BBC News - PM's child poverty claims 'inaccurate,' says statistics watchdog
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53588275

Hes a politician, if you want truth he's not your man.
Despite the affable clown persona he's still a monatarist Tory with an inbred affinity to the haves in society.

Football season just ended and another political thread started.

You are driving people away from this Clarets message board.

I hardly log in now and I’m sure many others are of the same ilk.

Give it a rest ffs

UTC

Did you think the thread was about our former player David Johnson?

International class wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:44 am

Football season just ended and another political thread started.

You are driving people away from this Clarets message board.

I hardly log in now and I’m sure many others are of the same ilk.

Give it a rest ffs

UTC

Ignore it then ,quite simple really

International class wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:44 am

Football season just ended and another political thread started.

You are driving people away from this Clarets message board.

I hardly log in now and I’m sure many others are of the same ilk.

Give it a rest ffs

UTC

It's the only party political thread on the front page Dick.

Politics I have no issue with its Boxing.Cricket and Car racing threads that leave me cold

International class wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:44 am

Football season just ended and another political thread started.

You are driving people away from this Clarets message board.

I hardly log in now and I’m sure many others are of the same ilk.

Give it a rest ffs

UTC

The inability of some people to not click on something they don’t want to read astounds me.

I guess you'd have to ask him

The problem is that he doesn't have to.

The 'Octopus Energy' thread definitely wasn't what I expected.

He has a track record of not telling the truth (he's been sacked for it more than once) and yet people voted for him. Why should he start telling the truth now?

Very clearly the from the last few years evidence the truth is “overrated”.

Look at the massive whoppers told by this government and by Trump.
Its now a case of what can I get away with in dealing with the here and now - whether that be selling Brexit, dealing with Covid or doing whatever is needed to get re-elected in America.
The strategy is if I can get enough people to believe it now it helps me achieve what I need to and when I get found out only a fraction of people will be bothered and even then I’ll move on to the next lie in trashing the opposition. The continuous stream of lies just becomes the norm then.

For anyone that disagrees just work yourself through the Covid timeline and you will see exactly what I mean.

No. Johnson is a proven serial liar.

All MPs and peers have been asked to come up with solutions to the social care crisis, after Boris Johnson admitted his claim to have a plan was untrue.

In an extraordinary letter, Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has asked them all to “share their views” – with the aim of kickstarting talks in May.

The move comes after the prime minister acknowledged he had no proposals, despite claiming – as he entered No 10 last summer – to have a “clear plan to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve”.
Indi 06/03/20

thomaspaine wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:28 am

No. Johnson is a proven serial liar.

Definitely a serial liar.

He clamed sugar puffs were a healthier breakfast than shredded wheat

It's a sad state of reality that lies are now pretty much the norm.
Public figures just spout anything when called to account.
So long as they've said 'something', they don't care if it's believed these days because it's forgotten so soon after.
Look at Cummings? The crap he came out with?
It's currently unbelievable what's going on in USA just now.
There's such a vast, fast turnover of news these days, the population just accept they'll be lied to.
It's an everyday part of 'what is'.

Think it would be a case of 'horror, shock, probe' if he ever was proved to have told the truth.

Politicians worldwide could could literally lie about anything at the moment and the vast majority of people will just shrug their shoulders where once up on a time there would be national outrage.

Cummings' galavanting to Barnard Castle set a precedent for this govt. They say whatever they want to whoever may care to be listening and expect it to be unopposed. Very sad state of affairs but that's what was voted in.

Is Johnson capable of telling the truth?

No.

Next question.

I think most politicians have said things that were not factually true. Am I defending him - No but because there are plenty of names we could probably come up with where MPs from different sides of the house who have been guilty of this.

Child poverty should not be an issue in today's world so again, don''t take this as something I don't care about.

