Joke Thread 5
- Thread starter Noel
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Yorkieguy
Established Member
You’ve flushed me out into the open!Call me a cynic, and I may be way off base here, but I'm starting to get the faintest suspicion that Yorkieguy isn't 100% behind our new Labour overlords.
How very dare you
Latest comment from His Holy Kierfullness: “I moved into Lord Alli’s £18 mill penthouse so my 16 year old son could study for his GCSE exams without disturbance”.
Two things come to mind:
1) What sort of a parent would crave privacy for his child, then bring him into a toxic argument and use him as a ‘human shield’ to justify the unjustifiable?
2) Some might say ‘well it’s understandable that any parent would want to not see their child’s education to be disturbed at such a critical time’.
Apparently that doesn’t apply to parents of ‘hard working families’ who have made sacrifices to send their kids to private school, but will have to take their children out of school from January - half way through the academic year, due to the imposition of VAT on school fees. Then to try find a place at a state school when few are available, and even if they are, they’ll be at different stages in the syllabus.
Many of those schools are for children with special needs for whom facilities in state school places aren’t available. The predicted savings will not be achieved, and ironically Reeves has said the money will be used to fund ‘breakfast clubs’ in state schools, which will be free, and not means tested, for kids whose grandparents will lose their means tested winter fuel payments.
So many missteps, inept, spiteful decisions - the most charitable view I can take is that Labour have spent 14 years as little more than a class was protest group that the top team are a bunch of rookies out of their depth.
On Winter Fuel Payments, they’ve even got the Trade Unions on the same page as the Daily Mail, and turned millions of pensioners, some of their own MPs, and others into geriatric ‘urban warriors’.
But it’s not all bad. At least Angela Rayner now has a taxpayer-funded £70k personal photographer so she can look good in had hat & his-vis jacket or a free frock. Bless.
I used to think ‘Yes Minister’ was a comedy series - I now realise it was a documentary.
Ho Hum.
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
The first thing that came to mind was all the important exams had already finished.You’ve flushed me out into the open!
How very dare you
Latest comment from His Holy Kierfullness: “I moved into Lord Alli’s £18 mill penthouse so my 16 year old son could study for his GCSE exams without disturbance”.
Two things come to mind:
stuart little
Established Member
At least one can say that Rayner has 'Two Good, Big Things' going for her! The breast of luck to her, I say!!You’ve flushed me out into the open!
How very dare you
Latest comment from His Holy Kierfullness: “I moved into Lord Alli’s £18 mill penthouse so my 16 year old son could study for his GCSE exams without disturbance”.
Two things come to mind:
1) What sort of a parent would crave privacy for his child, then bring him into a toxic argument and use him as a ‘human shield’ to justify the unjustifiable?
2) Some might say ‘well it’s understandable that any parent would want to not see their child’s education to be disturbed at such a critical time’.
Apparently that doesn’t apply to parents of ‘hard working families’ who have made sacrifices to send their kids to private school, but will have to take their children out of school from January - half way through the academic year, due to the imposition of VAT on school fees. Then to try find a place at a state school when few are available, and even if they are, they’ll be at different stages in the syllabus.
Many of those schools are for children with special needs for whom facilities in state school places aren’t available. The predicted savings will not be achieved, and ironically Reeves has said the money will be used to fund ‘breakfast clubs’ in state schools, which will be free, and not means tested, for kids whose grandparents will lose their means tested winter fuel payments.
So many missteps, inept, spiteful decisions - the most charitable view I can take is that Labour have spent 14 years as little more than a class was protest group that the top team are a bunch of rookies out of their depth.
On Winter Fuel Payments, they’ve even got the Trade Unions on the same page as the Daily Mail, and turned millions of pensioners, some of their own MPs, and others into geriatric ‘urban warriors’.
But it’s not all bad. At least Angela Rayner now has a taxpayer-funded £70k personal photographer so she can look good in had hat & his-vis jacket or a free frock. Bless.
I used to think ‘Yes Minister’ was a comedy series - I now realise it was a documentary.
Ho Hum.
Someone should tell her that shell suits went out with the early90's!Myfordman
AKA 9Fingers
Any possible attraction of her assets quickly evaporate when she starts to pontificate.
Those who might say you dont have to look at the mantelpiece whilst stoking the boiler are so wrong in this instance!
Those who might say you dont have to look at the mantelpiece whilst stoking the boiler are so wrong in this instance!
Sachakins
The most wasted of days is one without woodwork
It's worse than that, "Yes Minister" is their official induction and training video
No one has dared mention in the media the demografics of the removal of the winter fuel payment for pensioners.
If Labour lose 2 or 3 million pensioner votes for the next election in 2029 it won't matter because they will get back in with a reduced majority and around a third of today's pensioners will have passed away so their votes won't count anyway. Fast forward another 5 years to the election in 2034 where there just may be a possibility that Labour may lose and another third of today's affected pensioners will have expired, so that means two thirds of the lost voters are no longer with us. The remaining third will mostly have dementia or in a heated care home and won't have a vote. In the unlikely event that Labour get back in in 2034 then in 2039 there won't be any of todays affected pensioners alive. and the pensioners of 2039 will be in a position of "what they never had, they won't miss"
Cynical decisions by sleazy, vote counting politicians.
If Labour lose 2 or 3 million pensioner votes for the next election in 2029 it won't matter because they will get back in with a reduced majority and around a third of today's pensioners will have passed away so their votes won't count anyway. Fast forward another 5 years to the election in 2034 where there just may be a possibility that Labour may lose and another third of today's affected pensioners will have expired, so that means two thirds of the lost voters are no longer with us. The remaining third will mostly have dementia or in a heated care home and won't have a vote. In the unlikely event that Labour get back in in 2034 then in 2039 there won't be any of todays affected pensioners alive. and the pensioners of 2039 will be in a position of "what they never had, they won't miss"
Cynical decisions by sleazy, vote counting politicians.
This dam tablet s got a mind of it's own I was reading Joke thread 5 and it suddenly flipped to A new leadership ,Off topic 2 . ??? 
Similar threads
