Jeremy Corbyn

Quoted from Marinerz93

Whilst we have common ground on food banks and homelessness on how they shame the government have you seen 10 of Corbyns Polices in the telewag

http://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.....33-detail/story.html

1. Renationalisation of the railways - That'll be a YES from me, not sure how this will work or how much it will cost.

2. Scrapping nuclear weapons - Reduce yes but not scrap, so NO for me.

3. Talking to terrorist groups - Terrorist always state what they want, the only reason to talk is if there is common ground that will stop the violence. otherwise it means giving in, so NO.

4. Scrapping tuition fees - YES

5. Taxing the rich - YES but lets also go after dividends which is also a loop hole for people to pay themselves the minimum wage to pay less tax then pocket vast amounts of money without paying tax.

6. Not bombing Syria - You mean he wants ISIS to gain over all control of Syria thus creating the most extreme Islamic state which will then train even more fanatics to spread to other countries.  I disagree so NO, tactical bombing will be necessary as ISIS gains more control of Syria.

7. Cutting less and spending more - YES, especially in infrastructure and housing.

8. Capping rent levels - YES

9. Allowing Immigration - Need some clarification on this one, I want a points based system like Australia / Canada, so NOT SURE.

10. Getting rid of the Royal family - Hangers on Yes, the Queen No. NOT SURE, so need clarification.

How I scored

Yes - 5
No - 3
Not sure - 2

The sticking points for me as you can see are (2) Scrapping nuclear weapons, (3) Talking to terrorists, (6) Bombing of Syria.  Also his stance on Ireland.  Open to debate the NO's if there is meat to the bones so to speak but the sticking points for me are reason enough to never vote Labour whilst he is in charge.

FYI dividends are taxed from the last budget

Grim74...There isnt really much similarity between a foodbank and you opening a free beer pub UNLESS you are going to have some sort of qualifying criteria. Applications for help with food from banks are usually controlled by aid agencies such as Social Services etc. and the qualifying conditions can be quite strict. One of the other reasons for the vast increase is the ending of the crisis loan system by DWP even when the crisis has been caused by a failure to pay benefit on time. Another result of the huge cutbacks in staff within that departmemt..

There's about to be more "freeloaders" in the queue for food now that that nice Mr Osbourne is reported to be about to scrap free school dinners, despite saying he wouldn't in his manifesto.

Quoted from Grim74

Ive had this debate with you before do you not take anything on board do you hate veing wrong, but just to recap -
The whole food system is supply led, not demand led, the more food they get donated the more they will have to give away, blaming benefit cuts is a lie.
The 1000000 figure you quote is typical Guardian falsifying, 1000000 is the number of requests for food rather than individual recipients like YOU make out.
Some facts for you to chew on -
https://fullfact.org/factcheck/economy/food_bank_number-40853

Just remember these food banks came in under the labour goverment as a supplement to the welfare benefit, not as a result of welfare cuts, now as a result the poverty industry are churning them out faster then pound land shops, so by blaming the goverment for increased numbers really does make you look a foolish, do you really think the food bank fashion would come to a sudden halt under your beloved labour party come on get real.

Interesting link there. The fullfact thing notes the 1,000,000 uses was not to individuals, but then the Trussell Trust notes this in it's stats:

http://www.trusselltrust.org/stats

So, with an average of two instances per person per annum that is somewhere around half a million people supported by Trussell Trust food banks. Note also that the TT provised just half of the food banks in the UK. If the figures of the other food banks match those of the TT, then we could be around the 1,000,000 individuals mark. No statistics to show this one way or the other, however.

Your comments that the food banks were somehow brought in by the Labour government to bolster the welfare system is utterly bizarre! The food banks were set up by charitable organisations to meet a need, a need which clearly increased following the recession caused by the financial crash back in 2008. The appalling recovery following this recession thanks to Osbornomics means that the poorest haven't even got back to the income levels of 2008 and inflation has only been down to zero recently so it is clear that they are worse off. Of course, the benefits cuts during the last parliament and the further cuts just passed make the situation even more precarious.

