Marcus Rashford...

gatecrasher

Well-known member
But its bollox bex. Phrases like 'starving children'... Give over. Starving children is what you have in South Sudan, not London. If there are starving children in modern day London the problem is bad parental choices, not lack of funds.
I agree bad choices
The food bank near me is always the same scummy mummys coming out with bags of food
lighting up cigarettes and getting on their i phones
 

ringo_the_lion

Well-known member
Those food parcels are a liberty though. Government have paid that cunting company £30 for them to deliver £5 worth of food and in all honesty I’m right leaning but no kid should ever go hungry and the politicians are fucking parasites
This needs looking at not Rashford, if the company is profiteering by short changing whats in the food parcels then they need sacking and get a genuine voluntary group to run it.
The loopholes footballers and the rich use to pay hardly any tax needs a total overhaul, then maybe the tax paid by the average working man/women could be reduced benefiting the majority.
 

Bexleyheath_lion

Well-known member
This needs looking at not Rashford, if the company is profiteering by short changing whats in the food parcels then they need sacking and get a genuine voluntary group to run it.
The loopholes footballers and the rich use to pay hardly any tax needs a total overhaul, then maybe the tax paid by the average working man/women could be reduced benefiting the majority.

Allegedly the director of the company doing the food parcels is a Tory donor - now I have no real issue with the capitalism that goes on, but 500% profit of something as basic a good parcel is fucking disgusting. Far better to supply those in need food tokens ffs
 

Bexleyheath_lion

Well-known member
But its bollox bex. Phrases like 'starving children'... Give over. Starving children is what you have in South Sudan, not London. If there are starving children in modern day London the problem is bad parental choices, not lack of funds.

To an extent I agree. I mean I grew up in a poor home, my parents made sure there was always food on the table. I worked 3 paper rounds before school etc to get money just to buy my own clothes - so I take it with a liberal pinch of salt when I hear people claim poverty and let’s be real there are benefits out there for everyone. Chances are you aren’t paying rent either when you are on benefits. But I also firmly believe there is a class gap and some people are genuinely struggling - I always said I don’t know anyone who uses a food bank for example - but then I discovered someone who does in my immediate circle yesterday - so I’ll help them. But the point is, the likes of Hancock get a £40k pay rise, politicians get decent pay rises and claim all manner of add ons and expenses - this food parcel is a liberty and shit like that will lose the Tories voters
 

bramcoteboy62

Well-known member
The irony is if he’d tried to help kids in South Sudan he’d have got slaughtered for that as well. “Why don’t he help kids in this country!” Damned if he does damned if he don’t.

As for bad parental choices, as I said in my previous post, that’s still not the kids fault.
Again, great point. Might as well just start these threads with ‘look lads I genuinely just do not like this young and successful footballer who’s worked extremely hard to get where he is, and I’m going to justify it by...’
 

Life with the Lions

Well-known member
I got the impression KOTJ's comments were more aligned with 'let's knock another one out for a bigger council flat and kiddie allowance' than your average couple who've fallen on hard times.
Not sure if that argument applies any more. Didn‘t the government, a few years ago, change the law so that any parent (singular or together) would not receive any more monetary benefits after their second child (or was it third?) was born, thereby stopping the Wayne & Waynetta Slobs of this world from staying on the gravy train any longer than they needed to?

Not sure if that law also allows for the Slobs to get/not get a bigger council flat/house, but on the monetary side, it’s a step in the right direction to stop parent/s using the number of kids they have to keep them in the continued lifestyle they are used to, and all at the taxpayers expense!
 

King of The Jungle

Well-known member
Staff member
Sorry, but I think it’s ridiculous to say that if couples (married or otherwise) want kids, they need to decide if they can afford to have them before conceiving!

What about circumstances? It’s 2006 and you both decide you want kids. The jobs you are in are paying both of you fantastic salaries. You already have two cars, both on affordable HP, and a lovely house on an affordable mortgage. The following year your wife gives birth to twins! You’re both so very happy. Everything is going right in the world. Then...

Its 2008. A year later. The big economic crash. Economists predicted it, but you weren’t told. You didn’t think this was ever going to happen. Within months you’ve lost both your jobs, the cars and the house, with a couple of toddlers to feed!

Is it really the fault of couples who want to do well and help grow the population in this country, when so many of us are living much longer than our parents were? Why should they be penalised but not the banks who caused the mess in the first place? Why should the banks get a bail out, but not the people in this country that lost money in those banks?

