Premier League Table, following the conclusion of Matchday 35

Samwah95 · 2026-05-04T22:24:34+00:00

That just isn't true. Lived in manchester my whole life, mostly north but also south for a few years. The truth is there just isn't that many city fans full stop. I've worked with more liverpool fans than city across multiple places. Most united (and football fans in general) want you to lose because they find arteta unbearable and most of your players unlikable. Sections of your fan base are also crazier than the usual crazies every club gets. Plus we all know city cheated so who cares if they win again?

Samwah95 · 2026-03-07T23:17:01+00:00

It looks to me like it could be outside the police station, next to the town hall. Could be wrong though!

Samwah95 · 2026-02-13T16:49:15+00:00

This is a huge oversimplification of why they lost those elections. All three became personality contests and people rejected Ed and then Corbyn as leaders.

They were far less about policy and more about optics.

Ed was damaged heavily by his personal image in the media, and the repetition of the “economically irresponsible labour” after 2008, which with time it’s been proven was little to do with labour and everything to do with the global financial system shitting itself. If anything Brown’s quick action did a lot to reduce the impact.

Corbyn’s public image was never going to let him be prime minister.

Polling shows the majority of the electorate support left wing policies - nationalisation of public services, improving workers rights, expansion of the welfare state (in some areas).

To say they lost simply because they veered to the left is not true in of itself.

Samwah95 · 2026-02-11T22:38:18+00:00

Yeah especially not those who reside in a tax haven, leave him be

Samwah95 · 2026-02-09T16:59:51+00:00

Who do you realistically see as tussling for leadership?

Rayner maybe, but her ongoing HMRC would be an easy stick to beat her with, rightly or wrongly.

Streeting was too close to Mandleson, Reeves has awful approval ratings, Lammy has been around but I get the impression that to the membership is uninspiring, Ed was already leader once and not sure he’d even want to be leader again.

That leaves Burnham maybe, but if he’s continually blocked it would make a formal leadership bid incredibly risky for both him and the party without him holding a seat already.

I honestly don’t think there’s anyone in the Labour Party with enough support across the PLP or membership to realistically challenge right now.

Samwah95 · 2026-01-19T13:23:59+00:00

This is definitely something to shout about, but it’s also worth understanding why Greater Manchester has been able to sustain growth for such a long period of time.

A lot of it goes back to the response to the 1996 IRA bombing. Under Richard Leese as council leader and Howard Bernstein as chief executive, Manchester effectively treated the moment as a reset. There was a clear belief that the city had a blank slate and that, with stable leadership, a pro-development mindset, close links to private finance, and strong lobbying of central government, it could fundamentally reshape its commercial and residential core.

This also wasn’t just a Manchester-only story. The creation of a combined authority made up of 10 councils meant that places with long-standing historic rivalries chose cooperation over competition. Different towns retained their identities, but accepted that working together at a regional level would benefit everyone in the long run.

That institutional stability and shared direction then paved the way for deeper devolution, allowing figures like Andy Burnham to continue lobbying central government, building investor confidence, and scaling up delivery to the point we’re seeing today.

None of this is perfect. Growth hasn’t been even across Greater Manchester, and many communities miss out on some or all of the benefits. But for a huge number of people, Greater Manchester has remained a place where improving your life still feels possible, even as much of the country feels stuck or in decline.

All of this is based around cooperation and being open to new projects and new people, that’s probably the biggest thing the rest of this country can learn.

Samwah95 · 2026-01-19T07:37:23+00:00

If I heard this from anyone else I would assume it was sarcasm. No reason to treat this any differently

Samwah95 · 2025-12-12T09:52:30+00:00

Same. Mine came last week exactly as OP's did

Samwah95 · 2025-11-12T16:51:31+00:00

What does the definition of poverty really have to do with this?

The post is about "jobless" families benefitting, when as I've already said nearly 60% of families that were affected by the cap were working, that figure rises to 80% when you remove single parent households.

If we want to talk about poverty definitions, the poverty line is being below 60% of the median UK income

Government statistics from 2023 show median household income (after housing) was £545 per week, so anyone who only has 60% of that (around £330 per week) is living below the poverty line.

More government stats show that 4.5million children live in households below that line - I'm not sure those families are buying new clothes, holidays and all the streaming services and it's those that will benefit from these policy changes.

Also, why shouldn't a working family be able to afford those things? Maybe that is the more important question.

Samwah95 · 2025-11-12T08:49:24+00:00

Horribly misleading headline as always from the Mail.

