Army Rumour Service

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!

Universal free school meals

That is because the number of '' Hungry kids '' is actually miniscule and this whole thing has been blown out of all proportions by someone / some group in order to try and undermine the Government.

There is a world of difference between feeding a miniscule amount of hungry kids and a massive undertaking of Universal free school meals.

I wouldn't support universal free school meals.

But feeding hungry ones, 100%.

Gov's been stupid, especially if what you say is correct, it's a miniscule number.
 
Sexually abused, physically abused, politically indoctrinated...

There's good reason to try and keep kids with their parents. And it should be made very clear to some posters that not every family on benefits is a bad one; there are some very good people out there trying very hard under very trying circumstances.

But there are some people who are very poor individuals - poor in the sense of lacking morally - and poor individuals make very poor parents. My friends' niece being a case in point.

I do though wonder how much comes down to cost. And, for the record, I don't see a Labour government finding the money to cover things either.
I realise that the whole subject, discussion, about UNIVERSAL FREE SHCOOL MEALS, is couched in broad-brush generalisations . . . BUT, some posters/commentators, naively judge all parents by their own reasonable, acceptable, educated, informed, standards and mores.

However, there is sufficient empirical evidence, that there is a large swathe of the population, that is below . . . some would suggest BEYOND . . . the positive influences and assistance, that it might be hoped would be helpful to them.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for that, providing the something different is realistic.
I've just had a thought. All of the kids who receive free school meals are known, including home addresses.

All of those people that volunteered to be COVID helpers dropping off food and prescriptions to the vulnerable could now be used to drop some of this free food off at the homes of kids who would receive free school meals in term time.

The businesses are giving it away for free, volunteers do so for free and the food is delivered so any lazy parents don't have to get off the sofa. Admittedly there might be a shortage of volunteers in some areas and there's nothing stopping scumbag parents taking anything they want out of the food before passing the rest on to the kid but it's a start.
 

Blogg

LE
Annnndddd now the narrative is changing as it emerges that Universal Credit has been increased and that the money hosed at Local Authorities for express purpose has been pissed away on vital things like the war on motorists.

No, these starving children are from "chaotic families": parents who are addicts, alcoholics, mentally ill or just total wasters and will piss away any and all benefits no matter how much they are given.

Or just Labour activists bigging it up for political purposes. But ones dumb enough to forget to delete the pics. of their holiday in the Seychelles from Instagram first.

 

Tool

LE
This is a gift for Labour. Far better than BLM which we knew had some extreme aims (defunding the police and the destruction of capitalism).

The Tories have shot themselves in the foot and will look weak when they u-turn.

Rashford's just got himself some top US PR company to look after him; they'll be dealing with his philanthropic stuff too.

Gov's going to be feeding hungry kids.
The Government is already doing that. The issue is when the state aid stops, and when feckless parents are held responsible - at least in part - for their own offspring, or when they are required to change their outlook to better reflect what society sees as a norm.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
This is a gift for Labour. Far better than BLM which we knew had some extreme aims (defunding the police and the destruction of capitalism).

The Tories have shot themselves in the foot and will look weak when they u-turn.

Rashford's just got himself some top US PR company to look after him; they'll be dealing with his philanthropic stuff too.

Gov's going to be feeding hungry kids.
It's a gift for any party willing to cynically exploit it rather than accept the need to address the real issues.

As you say, a gift for Labour.

The Tories have ballsed up, aye - but only in the sense of not having the courage to turn round and tell some people to stop spending the money on booze and fags.

^That is a vote-winner, not a vote-loser.

(And yes, they've cave.)
 
Annnndddd now the narrative is changing as it emerges that Universal Credit has been increased and that the money hosed at Local Authorities for express purpose has been pissed away on vital things like the war on motorists.

No, these starving children are from "chaotic families": parents who are addicts, alcoholics, mentally ill or just total wasters and will piss away any and all benefits no matter how much they are given.

Or just Labour activists bigging it up for political purposes. But ones dumb enough to forget to delete the pics. of their holiday in the Seychelles from Instagram first.


Paging @Whey_Aye_Banzai

That is because the number of '' Hungry kids '' is actually miniscule and this whole thing has been blown out of all proportions by someone / some group in order to try and undermine the Government.

I think I called it correctly. What say you ?
 
I'm not saying it's alright for parents to not feed their kids. What I'm saying is that, in my experience, removing a child from their family causes a massive amount of emotional damage and I'm not sure that kids going hungry justifies that damage.

Hungry kids = shit
Kids into care = shit
I reckon kids into care = more shit than going hungry.

Your dad's cousin sounds like someone actually making a difference. It's good to hear that not all aspects of the care system are as fucked as my limited interactions with it.

Kids in care will (in theory) be safe, be warm, be clothed, be fed, be educated (forced to go to school) be taught some basics* etc

If they are left with parents who wont feed them, its unlikely they will get any of that.

My dads cousin deals with kids sometimes up to the age of 8 who shit/piss themselves because they have not been potty trained. I sometimes wonder how the **** kids can get to that age and social worker/teachers/neighbours have not flagged it up, but Im fairly certain I wouldnt want a kid go back to that type of parent. And that type of parent is the type to not feed them as well.