Look, it's clear that you don't believe, well, pretty much anything about the poor struggling to get by in the current system. You've entirely bought into the "skivers vs strivers" narrative of your favoured party.

So, explain this to me. As the IFS notes in the link below low income households lost the most money due to tax and benefits changes during the last parliament:

http://election2015.ifs.org.uk/distributional-analysis

So, the poorest 30% or so have lost up to 2% of their total income due to tax/benefit changes at the same time that annual inflation was averaging around 3% (which didn't even drop below 2% until 2014). Cumulatively, that's an increase of well over 10% in prices whilst their income has been cut, so why would you possibly think that the poorest in society wouldn't be struggling to put food on the table, especially when wage growth was pretty much non-existent until the past 12 months or so?

Similarly, why do you think that the new tax credit cuts and increased benefit cap just passed won't lead to more of the poorest in society struggling to put food on the table? Inflation might be at zero now but, as this IFS chart shows, the bottom 20% of earners stand to lose over 10% of their income over the next 5 years!

http://twitter.com/TheIFS/status/619133104893108225/photo/1

The poorest are already down well over 10% in real income over the past parliament and now they are to lose another 10%? Come on, explain how this won't lead to real hardship, especially at a time when rental prices are increasing twice as fast as wages!

Quoted from barralad

Grim74...There isnt really much similarity between a foodbank and you opening a free beer pub UNLESS you are going to have some sort of qualifying criteria. Applications for help with food from banks are usually controlled by aid agencies such as Social Services etc. and the qualifying conditions can be quite strict. One of the other reasons for the vast increase is the ending of the crisis loan system by DWP even when the crisis has been caused by a failure to pay benefit on time. Another result of the huge cutbacks in staff within that departmemt..

Trussesell have 27000 'care professionals' who can give away vouchers to anyone they want, there are many many reports of people abuseing the system which in turn makes a mockery of the recipient figures, there is absolutely nothing in place to stop people touring different voucher agencies and then useing different addresses with their made up sob stories.
I wasn't aware the crisis loans had stopped but there is still a lot of safety nets in place, for the few people that do fall through the net these food banks are a great supplement and it's a shame they get abused.

"One of my favourite philosophical tenets, is that people will only agree with you if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds."

Frank Zappa.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

The bit where you state not wanting to bomb Syria means Corbyn wants a ISIS controlled Syria. That was the shite that caught my eye. You talk about people chucking around accusations of nationalism and xenophobia but what do you expect when you clearly believe you can class people entirely along national lines with drivel like 'Poles are like us' and 'you try living with people from X, Y and Z'.

I'm talking about bombing ISIS positions in Syria not Asad. By not bombing ISIS positions in Syria you are condoning what will happen once they gain control. Not our problem, the refugees looking to get into Britain are making it our problem. A leader / potential leader would act, not sit on his hands.

This is all about a Gas pipeline, Asad won't allow it because it will weaken Russia.  The Turks who will benefit from a gas pipe line have been caught sending weapons to ISIS.  This is going to get much worse with far more suffering.

ISIS needs to challenged head on or you can wait for them to come to you, are you struggling to understand what ISIS is about.

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

Now M93 can tell us what the 'Argies' are like.

They are sharp objects of the highest order, you''ll get on well with them  

Crisis Loans have been stopped for more than two years. They were stopped on the premise that a large proportion claiming one was abusing the system. Now it seems the same accusations are being levelled against the users of foodbanks. This country is damaged beyond repair...

Quoted from barralad

Crisis Loans have been stopped for more than two years. They were stopped on the premise that a large proportion claiming one was abusing the system. Now it seems the same accusations are being levelled against the users of foodbanks. This country is damaged beyond repair...

Quite. Divide and rule is the Tory way and they have succeeded spectacularly.