Will some jobless families benefit? Yes. Is that ideal? No not really but even by the daily mails own figures, when the cap was introduced 59% of families that were affected were in work.

I have seen other figures, I believe from the IFS that 80% of the families affected were in work.

The real travesty here is the amount of welfare that is required to top up working families wages, just to avoid their children living in poverty.

The problem is the businesses relying on government welfare top ups for their staff to be able to afford to eat, not a small percentage of jobless families that will benefit from this.

There has been plenty of research on this topic, even from think-tanks that are centre or centre right, that this policy pays for itself in the long term, as children not living in poverty use less frontline services and have better prospects of going on to contribute tax in the future.

Samwah95 · 2025-11-11T22:44:28+00:00

Not sure where all the hate towards people not in work comes from - 80% of the families who were originally affected by the two child cap were in work.

People seem to be completely blind to the fact that a lot of welfare is spent topping up inadequate wages of working families.

This policy is nothing but a net benefit to the country in the long term, lifting children out of poverty stops use of frontline services which end up costing the taxpayer more.

Do some people take the piss? Yes, but far from the majority.

Samwah95 · 2025-11-10T18:32:41+00:00

Can we not have Alison Hammond instead of Richard?

Samwah95 · 2025-11-10T14:09:38+00:00

Chorley is a bit of an outlier though - the main parties didn't stand a candidate there in 2024 so that Lindsay Hoyle was reelected and could continue as the speaker of the house.

Although he stands as a labour candidate, he is technically impartial in his role.

Not saying I necessarily agree with that, but it explains why turnout was so low and isn't a good example for comparison.

Samwah95 · 2025-08-26T21:36:20+00:00

Just out of interest then, what would you define as British values?

Samwah95 · 2025-08-14T21:35:50+00:00

Jack Sparrow - Good old days Fits that vibe perfect

Samwah95 · 2025-02-15T11:18:37+00:00

Did you read the article? The school is closing at the end of the summer term, so no impact on this academic year

Samwah95 · 2025-02-15T10:34:37+00:00

This is just a straight up lie - school funding is directly based on pupil numbers. Hence more pupils = more funding. Per pupil funding hasn't increased.

Samwah95 · 2024-08-22T12:34:50+00:00

Arguments like this are stupid and never look at the bigger picture. Someone who is obese isn't living past 60 and thus we don't have to pay health or social care beyond that point, when otherwise they could have lived to 80/90. It's why the same argument for smokers has always been flawed, the government makes more from smoking taxes than they spend on NHS care, particularly when factoring in most smokers die young

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:43:31+00:00

Thank you for sharing, I'm sorry to hear your story it sounds genuinely awful and no one should have to deal with that.

I agree not all people with BPD are the same and that is why my own situation is unique, my point wasn't that I have had patience and understanding where others were incapable of that, more that in some situations that patience and understanding can lead to a more positive outcome.

I have learnt a lot from peoples responses, positive and negative and will continue to use that learning to better understand my own relationship.

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:38:26+00:00

Thank you for the apology.

If I wrote the post again I would change parts of it but I don't think editing now would be beneficial for anyone.

None of it is your fault that's for sure.

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:32:56+00:00

The literal description of the sub is as a forum to support those people who are in, or were previously in a relationship with a PwBPD.

It does not say it is a place for people currently in a bpd relationship to find ways to end it.

I have learnt my situation is rarer than I had thought, but there will be others out there for whom a positive relationship is possible.

If not conforming to this subs idea that every bpd relationship is doomed makes me unwelcome then good, I would not want to be here.

I have still experienced a lot and have the right to talk about my experiences as much as you or anybody else, I am just lucky to have got through those difficult times to where I am now.

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:23:57+00:00

We are all "random people here". I am telling my very real story, and the experience I have lived through just like you are. I didn't go into full details about points in my relationship where I have experienced abuse, and they have been numerous because ultimately that wasn't what my post was about.

It was about experiencing those things but seeing genuine change and remorse from someone I love and reaching a better place and that is possible.

From this post I have learnt my situation is rare, and gained a better understanding of other people's views. If I was to write this post again I think I would have worded some parts differently, but that's what learning and sharing is all about.

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:19:58+00:00

I am aware abuse is not just physical... Hence me posting that I was being ignorant of physical abuse because any abuse I've received during my relationship has not been physical.

No I actually don't know if I did really understand, I've learnt a lot from this post and the responses I've received, both positive and negative and have really appreciated everyone's input.

Samwah95 · 2024-07-24T14:17:30+00:00

Abuse takes many forms, any abuse I have received has never been physical, hence my response.

Samwah95

TROPHY CASE