn’t hold the government to account, so I suppose he and I are using the part of the definition of hold to account which means to punish.

They cant do that other than report what they find and ask questions. The rest is down to us.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get what you mean
 
Lala said:
Yes I agree with holding to account on that scale, which goes on already.

The previous poster said the BBC doesn’t hold the government to account, so I suppose he and I are using the part of the definition of hold to account which means to punish.

They cant do that other than report what they find and ask questions. The rest is down to us.
Click to expand...
I thought it was about impartiality?
 
EagleDay said:
I thought it was about impartiality?
Click to expand...
It is isn’t it. As they can’t say ‘go out and vote Labour,’ or ‘that Tory fella is a really bad boy.’
But they can still report facts without bias and ask questions that seek out accountability, and that relates to any political party or persuasion.

To be honest I’m getting into a debate that‘s getting into a specific area I know bugger all about 🤣🤣 that being section 4 of the BBC’s editorial code, am holding my own with a bit of common sense and blag here 🤔😆
 
Lala said:
It is isn’t it. As they can’t say ‘go out and vote Labour,’ or ‘that Tory fella is a really bad boy.’
Click to expand...

BBC has a reporter in Downing St who keeps shouting "Why are you so fxxxxxxg useless Prime Minister?"

He's a bit naughty
 
BBC seem to be losing a lot of TV presenters recently. Some quitting the screen for commercial radio stations. Maybe they have no faith in the future direction of the BBC especially as the TV licence fee may be scrapped in the near future.Where will the funding come from ?Adverts presumably.
 
tommytwojags said:
BBC has a reporter in Downing St who keeps shouting "Why are you so fxxxxxxg useless Prime Minister?"

He's a bit naughty
Click to expand...
Yet accurate in his comments. It would appear that more and more Tory MPs also agree and are putting in letters of no confidence.
 
Trammo said:
BBC seem to be losing a lot of TV presenters recently. Some quitting the screen for commercial radio stations. Maybe they have no faith in the future direction of the BBC especially as the TV licence fee may be scrapped in the near future.Where will the funding come from ?Adverts presumably.
Click to expand...
Or maybe the new hierarchy at Tory BBC are not paying good people the rate for the job, as another way of crippling it. Do not forget, the BBC top brass is Tory appointees and backers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top