FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!

Hope the pressure tells but they seem to be digging the trenches but Tories and U-turns go together like Ant and Dec at this point.

Hope he lashes out with a Gary Sambrook eats big dinners tweet if they stonewall him.

Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.

comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 minute ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No he doesn't

comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 10 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Movements make you rubbish so by that logic Manchester United must have started a movement after Fergie left or something.

My next movement will be exactly what you're talking

comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 22 minutes ago
FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah this chump should be practicing shooting with his left foot but instead he's out there saving poor kids.

comment by Greg- (U1192)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 22 minutes ago
FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah this chump should be practicing shooting with his left foot but instead he's out there saving poor kids.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly, obviously affecting his form whilst the likes of Kane and Son are scoring for fun, they’re probably taking extra food away from kids or something.

comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 51 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Got to be a tongue-in-cheek comment?

OP

He 100 per cent has my backing.

comment by Greg- (U1192)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 22 minutes ago
FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah this chump should be practicing shooting with his left foot but instead he's out there saving poor kids.





----------------------------------------------------------------------
He should donate half his salary every month to help kids out, because he isn't earning it on the pitch

comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, this is much more important than football, its a joke, right?

He scored a great goal against PSG, cut him some slack.

comment by Ron (U1646)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greg- (U1192)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 22 minutes ago
FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah this chump should be practicing shooting with his left foot but instead he's out there saving poor kids.





----------------------------------------------------------------------
He should donate half his salary every month to help kids out, because he isn't earning it on the pitch
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know he isn't. And Ole decides not you

comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Ron (U1646)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Greg- (U1192)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by Mike (U1170)
posted 22 minutes ago
FFS he should be out doing kick ups and practicing his 1 v 1s on the garden!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah this chump should be practicing shooting with his left foot but instead he's out there saving poor kids.





----------------------------------------------------------------------
He should donate half his salary every month to help kids out, because he isn't earning it on the pitch
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you know he isn't. And Ole decides not you
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think Ole will be deciding for much longer past this season.

comment by Carter (U18826)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, this is much more important than football, its a joke, right?

He scored a great goal against PSG, cut him some slack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Viva’d

My thoughts are that giving more to very poor kids directly in this difficult period is the right thing to do though the below is what many people are considering (and should be considered).

Pros

Feeding children! (All the mental, physical and emotional benefits that go with it for the children and also their parents)

Could have a positive effect on the children's future and therefore the economy offsetting to an extent the cost of the proposal

Very direct form of welfare so not much will be lost to people taking advantage.

Relatively low cost and temporary (so not a perpetual tax payer cost)

Unfortunate situation dictates that extra support should be given (may not be the fault of parents that they've run into particularly hard times)

Cons

Still an additional tax payer cost at a time where managing costs is even more important, or an opportunity cost issue (money that could be spent in another way may be reallocated if Rashford gets his way...)

To keep order, social media and wider media shouldn't dictate to governments. The motion was rejected, when will the pressure end and is this really a good direction for political decision making?

Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.

Parents who can provide for their children effectively penalised (more than they already are) for being able to do so by having to pay more for the children of parents who have failed in this regard.

comment by AlwaysUnited (U4063)
posted 4 minutes ago
My thoughts are that giving more to very poor kids directly in this difficult period is the right thing to do though the below is what many people are considering (and should be considered).

Pros

Feeding children! (All the mental, physical and emotional benefits that go with it for the children and also their parents)

Could have a positive effect on the children's future and therefore the economy offsetting to an extent the cost of the proposal

Very direct form of welfare so not much will be lost to people taking advantage.

Relatively low cost and temporary (so not a perpetual tax payer cost)

Unfortunate situation dictates that extra support should be given (may not be the fault of parents that they've run into particularly hard times)

Cons

Still an additional tax payer cost at a time where managing costs is even more important, or an opportunity cost issue (money that could be spent in another way may be reallocated if Rashford gets his way...)

To keep order, social media and wider media shouldn't dictate to governments. The motion was rejected, when will the pressure end and is this really a good direction for political decision making?

Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.