For the sake of bringing some perspective to the discussion and why a politician lying is unlikely to make one difference to anyone views on here...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/e ... y-re-lying

Interestingly the view on Corbyn historically and his marxist views and the perception by many to be of the far left/communist/militant leaning, starts to use words like comrades in his thanks for people supporting his legal fund. That's an interesting choice of words don't you think? That should be a good one for the internal biases to compute and process.

That article probably sums up why these debates end up with tit for tat interactions because it doesn't really matter what anyone else says, you are likely to still only accept the person/party that can deliver your desired political outcome.

Interestingly those votes which were lost by Labour in the last GE would fit this theory too. Most people I know who supported labour historically wanted brexit. Those votes were lost because of the loss of faith that JC could deliver this, or even wanted it. They didn't buy into the far left ideologies that now exist within many of the remaining supporters that appear to make themselves publicaly known that red is the only colour that matters.

Silkyskills1 wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 1:55 pm

Cummings' galavanting to Barnard Castle set a precedent for this govt. They say whatever they want to whoever may care to be listening and expect it to be unopposed. Very sad state of affairs but that's what was voted in.

Except that they've been lying to us for ten years, not just since Cummings went to Barnard Castle.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

Is any politician capable of not distorting matter?

Great bloke is Johnson. He's adored by many particularly females. Hehe. I'm so jealous.!!!

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:37 pm

I think most politicians have said things that were not factually true. Am I defending him - No but because there are plenty of names we could probably come up with where MPs from different sides of the house who have been guilty of this.

Child poverty should not be an issue in today's world so again, don''t take this as something I don't care about.

For the sake of bringing some perspective to the discussion and why a politician lying is unlikely to make one difference to anyone views on here...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/e ... y-re-lying

Interestingly the view on Corbyn historically and his marxist views and the perception by many to be of the far left/communist/militant leaning, starts to use words like comrades in his thanks for people supporting his legal fund. That's an interesting choice of words don't you think? That should be a good one for the internal biases to compute and process.

That article probably sums up why these debates end up with tit for tat interactions because it doesn't really matter what anyone else says, you are likely to still only accept the person/party that can deliver your desired political outcome.

Interestingly those votes which were lost by Labour in the last GE would fit this theory too. Most people I know who supported labour historically wanted brexit. Those votes were lost because of the loss of faith that JC could deliver this, or even wanted it. They didn't buy into the far left ideologies that now exist within many of the remaining supporters that appear to make themselves publicaly known that red is the only colour that matters.

Difference here is that this serial liar Johnson is our Prime Minister!

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:54 pm

Except that they've been lying to us for ten years, not just since Cummings went to Barnard Castle.

Your reading the wrong papers I think. Cancel the Morning Star its not giving you a balanced view on things.

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:37 pm

I think most politicians have said things that were not factually true. Am I defending him - No but because there are plenty of names we could probably come up with where MPs from different sides of the house who have been guilty of this.

Child poverty should not be an issue in today's world so again, don''t take this as something I don't care about.

For the sake of bringing some perspective to the discussion and why a politician lying is unlikely to make one difference to anyone views on here...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/e ... y-re-lying

Interestingly the view on Corbyn historically and his marxist views and the perception by many to be of the far left/communist/militant leaning, starts to use words like comrades in his thanks for people supporting his legal fund. That's an interesting choice of words don't you think? That should be a good one for the internal biases to compute and process.

That article probably sums up why these debates end up with tit for tat interactions because it doesn't really matter what anyone else says, you are likely to still only accept the person/party that can deliver your desired political outcome.

Interestingly those votes which were lost by Labour in the last GE would fit this theory too. Most people I know who supported labour historically wanted brexit. Those votes were lost because of the loss of faith that JC could deliver this, or even wanted it. They didn't buy into the far left ideologies that now exist within many of the remaining supporters that appear to make themselves publicaly known that red is the only colour that matters.

