Why the reluctance to answer questions and face the real electorate ?

Have you decided not to vote then Jane? You do sound as if you can see no point in democracy.

Round and round we go. As usual getting nowhere. Whatever the outcome next week the UK will be the loser.

Is it not wrong to apply for free school meals when one can afford to pay for them ?

Annie, please. Where have you been the last few years? All children in Early Years and KS1 (England) have had free school meals since 2014. Tegan's DD couldn't have paid for them even if she'd wanted to.

I've just been snet this email, about the link with TM and DM.

mailchi.mp/hackinginquiry/new-allegations-levelled-against-the-daily-mail-pressure-mounts-2z6j0nl60z?e=b6dad0678f

Whitewave, I shouldn't worry, it's just our favourite Tory complaining about something which hasn't actually been said - AGAIN

Just to answer the second of Jalima's questions, earned relates to work. Therefore earned income, either cash or in-kind benefits, received in exchange for work or service.

If they get ! That is the worry, all those promises - if they get

It is Jen. But very relevant when you are thinking about "richest".

Is it not wrong to apply for free school meals when one can afford to pay for them ?

That's a depressing map, GracesGran.
Hard to believe we are on the same coastline as the south east. Median there more than twice that of up here.

The rich are those who earn over £80,000, who will pay a bit more tax on earnings over £80,000.

I don't actually know anyone who earns that< I don't think.
I know families who earn more than that with both parents working full time.

If you give all children free school meals, even to those earning over £80,000, the costs will come back in tax paid. That sounds okay to me as a socialist.

Labour party are now saying that if they get enough of an income tax take, they should be able to reduce VAT in the future, which will benefit the poor as much as the rich.
Osborne put it up in 2010, despite saying he wouldn't in the manifesto. Tory cons again. You can't trust a Tory with your money.

And, on the subject of family breakdowns causing poverty, there are a lot of women, such as myself, who find themselves in straightened circumstances in old age due to divorce in later life. Thankfully I have state pension plus a very tiny pension that was part of my divorce settlement but losing the winter fuel allowance [I will probably lose that as I'm not on benefits] and the end of the triple lock on my pension are very worrying to me.

tegan right on!!

Surely money is never actually lost; ok my grandchildren had the free school meals which DD could afford to pay for. But the money she saved by doing so didn't just disappear..she would have spent it on something else and it would have worked it's way back into the economy.

Not attacking high salaries per say just ensuring that the level of tax paid by high earners is fair

I am irritated by the constant posts attacking people who earn a high Salary, more so when the same support free school meals for the children of doctors,teachers,,accountants , dentists , MP's, Solicitors , Arned forces, .police officers , or do they all depend in food banks

The actual percentage of very rich is how you chose to define it Jalima. You could talk about 'the richest 5%' or 'the richest 1%' or even, if it was relevant to your discussion the richest 50%.

What is more important is the comparative wealth - the gaps between the richest and the poorest.

For instance the richest 1% own as much as the poorest 55%. That may be relevant in some discussions.

Then there is the distribution across the country. Which may be a figure you need when it comes to investment from taxation, infrastructure, etc. (Map to help)

"Wealth" is just a word until you compare it and even then it will vary depending what you hope to show or achieve.

No jalima poverty is a result of poor wages.

I thought there were some nurses and policemen in rosesarered's bubble
There are some in mine and their situations vary

It has never been that easy for single people to afford a mortgage unless they are/were on very high salaries. And often, behind a struggling mother, nurse or whatever occupation, is a feckless father who doesn't think his children are his responsibility and will either pay nothing towards their upkeep or the minimum he can get away with (often by lying about his circumstances).
A lot of poverty is as a result of family breakdown.

Also by 'earned'. What qualifies as earned in an acceptable way to you? Again not being argumentative just trying to understand your thinking.

What is your definition of wealthy dj? That's a genuine enquiry by the way. You mentioned the millionaires in London so I was just using the term superwealthy to mean them.

Strangely enough daphnedil I don't come onto GN in order to impress or convince you ( or anybody else) saying that somebody is in a bubble is just a lazy insult, I could well say that you live in your own little bubble but it's a silly comment.

[grin

rosesarered Show that you are capable of an "outside the bubble" argument and you might even convince me.

fullfact.org/economy/guide-economy-taxes/

You mean the bubble that is used as a lazy insult.....yes, there are a lot of them about.