Parents who can provide for their children effectively penalised (more than they already are) for being able to do so by having to pay more for the children of parents who have failed in this regard.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
How dare you

Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.


please tell me this is a joke

comment by dunc manson... you must follow ole... you must... (U11713)
posted 11 minutes ago
Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.


please tell me this is a joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Unfortunately people are saying this, I don't agree with the sentiment but it's always best to know what people think. It prevents the confusion of expecting an outcome and then being shocked if it goes the other way, such as brexit...

comment by AlwaysUnited (U4063)
posted 47 minutes ago
My thoughts are that giving more to very poor kids directly in this difficult period is the right thing to do though the below is what many people are considering (and should be considered).

Pros

Feeding children! (All the mental, physical and emotional benefits that go with it for the children and also their parents)

Could have a positive effect on the children's future and therefore the economy offsetting to an extent the cost of the proposal

Very direct form of welfare so not much will be lost to people taking advantage.

Relatively low cost and temporary (so not a perpetual tax payer cost)

Unfortunate situation dictates that extra support should be given (may not be the fault of parents that they've run into particularly hard times)

Cons

Still an additional tax payer cost at a time where managing costs is even more important, or an opportunity cost issue (money that could be spent in another way may be reallocated if Rashford gets his way...)

To keep order, social media and wider media shouldn't dictate to governments. The motion was rejected, when will the pressure end and is this really a good direction for political decision making?

Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.

Parents who can provide for their children effectively penalised (more than they already are) for being able to do so by having to pay more for the children of parents who have failed in this regard.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The website has had an article with 350+ comments on it already about literally all of this. Comments like this is just opening a big can of worms once again.

comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by AlwaysUnited (U4063)
posted 47 minutes ago
My thoughts are that giving more to very poor kids directly in this difficult period is the right thing to do though the below is what many people are considering (and should be considered).

Pros

Feeding children! (All the mental, physical and emotional benefits that go with it for the children and also their parents)

Could have a positive effect on the children's future and therefore the economy offsetting to an extent the cost of the proposal

Very direct form of welfare so not much will be lost to people taking advantage.

Relatively low cost and temporary (so not a perpetual tax payer cost)

Unfortunate situation dictates that extra support should be given (may not be the fault of parents that they've run into particularly hard times)

Cons

Still an additional tax payer cost at a time where managing costs is even more important, or an opportunity cost issue (money that could be spent in another way may be reallocated if Rashford gets his way...)

To keep order, social media and wider media shouldn't dictate to governments. The motion was rejected, when will the pressure end and is this really a good direction for political decision making?

Parents should be capable of providing food for their children and should plan ahead for unforeseen circumstances or not have kids at all. Reckless behaviour should not be the burden of the taxpayer (in many ways it already is...) and providing extra support furter incentivises it.

Parents who can provide for their children effectively penalised (more than they already are) for being able to do so by having to pay more for the children of parents who have failed in this regard.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The website has had an article with 350+ comments on it already about literally all of this. Comments like this is just opening a big can of worms once again.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed, and it wasn't the intention. I only wanted people who agreed with him, to keep it going on social media, and getting as many as poss to sign the petition

comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
comment by Carter (U18826)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, this is much more important than football, its a joke, right?

He scored a great goal against PSG, cut him some slack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Viva’d
----------------------------------------------------------------------

comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by rosso - it’s not good enough to be right; you have to be effective (U17054)
posted 1 hour, 7 minutes ago
comment by Carter (U18826)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
Rashford has been rubbish since he started this 'movement'. He needs to concentrate on his football and stop his advisor posting his tweets for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh dear, this is much more important than football, its a joke, right?

He scored a great goal against PSG, cut him some slack.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Viva’d
----------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this a thing now? Please tell me it’s going to be a thing

There is a case to answer where parents who can’t afford to feed their kids keep on breeding like rabbits.

Parents who can provide for their children effectively penalised (more than they already are) for being able to do so by having to pay more for the children of parents who have failed in this regard.
++

If this is where we really are......

The God help us all.

Is this a thing now? Please tell me it’s going to be a thing
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I will try my best to catch some more whoppers.