>>105912715
>Guess it's not going to be long until the UK is more of a shithole than China
>until
Funny joke.
>>105914725
>you also shouldn't be allowed to influence little kids with propaganda online that's hard to oversee for their caretakers.
Right. You get more credit for caring about muh chillens if your government isn't trying to push them into poverty and crush their futures. It matters not which "side" you're on.
Parents allowed the internet to raise their kids because wages stagnated and government policy is there to keep them poor. Even systems designed to lift them out of poverty are unbalanced.

I want kids to raise their kids properly, not give them phones, tablets, access to the internet at large like the good old days but I'm a schizo.
Raise wages, allow for good childcare schemes, incentivise people to raise their children, introduce laws specifically to punish parents for allowing the internet to act as a child minder if you wish. There system is a blanket punishment for everyone, because of the chillens. They don't have the moral and ethical high ground here.

Worry not. Here's a Dear Paul, email they sent me yesterday. This is from the party that drafted the legislation and voted it in, Labour will NOT remove the cap, they suspended MP's for voting for an amendment to remove the cap, they've turned to demonising the disabled for watering down a welfare reform bill and that's now the reason the kids in poverty can't be lifted out.
There's no other way, can't improve their lives.
If you want to remove propaganda, remove think tanks, jail these daft cunts running the conservatives campaigns.
Find the daft cunt who sends phrases like:
>Creating an unfair, two-tier system rewarding the takers, not the makers.
and don't pay him for it, end his life on live stream, because who were the daft cunts who oversaw all that wage stagnation and introduced the child benefit cap
>Which is why in 2017 we introduced the two-child benefit cap.
Right then.