|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 18, 2024 10:18:02 GMT
Thomas looked at that link and there nothing about poverty saying it was Zero unless I'm looking in the wrong place That old chestnut? I gave you the exact quote and reference from what the author got his data from. Put your specs on . ( paragraph 14 of the article) There no paragraph 14 I copied &pasted what it said Seeing Im struggling to find it maybe you can copy &paste it so I can see it |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 18, 2024 10:20:11 GMT
That old chestnut? I gave you the exact quote and reference from what the author got his data from. Put your specs on . ( paragraph 14 of the article) There no paragraph 14 I copied &pasted what it said Seeing Im struggling to find it maybe you can copy &paste it so I can see it
The importance of these changes should not be underestimated. But children and pensioners can’t tell the whole story. In fact, the total number of people lifted out of poverty, once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. See Table 3b: Estimated number of individuals in relative/absolute low income, United Kingdom, Column I, comparing 1997/98 with 2009/10.) |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 18, 2024 11:27:27 GMT
There no paragraph 14 I copied &pasted what it said Seeing Im struggling to find it maybe you can copy &paste it so I can see it
The importance of these changes should not be underestimated. But children and pensioners can’t tell the whole story. In fact, the total number of people lifted out of poverty, once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. See Table 3b: Estimated number of individuals in relative/absolute low income, United Kingdom, Column I, comparing 1997/98 with 2009/10.)once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. Like I said then when. We had the effects of the Worldwide recession The Zero.statement is obviously I's own opinion on Selective data of 2017/18. To leave out the period from.1997 to 2017 A period of 10 yrs is dishonest |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 18, 2024 11:35:24 GMT
Figure 2: New Labour’s record on poverty. Source: DWP Households Below Average Income
The importance of these changes should not be underestimated. But children and pensioners can’t tell the whole story. In fact, the total number of people lifted out of poverty, once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. See Table 3b: Estimated number of individuals in relative/absolute low income, United Kingdom, Column I, comparing 1997/98 with 2009/10.) once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. Like I said then when. We had the effects of the Worldwide recession The Zero.statement is obviously I's own opinion on Selective data of 2017/18. To leave out the period from.1997 to 2017 A period of 10 yrs is dishonest what are you actually gibbering about? The publication came out in 2017/18 , but the data in table 3b compared figures from 1997/98 with 2009/10 , the new labour government years.. The discussion isnt concerned with what happened 2010 to 2017 , we are talking about new labours failure to lift people out of poverty . |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 19, 2024 20:43:26 GMT
once housing costs are accounted for, is an underwhelming zero. (This figure will surprise some people. For clarity it comes from the DWP and ONS publication Households Below Average Income, 2017/18. Like I said then when. We had the effects of the Worldwide recession The Zero.statement is obviously I's own opinion on Selective data of 2017/18. To leave out the period from.1997 to 2017 A period of 10 yrs is dishonest what are you actually gibbering about? The publication came out in 2017/18 , but the data in table 3b compared figures from 1997/98 with 2009/10 , the new labour government years.. The discussion isnt concerned with what happened 2010 to 2017 , we are talking about new labours failure to lift people out of poverty . And my point what was Clear he why didn't he.pick the years between 1997 and 2017/18 a ten year span but chose to choose the year of recession That I's just dishonest Don't expect you to understand that. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 19, 2024 20:46:57 GMT
what are you actually gibbering about? The publication came out in 2017/18 , but the data in table 3b compared figures from 1997/98 with 2009/10 , the new labour government years.. The discussion isnt concerned with what happened 2010 to 2017 , we are talking about new labours failure to lift people out of poverty . And my point what was Clear he why didn't he.pick the years between 1997 and 2017/18 a ten year span but chose to choose the year of recession That I's just dishonest Dear god. .......becuase.......its an article about new labours economic model................ |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 20, 2024 17:55:33 GMT
New Deal for Young People (NDYP) received by far the greatest proportion of New Deal funding (£3.15 billion through to 2002 ). It targeted unemployed youth (aged 18–24) unemployed for 6 months or longer. New Deal 25+ targeted those aged at least 25 years who were unemployed for eighteen months or more. In April 1998 when NDYP was rolled out nationally, its client group represented eight and half per cent of the claimant count in Great Britain—that are some 119,000 young people who had been registered unemployed for at least six months.[31] Since NDYP was launched in 1998 "youth unemployment has fallen noticeably more quickly compared to that of other age groups".[32] Between 1997 and 2000 unemployment in the NDYP client group fell by 70 per cent; and between 1998, when NDYP was launched, and 2000 by 56 per cent. This compares favourably with the fall in the overall number of 18 to 24 year olds registered unemployed and with the fall in claimant unemployed across all age groups (see Table 2). Table 2: Trends in unemployment since 1997 FALL 1997-2000 FALL 1998-2000 Fall in claimant unemployed in the NDYP client group 70% 56% Fall in claimant unemployed in all 18-24 year olds 37% 23% Fall in claimant unemployed across all age groups 49% 26% Source: Department for Education and Employment, Ev. p. 57. 24. Since NDYP was introduced it has affected a large number of people. By the end of November 2000, there had been 568,400 starts on New Deal unemployed youth? No labour government has left unemployment lower than what they found it in history , apart from one administration away back in 1924.
Most recently, Tony Blair’s Labour party entered government in May 1997 with unemployment at 7.2%. By the time the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government took office in May 2010, unemployment had risen to 7.9%. Again, absolute numbers had also risen. largely because they invented crap like ‘edukashun, edukashun, edukashun’ to con children into fifty grand of debt they'll never repay sonas to not appear on unemployment figures so people like you can post stuff like that hoping we’ve forgotten |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 21, 2024 8:17:53 GMT
unemployed youth? No labour government has left unemployment lower than what they found it in history , apart from one administration away back in 1924.