Labour lost the last election for a number of reasons. One major one and this applies to the Brexit vote as well was that people have seen their communities changed beyond recognition and never had a say about it. Well they have now. Remember Mrs Duffy in Rochdale when that idiot Brown left his microphone on and called her a bigot for mentioning this? This of course applies to people in communities. People from somewhere not people from anywhere, who put nothing much into society.

What politician or political party actually tells the truth, none of them will give a straight answer of yes or no, it's part of the deal when you are campaigning or elected to talk around subjects until everyone loses interest in the original question.

My question would be is child poverty the fault of any Government past or present or are there a lot of so called parents not prepared to accept responsibility for their own actions?

Buxtonclaret wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 12:45 pm

It's a sad state of reality that lies are now pretty much the norm.
Public figures just spout anything when called to account.
So long as they've said 'something', they don't care if it's believed these days because it's forgotten so soon after.
Look at Cummings? The crap he came out with?
It's currently unbelievable what's going on in USA just now.
There's such a vast, fast turnover of news these days, the population just accept they'll be lied to.
It's an everyday part of 'what is'.

The lies are doubled down. The vast majority of newspaper readers in this country are spoon fed the same lies, and when the truth emerges it’s not reported on. Look up thread a little and Clarethomer is talking about “far left” politics in the Labour Party (the far left believes in ending private property - not merely nationalising a few industries), which is an entirely inaccurate description. I don’t believe Clarethomer is stupid, so I don’t believe he’s using the term out of ignorance, but because he’s seen it used in the media. It is the old dictum of repeat a lie often enough and it becomes an accepted truth. Because it’s not correct it’s therefore the media misinforming - doing the exact opposite of what they’re supposed to do.

On iPlayer there’s a series on the Murdoch empire that illustrates his use of media to further his own interests. That is no longer a free press reporting facts, and even if the other billionaire owned titles don’t do it as much, they’re only slightly less culpable.

Stayingup wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:08 pm

Your reading the wrong papers I think. Cancel the Morning Star its not giving you a balanced view on things.

I'm 72 years old. I don't need newspapers of any sort, to tell me which party tells the most lies. The Tories are streets ahead of anyone else and they have been as long as I've been alive. They get away with it because of the right wing press and people these days are just too idle or apathetic to do anything about it. They are more interested in 'Strictly' and their iPhones than real life.

Once of a day, an MP would resign if they were found out to have lied, but these days, with Johnson in No 10, he can't sack anyone for lying because he's a proven liar himself. He's like Trump, in that anything said against him is 'Fake news'.

If anyone is reading the wrong papers, it's not me. I strongly suspect it's you.

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:08 pm

I'm 72 years old. I don't need newspapers of any sort, to tell me which party tells the most lies. The Tories are streets ahead of anyone else and they have been as long as I've been alive. They get away with it because of the right wing press and people these days are just too idle or apathetic to do anything about it. They are more interested in 'Strictly' and their iPhones than real life.

Once of a day, an MP would resign if they were found out to have lied, but these days, with Johnson in No 10, he can't sack anyone for lying because he's a proven liar himself. He's like Trump, in that anything said against him is 'Fake news'.

If anyone is reading the wrong papers, it's not me. I strongly suspect it's you.

Tony Blairs government were pretty good at it, certainly not streets behind the Conservatives

Grumps wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:17 pm

Tony Blairs government were pretty good at it, certainly not streets behind the Conservatives

Tony Blair was the nearest thing to a Tory the Labour Party has EVER had in charge. He wasn't nicknamed 'Bliar' for nothing.

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 2:37 pm

I think most politicians have said things that were not factually true. Am I defending him - No but because there are plenty of names we could probably come up with where MPs from different sides of the house who have been guilty of this.

Child poverty should not be an issue in today's world so again, don''t take this as something I don't care about.

For the sake of bringing some perspective to the discussion and why a politician lying is unlikely to make one difference to anyone views on here...

