The Post Office Horizon Enquiry
News2 mins ago
Let Them Eat...?
387 Answers
MPs rejected the plea for free school meals to be given during holidays.
https:/
Should be very good news for all the Answerbanks who think poor families spend too much on smoking, gambling, etc, so should get NO more handouts!
Let them eat cake! Or nothing.
Charles Dickens would not believe it.
A
https:/
Should be very good news for all the Answerbanks who think poor families spend too much on smoking, gambling, etc, so should get NO more handouts!
Let them eat cake! Or nothing.
Charles Dickens would not believe it.
A
Answers
Nothing wrong with Collins.
https:/
Adjective - sanctimonious.
https:/
Adjective - sanctimonious.
//True, and most of it was knee jerk pro-gov / anti poor reactions and when posting opinions suddenly realised they were exposed for not having a scooby about the issue such that they have now (for the most part) shrunk and shriveled back into their caves.//
I've not shrivelled back into my cave. I've been having a G&T and my dinner.
The issue here is whether parents should provide the funds (or more preferably the food) to feed their children during school holidays. Yes, there are a very, very few people who strike hard times. They need help. But the idea that so many people who receive benefits (whether in-work or out-of-work) should have their children's food provided or funded is ridiculous.
The principle that Mr Rashford, MBE, wants to see extended is the provision of free food provided by schools during term time to continue to be funded when schools are closed. The original idea of school meals in day schools was to provide food for pupils who were unable to get home for lunch or whose parents were not available to provide for them. They were paid for. It has moved on since then and now large number of pupils qualify even though their parents may well be at home and the children may be able to easily get there for their lunch. The schools are now acting in loco parentis, often providing breakfast as well.
In school holidays many children will receive their daytime food from somewhere like McDonalds or Dominos. There is no reason whatsoever why taxpayers should fund that. If you are so intent in seeing the funds provided for children's nourishment extended in such a way perhaps you and Mr Rashford, MBE, could launch a fund so that people with a similar conscience to yours could contribute towards feeding other people's children. Those of us who are uncaring uncharitable *** can continue to do nothing (except pay our taxes and NI) and slink back into our caves.
I've not shrivelled back into my cave. I've been having a G&T and my dinner.
The issue here is whether parents should provide the funds (or more preferably the food) to feed their children during school holidays. Yes, there are a very, very few people who strike hard times. They need help. But the idea that so many people who receive benefits (whether in-work or out-of-work) should have their children's food provided or funded is ridiculous.
The principle that Mr Rashford, MBE, wants to see extended is the provision of free food provided by schools during term time to continue to be funded when schools are closed. The original idea of school meals in day schools was to provide food for pupils who were unable to get home for lunch or whose parents were not available to provide for them. They were paid for. It has moved on since then and now large number of pupils qualify even though their parents may well be at home and the children may be able to easily get there for their lunch. The schools are now acting in loco parentis, often providing breakfast as well.
In school holidays many children will receive their daytime food from somewhere like McDonalds or Dominos. There is no reason whatsoever why taxpayers should fund that. If you are so intent in seeing the funds provided for children's nourishment extended in such a way perhaps you and Mr Rashford, MBE, could launch a fund so that people with a similar conscience to yours could contribute towards feeding other people's children. Those of us who are uncaring uncharitable *** can continue to do nothing (except pay our taxes and NI) and slink back into our caves.
I love these fuzzy weekends threads where people with absolutely no empathy pour scorn on people who are having a hard time of it (and the celebrity who publicises the fact) but think nothing of moaning about their cancelled holidays or how awful it is that their local shop has run out of their favourite £10 a pop bottle of wine.
//In school holidays many children will receive their daytime food from somewhere like McDonalds or Dominos.//
Not too much of a generalisation there Judge. As has been said time and time again on thors post, this is to help the genuinely needy. Those who due to coronavirus, have been made redundant or furloughed, and are struggling to make ends meet during lockdown.
Yeah, like any kind of benefit or aid, I'm sure it will be exploited by some, but those in need shouldn't been thrown under the bus because of those people.
Not too much of a generalisation there Judge. As has been said time and time again on thors post, this is to help the genuinely needy. Those who due to coronavirus, have been made redundant or furloughed, and are struggling to make ends meet during lockdown.
Yeah, like any kind of benefit or aid, I'm sure it will be exploited by some, but those in need shouldn't been thrown under the bus because of those people.
I'm one of those evil people that feel the tax I pay to provide people with free money is me doing my bit - I don't see why I should feel 'guilted' into doing anymore.
I schlep my sorry backside on the 6.32am to London Bridge every day, often returning after my kids are in bed (so not having seen either of them all day) in order to provide for me and mine to the best of my abilities, and frankly, that's all I care about.
I don't think that makes me evil, I'm doing it to look after my family, and if people genuinely can't feed their kids (and frankly I find that very difficult to believe), then that's very sad, but I fail to see how it's my problem that requires me to pay more than I'm already paying.
I schlep my sorry backside on the 6.32am to London Bridge every day, often returning after my kids are in bed (so not having seen either of them all day) in order to provide for me and mine to the best of my abilities, and frankly, that's all I care about.
I don't think that makes me evil, I'm doing it to look after my family, and if people genuinely can't feed their kids (and frankly I find that very difficult to believe), then that's very sad, but I fail to see how it's my problem that requires me to pay more than I'm already paying.