Most recently, Tony Blair’s Labour party entered government in May 1997 with unemployment at 7.2%. By the time the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government took office in May 2010, unemployment had risen to 7.9%. Again, absolute numbers had also risen. largely because they invented crap like ‘edukashun, edukashun, edukashun’ to con children into fifty grand of debt they'll never repay sonas to not appear on unemployment figures so people like you can post stuff like that hoping we’ve forgotten im assuming despite quoting me John , you are addressing your post to lefty the labour supporter ? I fully agree. The labour strategy in action , keep people in the dark as much as possible , and feed them on bullshit hoping we have selective amnesia. The mushroom syndrome tactic. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 23, 2024 13:29:10 GMT
largely because they invented crap like ‘edukashun, edukashun, edukashun’ to con children into fifty grand of debt they'll never repay sonas to not appear on unemployment figures so people like you can post stuff like that hoping we’ve forgotten im assuming despite quoting me John , you are addressing your post to lefty the labour supporter ? I fully agree. The labour strategy in action , keep people in the dark as much as possible , and feed them on bullshit hoping we have selective amnesia. The mushroom syndrome tactic. bloody quote tags.
yes, i jumped into the conversation, probably at the wrong point.
|
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 24, 2024 10:28:33 GMT
And my point what was Clear he why didn't he.pick the years between 1997 and 2017/18 a ten year span but chose to choose the year of recession That I's just dishonest Dear god. .......becuase.......its an article about new labours economic model................ Ecomic model based on one year are you Having a laugh 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 24, 2024 10:50:59 GMT
im assuming despite quoting me John , you are addressing your post to lefty the labour supporter ? I fully agree. The labour strategy in action , keep people in the dark as much as possible , and feed them on bullshit hoping we have selective amnesia. The mushroom syndrome tactic. bloody quote tags.
yes, i jumped into the conversation, probably at the wrong point.
OK education isn't just based on higher Education but they made it easier for the working class by attaining higher exam results and their still a lot going to uni now despite them paying so it's not much of a obstacle. Where Scotland is you Have to be a resident in Scotland what is a obstacle to the majority of British people. And you being a Unionists I think you are should realise that |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 24, 2024 11:56:15 GMT
bloody quote tags.
yes, i jumped into the conversation, probably at the wrong point.
OK education isn't just based on higher Education but they made it easier for the working class by attaining higher exam results and their still a lot going to uni now despite them paying so it's not much of a obstacle. Where Scotland is you Have to be a resident in Scotland what is a obstacle to the majority of British people. And you being a Unionists I think you are should realise that The reality is Harold Wilson created the expansion to higher and further adult education as part of his ‘white heat of technology’ mantra and clearly understood the money it cost would actually be recovered many times over from the increased tax take from tbe successful students whose tuition free education would give them the chance of better and more taxable jobs. In stark contrast Blair expanded education with his mantra not to improve the lot of the people but to hide the unemployed and in some cases the unemployable for a few years, while Brown fucked the university funding forcing them to charge students for the right to waste three years of their life. While in the EU Scotland was forced to give any non uk EU citizen free education under a directive that EU citizens were required to be treated by educational establishments exactly as residents of the nation state were. They had the laws changed specially so they could fuck the English, Brussels made no complaint |
|
|
|
Post by Totheleft on Feb 24, 2024 12:20:17 GMT
Well obviously Wilson didn't think the working class could obtain uni education
Because unable to reach the Standards of education.
But like I said payment is no obstacle
Think now there more in uni now then there' ever was
Has for the foundation of state institutions the NHS was set up for free access for all UK residents regardiles
Of there immigration status or wealth.
But them on the right Complain about immigrants using it.
They now pay a fee on there visaà
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Feb 24, 2024 14:57:11 GMT
bloody quote tags.
yes, i jumped into the conversation, probably at the wrong point.
OK education isn't just based on higher Education but they made it easier for the working class by attaining higher exam results and their still a lot going to uni now despite them paying so it's not much of a obstacle. Where Scotland is you Have to be a resident in Scotland what is a obstacle to the majority of British people. And you being a Unionists I think you are should realise that What exactly are you gibbering about now? You talked about unemployment , and unemployed youth in the uk. John replied about new labour encouraging everyone going on to university , then applying tuition fees to marketise further education with the quip this was done in part to keep vast numbers of unemployed youth off labours unemployment figures. You then replied to that by waffling on about tuition fees . You do realise labour introduced tuition fees in scotland as well ?
The facts about the history of tuition fees in Scotland are stark and unarguable:
– in 1997 when Labour came to power, higher education was free.
– the Labour government then introduced fees of £1000 a year across the UK, which meant a four-year degree in Scotland suddenly cost £4000.
– in 2000, the Labour-led Scottish Executive replaced said fees with a “graduate endowment”, meaning that Scottish students paid £2000 retrospectively towards the cost of their education – half of what it had cost them under Labour’s fees system in 1999, but still £2000 more than the £0 they’d been paying in 1997.
In the space of three years, then, while claiming to have “abolished” tuition fees, Labour had in fact increased the cost of a degree in Scotland from zero to £2000. Those are the cold, hard, unyielding truths. |
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Feb 25, 2024 11:02:07 GMT
One side issue to the dismal events this week was the Labour v SNP row over Gaza, Starmer may well have enraged Scots over his shafting the SNP Day Motion that many may no longer vote for him at the next election.
Simon Heffer does (as ever) put it succinctly in the DT today.
|
|