No one knows what’s round the corner. Sorry, but your comments are of the sort I’d expect from an uncaring Tory (though not saying you are totally uncaring or a Tory), and I really hope none of the above ever happens to you or your family!

There but for the grace of God..... indeed!
I accept the premis of your post, that of there should be help available for those unfortunate enough to fall on hard times. I do not begrudge help for those people. However, the opening paragraph of your post is completely nonsensical to me... How can it be ridiculous for prospective parents to consider whether they can afford children before conceiving??? Surely everyone has a responsibility to be reasonably certain that they can afford to feed, clothe and shelter a new life before creating it?

That said, yes, I concur that some unfortunate families will fall on hard times, and as I say I don't begrudge them support... However, I have lived in a country where there was very little support for such families, and seeing that first hand and the lengths that parents would go to to give their children what they need, made me realise that we really don't have things too bad in this country with regard to welfare should people fall on hard times.

I suppose what I am trying to say is that I personally don't believe that there is any need for children to be portrayed as being undernourished or close to starving in modern Britain. I find Rashfords portrayal of the situation rather Dickensian and inflammatory.
 

kevrelles

Well-known member
I don't know the answer to this.so perhaps someone can enlighten me. The community Rashford initially helped. Was it prominently the black community ?
 

King of The Jungle

Well-known member
Staff member
Sad ain’t it, when anyone try’s to do any good in the world these days they’re accused of ‘virtue signalling’.
back in the day footballers used to use there spare time to go gambling, drinking and shag brasses.
Rashford uses his spare time, and position, to try and help some disadvantaged kids and he gets slaughtered for it. What a cold hearted, arse about face world we live in.
Do the disadvantaged kids have it as hard as poor kids in the third world? Of course not. But they can still have it pretty shit. And helping these kids out of poverty will only benefit our country in the long run.
Do some of these kids parents make poor lifestyle choices? Of course they do. Still doesn’t make it the kids fault does it.
No it doesn't make it the kids fault... But what about the kids of the parents on minimum wage who are paying for others kids?
 

King of The Jungle

Well-known member
Staff member
Yet again we are cunting off footballers who care about kids in this country going hungry. Footballers pay shit loads of tax, most footballers come from poor working class backgrounds so know what it’s like to have very little. Why isn’t everyone cunting off all the posh boy actors who make just as much money as footballers but seem to do fuck all about helping poor kids. The media want you to attack footballers because they want the working classes to fight each-other while the upper classes sit there and laugh.
'Footballers pay shit loads of tax' - some do most likely, but I'm sure plenty don't.
 

Guernsey Wall

Well-known member
I am sick fed up of your bullshit.

If anyone wants kids, surely they put together the simplest maths to decide whether they can support them or not... Its not like the little fuckers just magically appear is it? I don't buy a dog and then expect all my neighbours to pay for the woofers pedigree chum... And considering it is far cheaper per week to feed a dog than a child, it is even more ridiculous that some people should expect me to feed their kids than them feed my dog!

As to Marcus's latest rant, about the quality of the food parcels... Er... Well Marcus... Maybe if you took the 85% of your wages that you put into an offshore tax free business account and actually paid tax on your wages, like Brian, who works nights stacking shelves in tescos, and whose tax bill has gone up because of your campaign for free school meals, maybe the quality would be better...

But oh no Marcus... You keep virtue signalling, make us all pay more tax for irresponsible parents, while you squirrel your money away.

You utter wanker. We all know what you are.
''offshore tax free business account and actually paid tax on your wages'''

Err, ive got mouths to feed !!
 

Lionz

Well-known member
Not sure if that argument applies any more. Didn‘t the government, a few years ago, change the law so that any parent (singular or together) would not receive any more monetary benefits after their second child (or was it third?) was born, thereby stopping the Wayne & Waynetta Slobs of this world from staying on the gravy train any longer than they needed to?

Not sure if that law also allows for the Slobs to get/not get a bigger council flat/house, but on the monetary side, it’s a step in the right direction to stop parent/s using the number of kids they have to keep them in the continued lifestyle they are used to, and all at the taxpayers expense!
Mate, not sure - I've been away 20 yrs and that was one of the 'perks' that helped convince me to fcuk off. If it's changed, great.

They must have transferred the payment to B&B's around Dover instead :wagging: