Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
@contradevian

Stop Using Food Banks Says Tory

Recommended Posts

http://www.huffingto..._n_4035950.html

Tory wants poor people to stop using food banks in case they get into the habit of not feeling hungry.

Is some form of madness afflicting the Tories or desperation? This isn't the 1930's you know.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingto..._n_4035950.html

Tory wants poor people to stop using food banks in case they get into the habit of not feeling hungry.

Is some form of madness afflicting the Tories or desperation? This isn't the 1930's you know.

I get that some people have an instinctive, visceral reaction to any Tory who mentions poverty (EVIL!!!1!), and some of their recent policy suggestions have been horrific and clearly designed to appeal to the extremists who are heading towards the treason party - but what is there to object to in what he's actually said here? He doesn't want to see going to the food bank as being normal activity, he doesn't want to see people relying on it, he doesn't want to see it as part of the state welfare net and he does want to see more food being sold cheaply if the only reason it's been rejected are aesthetic concerns.

Try inverting those and seeing how reasonable the response is; would you like to see relying on food banks on a daily basis a normal activity? Would you like food prices to go up as cheap stuff gets rejected out of hand? Would you like to see literal breadlines as the state has to provide food to those fallen so far they can't afford it?

Anyone agreeing to that belongs in the 30s. His actual statements are a set of the bleeding obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this like feeding 'homeless' poeple on the streets encouraging more people to seek food on the streets?

Food banks shouldn't be a long term option.

For many people there will be lifestyle adjustment issues to deal with. Champagne lifestyle can not be sustained on lemonade income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this like feeding 'homeless' poeple on the streets encouraging more people to seek food on the streets?

Food banks shouldn't be a long term option.

For many people there will be lifestyle adjustment issues to deal with. Champagne lifestyle can not be sustained on lemonade income.

Champagne lifestyle is still sustained for politicians civil servants and bankers living on government subsidy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that some people have an instinctive, visceral reaction to any Tory who mentions poverty (EVIL!!!1!), and some of their recent policy suggestions have been horrific and clearly designed to appeal to the extremists who are heading towards the treason party - but what is there to object to in what he's actually said here? He doesn't want to see going to the food bank as being normal activity, he doesn't want to see people relying on it, he doesn't want to see it as part of the state welfare net and he does want to see more food being sold cheaply if the only reason it's been rejected are aesthetic concerns.

Try inverting those and seeing how reasonable the response is; would you like to see relying on food banks on a daily basis a normal activity? Would you like food prices to go up as cheap stuff gets rejected out of hand? Would you like to see literal breadlines as the state has to provide food to those fallen so far they can't afford it?

Anyone agreeing to that belongs in the 30s. His actual statements are a set of the bleeding obvious.

Quite.

But food banks are a bleeding obvious result of welfare sanctions that can literally stop someone having the ability to feed themselves (zero income).

Don't welfare sanctions imposed and food bank usage figures eerily correlate? Can't think why (and it's clear he hasn't bothered either).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of get the point he is making here- it's like saying that it's better not to get wounded in the first place than end up relying on bandages to cover the wound up.

The problem is that it's his party who are increasingly lashing out at the people least able to protect themselves- so the wounds in this case are being inflicted by the policies he and his party have introduced.

So maybe the place to start would be to stop attacking the weak in a desperate attempt to establish your right wing credentials with the increasing number of Tories drifting toward UKIP.

Strength is not measured by how successfully you can beat up people who can't fight back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of get the point he is making here- it's like saying that it's better not to get wounded in the first place than end up relying on bandages to cover the wound up.

The problem is that it's his party who are increasingly lashing out at the people least able to protect themselves- so the wounds in this case are being inflicted by the policies he and his party have introduced.

So maybe the place to start would be to stop attacking the weak in a desperate attempt to establish your right wing credentials with the increasing number of Tories drifting toward UKIP.

Strength is not measured by how successfully you can beat up people who can't fight back.

They are whipping people to teach them to drink after taking their water away, and then wondering why so many poor bleeding people are gathering round the one communal tap left.

The problem with any extreme right or left Dogma is that it will never admit fault. It will just keep marching us over the cliff because it's,... well... Stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that some people have an instinctive, visceral reaction to any Tory who mentions poverty (EVIL!!!1!), and some of their recent policy suggestions have been horrific and clearly designed to appeal to the extremists who are heading towards the treason party - but what is there to object to in what he's actually said here? He doesn't want to see going to the food bank as being normal activity, he doesn't want to see people relying on it, he doesn't want to see it as part of the state welfare net and he does want to see more food being sold cheaply if the only reason it's been rejected are aesthetic concerns.

Try inverting those and seeing how reasonable the response is; would you like to see relying on food banks on a daily basis a normal activity? Would you like food prices to go up as cheap stuff gets rejected out of hand? Would you like to see literal breadlines as the state has to provide food to those fallen so far they can't afford it?

Anyone agreeing to that belongs in the 30s. His actual statements are a set of the bleeding obvious.

Except he frames it as a lifestyle and personal responsibility choice. He does not see it as a result of inflation, particularly in the basic necessities, being vastly higher than increases in incomes (which are pretty much static or falling at the bottom end). But rather views it as the fault of the individuals involved as if they are doing it out of greed, and if they just stopped wanting "free stuff" everything would be well.

This is the common meme that the right always put forward when the poor are suffering, blame the poor for being poor, because it relieves them of any responsibility for forestalling their plight, or accepting responsibility that they themselves through overarching economic policies might be the cause - they did it to themselves so why should I help?

It's the type of propoganda that led to victorian workhouses and is espoused in the story of scrooge. You can even see it in this thread with the post of SarahBell who is certainly on the political right.... poor people want a champagne lifestyle so are turning to using food banks to keep that lifestyle...... It can't of course be that they have been economically hammered over the last five years to the extent they are struggling with even the basics.....

Edited by alexw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vile.

Food for foodbanks is provided as a voluntary act of charity by members of the public, and businesses. Supermarkets provide food that would otherwise go unsold.

I understand that you can't just stroll up and get food from a food bank, you have to get referred.

All of these Tory policies are negative - the poor will be beaten until they stop being poor.

This nonsense about 'making work pay' is more like 'making unemployment even more dreadful than working for a pittance'. The low-paid and unemployed are being cynically played against each other in a race to the bottom.

I find this trend disgusting and worrying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except he frames it as a lifestyle and personal responsibility choice. He does not see it as a result of inflation, particularly in the basic necessities, being vastly higher than increases in incomes (which are pretty much static or falling at the bottom end). But rather views it as the fault of the individuals involved as if they are doing it out of greed, and if they just stopped wanting "free stuff" everything would be well.

This is the common meme that the right always put forward when the poor are suffering, blame the poor for being poor, because it relieves them of any responsibility for forestalling their plight, or accepting responsibility that they themselves through overarching economic policies might be the cause - they did it to themselves so why should I help?

It's the type of propoganda that led to victorian workhouses and is espoused in the story of scrooge. You can even see it in this thread with the post of SarahBell who is certainly on the political right.... poor people want a champagne lifestyle so are turning to using food banks to keep that lifestyle......

And meanwhile the whole benefit cutting saga is preceded over by a boggle-eyed bald maniac who can't see the hypocrisy in his kin collecting 3K a week in EU benefits (paid for by you and me), or the fact he's never earned a penny outside of the public purse in his life.

Labour aren't blameless here BTW.

For this shamble of nutters and morons to get in took some doing.

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except he frames it as a lifestyle and personal responsibility choice. He does not see it as a result of inflation, particularly in the basic necessities, being vastly higher than increases in incomes (which are pretty much static or falling at the bottom end). But rather views it as the fault of the individuals involved as if they are doing it out of greed, and if they just stopped wanting "free stuff" everything would be well.

This is the common meme that the right always put forward when the poor are suffering, blame the poor for being poor, because it relieves them of any responsibility for forestalling their plight, or accepting responsibility that they themselves through overarching economic policies might be the cause - they did it to themselves so why should I help?

It's the type of propoganda that led to victorian workhouses and is espoused in the story of scrooge. You can even see it in this thread with the post of SarahBell who is certainly on the political right.... poor people want a champagne lifestyle so are turning to using food banks to keep that lifestyle......

I can kind of see where Sarah is coming from. There was an article in the Guardian about a Liverpool family who were "starving" on £3.20 per day per head and having to sit in the dark. When I read it I thought., hang on. They are spending more than I am. and I eat well. Also I can have every light on in the flat for less than 100 watts, thanks to energy saving bulbs.

That isn't a 'champagne lifestyle' as such, more of a supermarket pizza one, where you are 'starving' if you can't afford a Chicago pizza every night.

The problem is it would sound deeply patronising if any MP were to give food saving tips. For example an MP might say 'eat beans on toast' and instantly the press would react 'Tory tells poor to live on beans on toast' when actually its not a bad meal if you can't afford a pizza or a takeaway curry. Also I don't think any MP's can tell the poor how to manage money or economise on bills because I suspect they have never had to.

Also supermarkets at one time used to just chuck out the food and many people used to forage at closing time. Now this food ends up at food banks, so its just a more socially acceptable and decent way of foraging without being accused of stealing and ensure that only the really needy get it (in theory).

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that we have got rid of all our industry allowing a few people to become extremely rich on the back of cheap foreign labour. This has made probably a good 50% of the population surplus to requirements, and these people who have been cast aside and nannied by the state are now going to pay the price for what our government has done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And meanwhile the whole benefit cutting saga is preceded over by a boggle-eyed bald maniac who can't see the hypocrisy in his kin collecting 3K a week in EU benefits (paid for by you and me), or the fact he's never earned a penny outside of the public purse in his life.

Labour aren't blameless here BTW.

For this shamble of nutters and morons to get in took some doing.

Basically the tories took the easy way out. They could have run this country well on a right-wing slant that would have improved the lives of the majority, but it would have required them taking on a substantial part of their donor and support base.

