We have to respond evasively to the previous poster's question by saying (something along the lines of) "That's a very good question, but an even better question is this [ ..... ]."
And despite the constant use of this politicians' interview-question-dodge and stick-to-their-own-talking-points device ~ I think, but we shall see ~ an exchange of perspectives, insinuations, red herrings, opinions and priorities ~ about any topic under the sun ~ should, nevertheless, somehow come to pass.
How do you square your professed support for the plight of single mothers living in poverty with your announcement yesterday of cuts in subsidies and benefits payable to low income mothers bringing up children on their own?
Originally posted by FMF We have to respond evasively to the previous poster's question by saying (something along the lines of) "That's a very good question, but an even better question is this [ ..... ]."
And despite the constant use of this politicians' interview-question-dodge and stick-to-their-own-talking-points device ~ I think, but we shall see ~ an exchange of perspectives, ...[text shortened]... ons and priorities ~ about any topic under the sun ~ should, nevertheless, somehow come to pass.
"This box could have been used to add information about myself that I might have liked to share with other Red Hot
Pawn members but it it hasn't because I didn't."
Originally posted by FMF How do you square your professed support for the plight of single mothers living in poverty with your announcement yesterday of cuts in subsidies and benefits payable to low income mothers bringing up children on their own?
The real question is "Where are the fathers?" The announced
savings in benefits will enable us to chase fathers for
Parental Support and therefore single mothers will be better off.
Originally posted by wolfgang59 The real question is "Where are the fathers?" The announced savings in benefits will enable us to chase fathers for Parental Support and therefore single mothers will be better off.
Well of course that is an excellent question but, surely, a far more important question is: are you willing to invest government money in answering it, and in so doing tracking down those missing fathers?
Originally posted by FMF We have to respond evasively to the previous poster's question by saying (something along the lines of) [b]"That's a very good question, but an even better question is this [ ..... ]."
And despite the constant use of this politicians' interview-question-dodge and stick-to-their-own-talking-points device ~ I think, but we shall see ~ an exchange of perspec ...[text shortened]... ons and priorities ~ about any topic under the sun ~ should, nevertheless, somehow come to pass.[/b]
Taking on a new batch of students to teach them your best methods of forum combat?
What's the matter, a perfect student like divegeester wasn't enough for you?
Originally posted by Suzianne What's the matter, a perfect student like divegeester wasn't enough for you?
Well that's an intriguing question that you are putting to me, but I am quite sure your listeners would prefer to be told why you are describing him as "a perfect student", as you put it. On what basis you are you making this claim?
Originally posted by FMF Well that's an intriguing question that you are putting to me, but I am quite sure your listeners would prefer to be told why you are describing him as "a perfect student", as you put it. On what basis you are you making this claim?
That's a very good question. The more important question is of course what constitutes the Basis of the System as such.
Originally posted by Ponderable That's a very good question. The more important question is of course what constitutes the Basis of the System as such.
Well it'd be interesting to chew the cud over the way things are, but no doubt ordinary folk want to hear what my department intends to do, and, more to the point, why is the media sneering down from their ivory towers at a policy that all right-thinking people will embrace?
Originally posted by FMF How do you square your professed support for the plight of single mothers living in poverty with your announcement yesterday of cuts in subsidies and benefits payable to low income mothers bringing up children on their own?
Originally posted by FMF Well of course that is an excellent question but, surely, a far more important question is: are you willing to invest government money in answering it, and in so doing tracking down those missing fathers?
We could also spend some of that "government money" teaching women how to stop having indiscriminate sex with these yokels that are incapable of supporting offspring.
josephw, this thread isn't about the 'arguments' in the posts, per se. It is, instead, a 'writing game', of sorts. If you don't want to play, fair enough ~ but please don't feel you are obliged in any way to post. 🙂
Originally posted by FMF Well of course that is an excellent question but, surely, a far more important question is: are you willing to invest government money in answering it, and in so doing tracking down those missing fathers?
Of course fathers should be expected to take responsibility for their children. We need to target our payments to those who are truly in need of funds from the public purse. Taxpayers have a right to know that their money is ensuring a better future for children. To that effect we will reduce costs of compliance with child support legislation.
Originally posted by Kewpie Of course fathers should be expected to take responsibility for their children. We need to target our payments to those who are truly in need of funds from the public purse. Taxpayers have a right to know that their money is ensuring a better future for children. To that effect we will reduce costs of compliance with child support legislation.
This talk of reducing the costs of compliance with child support legislation is all well and good, but a far more important thing for you and I to be discussing is the hypocrisy of the the shadow minister for benefits whose brother-in-law, it turns out, was a deadbeat dad back in the 1990s. Why isn't the media want to talk about that?
Originally posted by FMF josephw, this thread isn't about the 'arguments' in the posts, per se. It is, instead, a 'writing game', of sorts. If you don't want to play, fair enough ~ but please don't feel you are obliged in any way to post. 🙂
That's a very good question, but...
16 Mar '16 07:25
Back to Top