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/e ... y-re-lying

Interestingly the view on Corbyn historically and his marxist views and the perception by many to be of the far left/communist/militant leaning, starts to use words like comrades in his thanks for people supporting his legal fund. That's an interesting choice of words don't you think? That should be a good one for the internal biases to compute and process.

That article probably sums up why these debates end up with tit for tat interactions because it doesn't really matter what anyone else says, you are likely to still only accept the person/party that can deliver your desired political outcome.

Interestingly those votes which were lost by Labour in the last GE would fit this theory too. Most people I know who supported labour historically wanted brexit. Those votes were lost because of the loss of faith that JC could deliver this, or even wanted it. They didn't buy into the far left ideologies that now exist within many of the remaining supporters that appear to make themselves publicaly known that red is the only colour that matters.

Not sure...but isn't this just a long-winded way of saying "It would be worse under Corbyn?".

Thought I’d change the title for you

Surely the correct answer to the question is "Yes......most sane people are capable of doing so". The problem with Boris is that he has been proved to be a liar so often that nobody would know if he did tell the truth.

Bigvince wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:40 pm

Thought I’d change the title for you

snap

Johnson is proven to lie by saying child poverty is getting better. Yep he got the facts wrong and he is a liar.

Diane Abbot couldn't get her figures right about funding policies.

There was Fiona Anasanya and her perversion of justice incident.

It just proves that there a people on both sides of the house talk about things that are factually incorrect and are capable of being averse to telling the truth.

I think we better ask CT for that politics board if we are going to make a thread out of every lie or statements of questionable facts. This could become a busy board.

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:58 pm

Johnson is proven to lie by saying child poverty is getting better. Yep he got the facts wrong and he is a liar.

Diane Abbot couldn't get her figures right about funding policies.

There was Fiona Anasanya and her perversion of justice incident.

It just proves that there a people on both sides of the house talk about things that are factually incorrect and are capable of being averse to telling the truth.

I think we better ask CT for that politics board if we are going to make a thread out of every lie or statements of questionable facts. This could become a busy board.

The problem is with Boris Johnson is that it's well known he will lie about anything he can get away with, and that means nothing is off limits.

Would you lie if you knew the damage it could cause others, yet wouldn't care about it?

Let's forget the politicians for a second because if you can't accept that it happens on both sides of the house, there is no point in trying to discuss that with you as your inherent biases and my inherent lack of tolerance for people who can't show humility in their views when it comes to politics isn't going to get us anywhere.

This is all about our PM trying to mis-lead the public about child poverty. Let's see if the fine members of this board can have an adult conversation around the topic of child poverty?

Poverty as a whole has hardly changed in the last 2 decades.
Here you will see the change in poverty rates by age.
Poverty for children appears to have dropped 2% in nearly 2 decades and we have 4.6m children living in poverty
What I can see from the above is that child poverty under the conservatives has been at a lower point in their tenure than at any point in the 6-7 years of Labour's tenure represented in this study.

The bottom line is that rather than calling out our PM for being a liar, perhaps consider that what is factually correct is that no party has solved child poverty. Regardless of what promises are made (I'm pretty sure the then Labour leader, Tony Blair said he would end child poverty by 2020) this problem will not be influenced by the words of Boris Johnson or any other politician by the looks of it.

It's not about what he has said and who said it. The facts are that NO politician has done anything for child poverty which is acceptable in the last 2 decades and if you want to start pulling people up for lying, please at least be consistent and balanced.

International class wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:44 am

Football season just ended and another political thread started.

You are driving people away from this Clarets message board.

I hardly log in now and I’m sure many others are of the same ilk.

Give it a rest ffs

UTC

You have posted 91 times in 4 years.
Seems like you have hardly logged on since you joined

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:58 pm

Let's forget the politicians for a second because if you can't accept that it happens on both sides of the house, there is no point in trying to discuss that with you as your inherent biases and my inherent lack of tolerance for people who can't show humility in their views when it comes to politics isn't going to get us anywhere.

This is all about our PM trying to mis-lead the public about child poverty. Let's see if the fine members of this board can have an adult conversation around the topic of child poverty?

Poverty as a whole has hardly changed in the last 2 decades.

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.44.35.png

Here you will see the change in poverty rates by age.

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.45.58.png

Poverty for children appears to have dropped 2% in nearly 2 decades and we have 4.6m children living in poverty

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.50.26.png

What I can see from the above is that child poverty under the conservatives has been at a lower point in their tenure than at any point in the 6-7 years of Labour's tenure represented in this study.

The bottom line is that rather than calling out our PM for being a liar, perhaps consider that what is factually correct is that no party has solved child poverty. Regardless of what promises are made (I'm pretty sure the then Labour leader, Tony Blair said he would end child poverty by 2020) this problem will not be influenced by the words of Boris Johnson or any other politician by the looks of it.

It's not about what he has said and who said it. The facts are that NO politician has done anything for child poverty which is acceptable in the last 2 decades and if you want to start pulling people up for lying, please at least be consistent and balanced.

All politicians lie and stretch the truth, but Johnson is on a completely different level. Cameron, Osborne, IDS, and others told some massive porkies (as I believe Blair and members of his government also did) but they all look like saints compared to Johnson. And with a liar in charge, the whole culture of the government is to just lie, and so they roll out of Patel, Gove, and Hancock too. Even my Tory father in law is appalled by him. So to call for equivalence - if we discuss a Johnson lie we have to balance it with a Labour one - is nonsense. This balance you’re calling for never existed when people screeched: “Labour will trash the economy!” or “Corbyn is a traitor to our country!” I don’t remember anyone saying: “but for balance I should also mention that the Tories have run up a bigger debt than all of Labour’s in history” or “if Johnson doesn’t release the Russia report quickly, I’ll suspect he’s traitorous too.”

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 7:08 pm

I'm 72 years old. I don't need newspapers of any sort, to tell me which party tells the most lies. The Tories are streets ahead of anyone else and they have been as long as I've been alive. They get away with it because of the right wing press and people these days are just too idle or apathetic to do anything about it. They are more interested in 'Strictly' and their iPhones than real life.

Once of a day, an MP would resign if they were found out to have lied, but these days, with Johnson in No 10, he can't sack anyone for lying because he's a proven liar himself. He's like Trump, in that anything said against him is 'Fake news'.

If anyone is reading the wrong papers, it's not me. I strongly suspect it's you.

Well said that Man!........Now if we can just get you to give Brady a chance.

Fast forward to next election..........

"Even in the despair of Covid 19 ... W, w, we created thousands of future jobs... er, um er ah ah. yes many died, erm um um but it, b b b ah it created vacancies... for you erm young and erm er old..."

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:58 pm

Let's forget the politicians for a second because if you can't accept that it happens on both sides of the house, there is no point in trying to discuss that with you as your inherent biases and my inherent lack of tolerance for people who can't show humility in their views when it comes to politics isn't going to get us anywhere.

This is all about our PM trying to mis-lead the public about child poverty. Let's see if the fine members of this board can have an adult conversation around the topic of child poverty?

Poverty as a whole has hardly changed in the last 2 decades.

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.44.35.png

Here you will see the change in poverty rates by age.

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.45.58.png

Poverty for children appears to have dropped 2% in nearly 2 decades and we have 4.6m children living in poverty

Screenshot 2020-07-30 at 20.50.26.png

What I can see from the above is that child poverty under the conservatives has been at a lower point in their tenure than at any point in the 6-7 years of Labour's tenure represented in this study.

The bottom line is that rather than calling out our PM for being a liar, perhaps consider that what is factually correct is that no party has solved child poverty. Regardless of what promises are made (I'm pretty sure the then Labour leader, Tony Blair said he would end child poverty by 2020) this problem will not be influenced by the words of Boris Johnson or any other politician by the looks of it.

