Modern Tory party only f**king kids financially and socially, insist officials

[blacksunday]

With allegations of child abuse against former Conservative prime minister Edward Heath, the current Tory government has promised they’ll only ever f*ck kids financially and socially.

Detectives in Wiltshire, London, Jersey, Kent and Hampshire are now known to be examining claims that the former Tory leader was a paedophile, though government officials insisted the current crop are not that way inclined whatsoever.

A party spokesperson explained, “We’re not into the direct physical abuse of children, not at all. We’re more into the unrelenting socio-economic abuse of the poorest ones.”

“Honestly, nothing gets us off quite like it.”

“We don’t like horrific photos of children under the control of paedophiles – but show us a photo of a small dirty child crying outside a food bank whilst its mother tries to scrape up enough handouts to make it some dinner, and blimey – you’ll really get our motor running.”

“You could hang your coat on it.”

“No, don’t worry, the way in which we prefer to f*ck kids is perfectly legal – trust us, we’ve checked.”

newsthump.com/2015/08/05/modern-tory-party-only-fcking-kids-financially-and-socially-insist-officials/

Bit people aten't really arguing about that though necessarily Scarlet.

It is the nature of the OP and the comparisons that are made which is disgusting

Wow. This is extraordinarily poor taste. Bad way to make a point

You are completely deluded OP if you think everything was a land of milk and honey under the last Labour govt. ANd your post is completely vile.

Indeed. Only under the Tories will children be kept out of poverty. Don't believe left wing propaganda.

You are completely deluded OP if you think everything was a land of milk and honey under the last Labour govt

I believe the OP is somewhat to the left of the Labour party.

I believe the OP is somewhat to the left of the Labour party

I agree

I'm sorry but the Labour party are not blameless. The debt the country got into under them was horrendous. The Tories are trying to sort out the mess that Tony Blair left behind.

The Tories are trying to sort out the mess that Tony Blair left behind.

What - still?

You mean they've made no progress whatsoever with the economy, despite having been in government for five years? That's quite a shocking admission.

It's like any cleaning task. You can have made vast amounts of progress without it being complete.

(Straw men take a while to clean as well).

They have made good progress, much better than under Labour but we still have a deficit (never mind a national debt). We need a lot more money saving in order to get the country back on a good footing and the nation is behind the Tories in this and what they are doing. labour could not manage a piss up in a brewery but thankfully Corbyn is likely to be elected leader and Labour will not get in for a decade.

the nation is behind the Tories in this

Did we all imagine the election where they got into government on less than 35% of the vote then?

I'm sorry but the Labour party are not blameless. The debt the country got into under them was horrendous. The Tories are trying to sort out the mess that Tony Blair left behind.

That's just stupid. The debt and deficit spike was caused by the financial crisis and depression, not public spending.

What IS stupid, is your constant denial of the FACTS proving that no State is safe from a socialist government as it is so ideologically stunted, it refuses to learn from its OWN mistakes so would do the same all over again.

According to this ‘Labour friendly’ link, it shows that UK government spending went up over 50% in real terms (when inflation was far higher than today) BEFORE our GDP had crashed – which was huge and far higher than any other country in Europe
www.economicshelp.org/blog/5509/economics/government-spending-under-labour/

“During the years 2001-2007, there was a sharp rise in government spending. In real terms, government spending increased from just over £400bn (2009 prices) to £618bn in 2008-09.

So when the tax receipts proceeds of the Labour financial bubble ‘engineered’ by relaxing UK banking regulations (via the FSA regulatory stooge Brown created) fell away, we had the honking great Labour budget deficit/overspend of £153 billion in 2010, far higher than anywhere else in Europe, but would have been even higher that year without a Conservative led coalition regaining some control over fat government spending.

In France, the ‘Big State’ mother, father, and tee shirt wearer, what was their annual Budget Deficit back then, around Euro 60 billion?

So that shows just out of control our finances were, with no plan to fix them, or our businesses on their knees and citizens who had seen a ‘real term’ fall in the their wages from 2008.

Big State France now has an annual Budget Deficit/overspend closer to Euro 80 billion, the UK has one closer to £70 billion - with twice our unemployment rate and les than half our economic growth.

In summary; an anyone in a month of Black Sundays deny that the UK big spending splurge happened between 2001 to 2008 and supply qualified figures showing what the believe our spending grew by, or if not, stop regurgitating lies trying to mask Labour’s economic incompetence during times of plenty?

For those believing 2010 Labour was an 'alternative', can they tell this board what the Labour administration of 13-years, with parliamentary majorities of between 120 to 166 seats to do EXACTLY what they wanted, PLAN was to rebalance the UK economy and get back all the private sector jobs that were lost????

As all I saw were increased taxes on businesses and citizens to crash the UK economy further, with annual budget deficits rising indefinitely (see Darlings optimistic projection below) – so quite how a jobless UK, with ever debt levels on the Road to Greece was going to help the UK economy, never mind child poverty, heaven knows.

March 2010; “Labour’s plans to increase national insurance next year will cost jobs, Alistair Darling has said.”
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/7539343/Labours-planned-National-Insurance-increase-will-cost-jobs-Alistair-Darling-admits.html

“In his evidence, Mr Darling defended his plans to increase national insurance, saying it was necessary to raise extra money to reduce Government borrowing, which will be £167 billion this year.”

When even moderate Labour governments believe they can tax everyone to economic growth with business confidence shot to pieces and the masses 2-years into an inflation adjusted earnings fall - just think what a far left of bum cheek Labour government would do under Corbynomics.

Yep, that's right, only the rich and powerful vote Tory - that's why they just won a general election.