Incidentally some decent parents put their kids in foster care, usually when they are very sick and dont have family support.
 
"Great, more fags and booze"
You quaint old thing, you.

One of my annual tasks was the planning of the Bermondsey Carnival, whose vast majority of attendees were from the local council estates, all with East End roots, knees up muvva brown types..
In one planning meeting the production company stated that they were no longer providing urinals for the male attendees, just extra portaloos as she noticed that with the exception of kids the males were only queuing for these. Was sitting down to pee some new thing with men?
No, I told her, bending down to snort coke off the toilet seats was though.
When I ran doors in Glasgow, we used to spray toilet seats and cisterns with WD40, this increased our popularity with recreational users no end as it turns any powder into a claggy lump.

Edited to add, it also has one of two effects on Rizla papers as used for Jazz cigarettes, either they stick to it and tear apart spilling the filling, or they burn too fast spilling the filling.
 
Last edited:
It will be something along the lines of 'Is Christmas Racist'?

Father Christmas is white and comes into peoples homes yet hasn't been shot once, so does Father Christmas have white privaledge?

Is snow racist? Are Christmas Trees oppressive? How much of Noddy Holders royalties go to black charities and is Noddy Holder racist for not giving all his money to black charities? Is Father Christmas cis gendered and does Mrs Christmas want to better herself and smash the patriarchy?

I could write bollocks like this all day, maybe I'll get headhunted for a job at the Gruniad?
Fun fact. Noddy wrote a song nearly fifty years ago than pays him £1.4 million each year. Am pretty sure he isn't crying over black kids - he didn't contribute to Band Aid.
 
Annnndddd now the narrative is changing as it emerges that Universal Credit has been increased and that the money hosed at Local Authorities for express purpose has been pissed away on vital things like the war on motorists.

No, these starving children are from "chaotic families": parents who are addicts, alcoholics, mentally ill or just total wasters and will piss away any and all benefits no matter how much they are given.

Or just Labour activists bigging it up for political purposes. But ones dumb enough to forget to delete the pics. of their holiday in the Seychelles from Instagram first.


I tried looking her up earlier on social media, Im not 100% certain she is the same person in the Instagram. (Same name though)
 

Tool

LE
Indeed. I'd suggest that the cynical exploitation is coming from only one direction, though.

The Tories are very, very bad at articulating...
It would appear that the conservative (small "C"), or Western societies are less adept at "politicising"* or combatting the politicising of issues. It's not just the Tories.

*Read: propoganda
 

Dredd

LE
So if the underlying causes cannot be fixed, and there's neglected hungry kids that need feeding, the logical thing to do - if we live in a modern caring society - is to feed them.

Seems obvious to me.

No, the logical thing to do is not have them. Seems more obvious to me.

But if you want to feed the ones there now, you do it as part of the effort to prevent more being added the continual conveyor belt. To stop those being fed now simply churn out more needing fed later.

And you should need to give evidence of why your child/ren need fed because you have now abrogated your responsibility for doing so. That will then be used at your next renewal so a greater focus is spent on helping you by for example attending courses on personal life management. Fail to attend and the kids may be removed as you are patently incapable of looking after a cat, let alone a child. And we have now clearly identified where your priorities are - and it isn't the kids.

Food is one one of the primary fundamentals in Maslow's hierarchy of need. It is an essential basic for sustaining life itself. If you cannot do it - or by extension your dependants (and the clue is in the word) - then you really are at the lowest possible stage and should NOT have a car, or a phone, or a TV, or a game console, or a season ticket to a football ground (yes, I know, but many still do have them even if they cannot go), or a satellite TV / steaming service subscription, or . . .

You are right - this is so basic it is astonishing that there are people who cannot even manage that. And if you are essentially capable of that, but don't or won't, then why are we validating their assertion that they have this right to it?

They have absolutely enough to meet the lowest of the hierarchy. That they choose not to is not the fault of the State. As we keep saying. So they need to make the sacrifice - and keep making it - until they improve their situation.

Or, as you suggest, they just take the easy route, give up and let the State feed their children but then wail loudly if there are reasonable conditions suggested as a quid-pro-quo.
 
Annnndddd now the narrative is changing as it emerges that Universal Credit has been increased and that the money hosed at Local Authorities for express purpose has been pissed away on vital things like the war on motorists.

No, these starving children are from "chaotic families": parents who are addicts, alcoholics, mentally ill or just total wasters and will piss away any and all benefits no matter how much they are given.

Or just Labour activists bigging it up for political purposes. But ones dumb enough to forget to delete the pics. of their holiday in the Seychelles from Instagram first.


UC was increased by £1,000 p.a. (£20 ish per week) over 4 weeks ago...somehow it was missed by the MSM ?

Doesn't follow their agenda.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
It would appear that the conservative (small "C"), or Western societies are less adept at "politicising"* or combatting the politicising of issues. It's not just the Tories.

*Read: propoganda
Spot on.

Our only saving grace is that the Left conflates the small 'c' conservatives with its mythical view of large 'C' Conservatives and so alienates itself.
 

Latest Threads

Top