For example being pro-business is fundamentally identified with the right wing. Yet a big aspect of being pro-business is having companies operate on a level playing field, but then that would have required the tories to do a "Margaret thatcher" on a lot of large corporates, that play games of fiction with respect to where their profits are generated or sales take place. This destroys far more pro-business enterprise and risk taking than it generates. Similarly oligopolies, monopolies, and the huge lack of transparency among corporates, is also something that is hugely anti-business, yet is something that the tories will not tackle because of whom it involves inflicting pain on.

Private sector house building...again right wing but hurts boomers in the shires and Taylor Wimpy et al.

Fundamental banking reform....ends socialization of losses and privatization of profits....but causes pain to the wealthy financial sector elite whom in the vast majority are tory donors and supporters....

etc, etc.

So instead they hammer the poor and vulnerable because its a quick and easy way to get the unthinking sheeple that lie on the political right to vote for them (not saying the left don't have lots of unthinking sheeple too, they certainly do!)

None of this is to say the labour party don't have their own issues but milliband at least is making *some* noises about tackling the vested interests that infect our society with breaking up the energy cartel (not talking about the price fixing bit), and throwing a spanner into the works of the land bankers.

Edited by alexw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip> I understand that you can't just stroll up and get food from a food bank, you have to get referred.<snip>

Indeed you can't. The website of the Trussell Trust. one of the biggest organisers of food banks, explains how they work.

"Care professionals such as doctors, health visitors, social workers, CAB and police identify people in crisis and issue them with a foodbank voucher. Foodbanks partner with a wide range of care professionals who are best placed to assess need and make sure that it is genuine."

http://www.trusselltrust.org/how-it-works

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this like feeding 'homeless' poeple on the streets encouraging more people to seek food on the streets?

Food banks shouldn't be a long term option.

For many people there will be lifestyle adjustment issues to deal with. Champagne lifestyle can not be sustained on lemonade income.

Let them eat cake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can kind of see where Sarah is coming from. There was an article in the Guardian about a Liverpool family who were "starving" on £3.20 per day per head and having to sit in the dark. When I read it I thought., hang on. They are spending more than I am. and I eat well. Also I can have every light on in the flat for less than 100 watts, thanks to energy saving bulbs.

That isn't a 'champagne lifestyle' as such, more of a supermarket pizza one, where you are 'starving' if you can't afford a Chicago pizza every night.

The problem is it would sound deeply patronising if any MP were to give food saving tips. For example an MP might say 'eat beans on toast' and instantly the press would react 'Tory tells poor to live on beans on toast' when actually its not a bad meal if you can't afford a pizza or a takeaway curry. Also I don't think any MP's can tell the poor how to manage money or economise on bills because I suspect they have never had to.

Also supermarkets at one time used to just chuck out the food and many people used to forage at closing time. Now this food ends up at food banks, so its just a more socially acceptable and decent way of foraging without being accused of stealing and ensure that only the really needy get it (in theory).

Do you know there are children in London going to school with a bit of leftover rice from last night in a food box and that will be their lunch?

Its shocking that in 2013 poverty is alive and hurting people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know there are children in London going to school with a bit of leftover rice from last night in a food box and that will be their lunch?

Its shocking that in 2013 poverty is alive and hurting people

Maybe I should try and work a bit harder then. My biggest problem with the welfare system is paying ******wits to have children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I should try and work a bit harder then. My biggest problem with the welfare system is paying ******wits to have children.

don't worry one day you will be out of work. see how you can survive ****wit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

don't worry one day you will be out of work. see how you can survive ****wit

I am sure I will be ok. It would pretty much mean the end of civilisation for my job to cease to exist :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the type of propoganda that led to victorian workhouses and is espoused in the story of scrooge. You can even see it in this thread with the post of SarahBell who is certainly on the political right.... poor people want a champagne lifestyle so are turning to using food banks to keep that lifestyle...... It can't of course be that they have been economically hammered over the last five years to the extent they are struggling with even the basics.....

Can we have some surveys done to see food bank users in more detail:

- how many drive there

- how many smoke

- how many have a phone on contract or top up regularly

- how many drink, go out,

- how many have sky tv

- how many wear designer brands

- how many have kids who have designer brands, fancy parties, and mobile phones

If access to foodbanks is unlimited for people then they will never learn to cope. And I'm not talking about people who've been left floating by the system not paying them out for a fortnight.

I find it really hard to feel sorry for people who just do not want to cut some non-essentials out.

A food bank shouldn't just be about feeding people, it should be an opportunity to educate people - how many give budgeting help to assist them long term?

if you give a man a fish he is hungry again in an hour; if you teach him to catch a fish you do him a good turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure I will be ok. It would pretty much mean the end of civilisation for my job to cease to exist :)

Such hubris.

Your job might never disappear, but your ability to perform it might.

You, like everyone, are one faulty car brake, one bacterium, one black swan phone call away from a life-changing event that could render you unemployed or unemployable.

Dwell on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such hubris.

Your job might never disappear, but your ability to perform it might.

You, like everyone, are one faulty car brake, one bacterium, one black swan phone call away from a life-changing event that could render you unemployed or unemployable.

Dwell on that.

I never stated those things could not happen. My original point was I do not like paying for ******wits to have kids; I stand by that point. This does not mean that I think there should not be a safety net for the sick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   224 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.