And of course, as soon as a person becomes "rich" they loose their "moral compass" and think only of screwing the poor.

Of course the Labour party never spent more than they should have - just those bastard bankers of course.Tories don't care nope, that's why Britain is creating more jobs, low inflation and positive economic growth that is the envy of other countries.

I've had enough of all this left wing bullshit which ignores facts and treats most of the voters as if they were blind and stupid.

The problem is that the Tories are pushing more children into poverty!! The recent behaviour of the DWP has been absolutely abhorrent. My local job centre was running competitions among advisors to see how many people they could sanction! There have been serveral reported cases of suicide as a result of DWP behaviour. Kids are going hungry every day and it is seen as ok as 'we are dealing with the deficient'. It's pathetic.

Disgusting, vile post. You should be ashamed of yourself making a joke out of child abuse. Sickening.

No, the Tories are ensuring the welfare state is preserved whereas Labour would haev ground children into poverty and bankrupted the country by spending too much. It's common sense.

And the Tories would have been voted in even under proportional representation. The people spoke and the people were wise.

What absolute nonsense! they have no intention of preserving the welfare state! They are making cuts to the poorest and most vulnerable, thousands and thousands of people are using food banks. They have cut funding repeatedly to the organisations that can actually help those most in need (such as mental health services), leaving the churches to pick up the pieces. It makes me so angry that this benefit bashing propaganda is actually being believed. I work with the long term unemployed and I actually leave the office in tears at least once a week because of the stuff I see. We are one of the worlds richest nations, but we have 20 million children living in poverty. And then the Tories have the audacity to try and redefine what child poverty is to cover their own arses!! I spent yesterday giving out food parcels to children who weren't getting lunch because it is the school holidays and no free school lunch. That is the reality of the Welfare Reform and it is only getting worse.

Why are critics of a State that was spending £153 billion a year MORE than we were earning in 2010, unable to process that the Welfare State was not as it was in 2000, it like everything else under Labour, remained unreformed and had masses of taxpayer money thrown at it - and as we were borrowing to help fund it during the global economic/financial bubble induced boom – it was not sustainable THEN never mind with a £153 bil overspend.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10574376/Graphic-Britain-outstrips-Europe-on-welfare-spending.html

We are one of the world’s largest economies, NOT RICHEST NATIONS (FOR LONG), if the UK that had tried an experiment where the State, including the size of government and Welfare, had grown MORE than the public sector ££££££supporting it - had kept going, as was, from 2010.

The ‘social experiment’ where we keep increase taxes and either park our indigenous population on unemployment/welfare/benefits or give them their taxes back via Credits – while inviting in 3 million new citizens to work and relying on record profits from the City to help fund the new social Utopia – was flawed from the beginning, if the government had to STILL borrow annually to support it and STILL needed the financial bubble multiplying home prices/increase spending.

One of the fundamental problems with that socialist ‘master plan’ is 1.7 million families (5 million indigenous citizens) needed more social homes in 2010 that didn’t exist, how many children were suffering as needed basic accommodation or a bedroom – where was ‘the richest nation of earth’ and socialist critics then, having spent hundred of ££billions MORE of taxpayers money annually on WHAT???

Apr 2010; Inequality rose under Labour, says IFS
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/527519d8-4287-11df-8c60-00144feabdc0.html

”The gap between rich and poor has grown since 1997, despite three successive Labour governments reforming the tax and benefit system in an attempt to reduce income inequality, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said .”

Moreover, due to BAD PARENTING (and yes in the real world it does exist under a government of any colour) how many ‘starving children’ still have up to date technology, parents who are on drugs, drink, smoke, have £50 of Sky each month and/or still can't prepare basic low cost nutritional meals - and/or have pets better fed than their children??

Every Tory I have ever known including me is behind the welfare state. The reason we want mnoey to go where it is needed is because we are wise and want to ensure only those who need it get it. That is wisdom and compassionate care for the poor unlike the Labour lot.

So how do you decide who gets it??? Only the deserving poor? And the children of the undeserving should just be left to it, continuing the cycle of social exclusion? Get real. The current system is only making things worse and moving the problem on,

"So how do you decide who gets it??? Only the deserving poor?"

What, as opposed to the world and its mother, under Labour?

A responsible government provides the population with an education for work, makes the all little shites attend, encourages businesses to invest and hire, makes sure it doesn't pay NOT to work and allow in an EU worker who does and needs a spare home we have not got - and tah dah in several years you have close to 3 million new private sector jobs, shed several hundred thousand Labour created and tax sapping 'non jobs' - which is a more SUSTAINABLE economic and social way of increasing everyones life chances.

The days of parking people on Welfare/benefits as easier than training them when there are 500 million new shiny better educated EU citizens to chose from, are gone - we couldn't afford it in the 2000's, we certainly can't afford it now.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9963012/900000-choose-to-come-off-sickness-benefit-ahead-of-tests.html

Corbyn says 'the rich want to pay more taxes' and he is probably right, but to those who NEED help, short or long term, who should be helped MORE under a Conservative government as capable of running a sustainable economy.

If they don't, hold them to account in 2020, as I will.

That doesn't answer my point- who is entitled to benefits and who isn't??? I run an employment programme, and can count on one hand the numbers who I have felt are milking the system. We don't give to the 'world and its dog', complete Tory propaganda to justify why more children are in poverty. Their 'work first' model of get a job, any job, is totally useless and is doing far more harm than good. The reality is that there are thousands of people living in communities that went into decline under Thatcher, that have simply never recovered and are now being pushed even further into poverty with the Welfare Reform. I have yet to meet anyone who works frontline with the long term unemployed who would dream of voting Tory. They are so out of touch with reality it is unreal.