It's not about what he has said and who said it. The facts are that NO politician has done anything for child poverty which is acceptable in the last 2 decades and if you want to start pulling people up for lying, please at least be consistent and balanced.

A Guardian article, but written by Peter Oborne - a Conservative commentator:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ying-media

AndrewJB wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:25 pm

A Guardian article, but written by Peter Oborne - a Conservative commentator:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ying-media

I haven't argued about the lies. I don't intend to argue about the lies. Out of the stats I have produced to aid the discussion around child poverty and the record over the last 2 decades factually tells you that how well you can lie, or not is irrelevant to the actual issue. Child poverty is a disgrace and a stain on this country.

If you all want to keep going on about this abhorrent PM of ours and the fact that he gets away with being a liar and as the guardian article explains, he has lied about hospitals and police etc, I have just one question that I would like you to answer....


Why is it that even though these were well worn debates in the election, the country chose this person over all the other options?


Just how bad were the other options... He isn't even a good liar as people have pointed out.

The problem with poverty is that not everyone agrees on the definition. According to some commentators, the "less than 60% of median income" definition is the perfect definition of poverty, which is why there are so many more poor people here than in, say, Somalia. Because poverty isn't about having no food, ho roof, no education, it's about having less than the person next door.

And this is why governments can't eradicate it. An average poverty stricken family now is one that has less than £355 income per week after paying all taxes including council tax, pension contributions, child support, student support. It varies depending on size of family, but that's the average. It's 60% of the median income which is £30,773 p.a.

Twenty years ago, using figures adjusted in real terms to allow for inflation, the median wage was £23,710 and the poverty line for the same average family was £264 per week. The average median income has risen by 30% over 20 years, meaning that the average person can by 30% more stuff than they bought twenty years ago. Some would call this getting richer. If you have more money, you are richer. But it doesn't work that way using government stats, because the family next door has more things too. Getting richer is not about getting more things for yourself, it's about getting ahead of the person next door.

So the family from 20 years ago with an inflation adjusted income of £280. They weren't poor. They were above the poverty line. Suppose that family was given 25% extra purchasing power to buy 25% extra things? They can have more or better food, they can have more holidays, they can have more household goods and cars and clothes and stuff generally, Are they richer for those 25% extra? No, they are poorer. They have income of £350 per week and are below the poverty line.

That's why it's hard to get people out of poverty. You can't do it by giving everyone more money. You can only do it by taking money away from people in the middle, because if everyone gets richer, then no-one gets richer. This is the scandal that the Guardian and similar are railing about - they don't care about the poor getting richer; what they are bothered about is that the rich aren't getting poorer.

Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 30, 2020 11:01 pm

Well said that Man!........Now if we can just get you to give Brady a chance.

How many chances do you think he should be given? I've run out of fingers mate.

clarethomer wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 31, 2020 3:41 pm

I haven't argued about the lies. I don't intend to argue about the lies. Out of the stats I have produced to aid the discussion around child poverty and the record over the last 2 decades factually tells you that how well you can lie, or not is irrelevant to the actual issue. Child poverty is a disgrace and a stain on this country.

If you all want to keep going on about this abhorrent PM of ours and the fact that he gets away with being a liar and as the guardian article explains, he has lied about hospitals and police etc, I have just one question that I would like you to answer....


Why is it that even though these were well worn debates in the election, the country chose this person over all the other options?


Just how bad were the other options... He isn't even a good liar as people have pointed out.

Johnson had 87% of print media by circulation propagandising for him, and the same had been attacking Labour fairly relentlessly too. While I don’t think that’s the only reason for the result, there can’t be any question of it playing a large role.

On iPlayer there’s a three part documentary on Murdoch and his media empire. Anyone watching it would be forgiven for wondering how a foreigner has had so much influence on our governments over the last forty years.

Is Johnson capable of telling the truth? No
Is any politician capable of telling the truth? No