Hungry Britain

What's true about the big dogs, jingle?

Or misread your post or attribute someone else's remarks to you, as has just happened to me I realise looking back ...

Thank you absent- how kind and generous.

There are some people here who do try to see things without the obsession between right and left and terribly entrenched views- and they make it all worthwhile. But thank you.

Rosequartz, if you have furniture to recycle, go on your council website. Our council has a list of six companies that will collect your furniture.
Anyway, the title of this thread was foodbanks in 2014! What has gone wrong?
You should expect people with strong views to be on this thread.

As a 6th Form teacher, I worked very hard at supporting girls who became pregnant and ensure, by teaching them at home, and even in hospital, in my own time, of course- without judgement. Some of them are still in touch 10 or even 20 years later- wonderful.

When someone dies because he's had his benefits cut, I claim the right to be angry. Yes I am a socialist, but even the rightwing thinktanks are claiming that the government is going too far.

rose sincere apologies. I should have written cactus when referring to the charity shop.

Apology accepted whenim64. All getting a bit heated on here I think.
We have a good re-cycle system going here, and our charity shops are very good but small. Even so, it is still difficult to get rid of stuff.

The story about the man with Asperger's may be more complex than we know, there is usually more to it than is written in the media.

No one died just because of benefit cuts. The poor man has family, but where were they when he needed them. Where were his social workers?

To try and blame this on benefit cuts alone and blaming 'right wing think tanks' is illogical and extremism taken to the nth degree.

Durhamjen
You cannot assert that this boys cause of death was because his benefits were cut. You have said that he had anorexia, OCD, and other issues. The cut in benefits may or may not have contributed to his death.

That is not to say that the benefits should not have been cut, however, he may well have died anyway through general neglect.

Never said he died just because of benefit cuts. The letter from his doctor stated that his anxiety disorder and obsessional traits had been made significantly worse because of the pressure put on him by benefit changes. He died because of being markedly underweight and malnourished, the coroner said.
And I have said above about his family, so I am not going to repeat it.
When you've watched someone die because of undernourishment over four months, it's acceptable to feel angry about this, I would hope.

Read again. I am not blaming right wing think tanks. They agree with me that the government is wrong.

For those of you who think that drugtaking is a problem, apparently 13% of those in the 45-59 year old age group admitted to having taken illicit drugs in 2012. No figures for 60+!

Easy credit has been used to mask a relative decline in wages for the majority of the populations which has occured since around the 1970's. Before the 60's there were no credit cards and debt was seen as undesirable and shameful. By the 80's, credit cards were being heavily marketed on television and people were being bombarded with offers of credit, regardless of their financial situation.

Wages continue to stagnate and it is hardly surprising that people get into debt. I'm more inclined to blame a very unequal society that finds many people today using credit cards to pay for essentials rather than luxuries.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22417334

Joelsnan, he was 44. Not a boy. He had £40 a week to live on. Doctor's letter said "Please do not stop or reduce his benefits as this will have ongoing significant impact on his mental health. He simply is not well enough to cope with this extra stress."
Atos did not seek medical evidence from the GP before they stopped his benefits. They made the assessment that he was capable of work after a half-hour interview at his home.
You can make as many excuses as you like for the system. It's wrong. His sister wants the govt. to acknowledge that, and so do think tanks etc.

On Thursday there is a debate on whether to have an enquiry on impact assessment of the effects of the cuts on the sick and disabled. This man was both.
I hope you have all asked your MPs to attend this debate, just to see if you have the right to carry on criticising what I think.

All those who criticise me, please read this.
www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/nick-pearce/unnecessary-suffering

Well said, Eloethan.
What's the difference between using credit cards and HP?
I remember a man coming every Friday to my parents house. We probably wouldn't have had any furniture if it wasn't for him, but I bet his interest rates were as high as credit cards. He'd give my mother a cheque and she could only spend it in certain shops. A bit like the food vouchers that people advocate.
For those who accuse me of being well off, and talking from the equivalent of my ivory tower, my parents applied for clothing grants for my uniform. They were given enough for a few pairs of knickers. I had free school meals.
My parents also applied for housing benefit when they were pensioners and a man came to go through both their bank accounts. They were given a pound a week. The next year when he came back, my mother told him to get stuffed.

Before the 60s, I remember we had loan sharks and pawn shops, or local money lenders who made a private arrangement to lend money at an interest rate of their choosing. Then there was the workhouse in earlier decades. Thank goodness we don't live in those times, but there's still that air of people deciding that their their fellow humans are not all entitled to fair and equal treatment. If a struggling individual is assessed as being legally entitled to receive benefits, who has the right to tell them they should manage better, cook from scratch, don't smoke or drink, don't have a TV, don't have children, don't give your children toys or clothes that might make them feel they are on a social footing with the other children they know, don't buy anything new, don't be a drain on the NHS - in other words, don't be visible because we don't want to know.

It's a good job so many live in high rise flats - they'd be wanting flood compensation when they haven't insured themselves! Oh, wait a moment - no, thst's the uninsured rich living on the banks of the Thames. They were told flooding was a risk, but did they listen? Feckless!

This thread seems to me to have raised the pernicious notion of the 'deserving' vs 'undeserving' poor. Research has consistently found that the behaviours and attitudes of those in poverty basically mirror those of mainstream western societies. Likewise, a vast majority of those in poverty have worked extensively and will do so again if the chance arises. Poverty is ultimately a result of failings at economic and political levels rather than individual shortcomings.
I accept that poor people are not perfect, and some of them do engage in destructive behaviors, but then economically privileged people can indulge in countless bad behaviours and make any number of rash decisions without serious consequences. If you’re reasonably solvent you could spend your twenties hoovering up quantities of cocaine, then go through your thirties as a hopeless drunk — and yet still manage to hold down a mortgage and a job and NOT be regarded as feckless. (Just check out the celebrity gossip.) On the other hand a poor person who exhibited similar behaviours might well end up homeless, in prison, or worse. You don’t become poor because you’re a terrible person or a defective human being. People are poor because of the way our economy and our society is arranged.
I think Jesus got it right when he applauded those who responded to need without checking out whether the recipient was 'deserving' or not:
'I was hungry and you fed me,
I was thirsty and you gave me a drink,
I was homeless and you gave me a room,
I was shivering and you gave me clothes,
I was sick and you stopped to visit,
I was in prison and you came to me.’

Thank you, ga - the point you make about responding to need is important. People must have food and shelter, whether others consider them deserving or not. Immediate need calls for immediate action, and only after that can the underlying issues be addressed.

Why is it pernicious to suggest there are deserving poor and undeserving poor?

Just to say that there is a difference between HP and buying on credit cards; my DP and we have bought things on HP, if you couldn't keep up the payments they could come and take the goods away. No suite to sit on, no washing machine, no tv etc etc. Disastrous and very inconvenient but not life-changing.

With a credit card goods are purchased at a very high rate of interest, if you only pay the minimum payment you will never pay it off. The debt accumulates if you can't pay, gets passed on to debt collectors, ending up with disaster for years, or bankruptcy.

Interest free credit was good, I know you paid for it by paying more for goods in the long run but we found it a good way to buy things we couldn't afford to pay for in one go.

I suppose you could count us amongst the feckless, whenim, as we were on benefits for 4 months. And they seemed to be the very minimum they had to pay. However, always managed to feed the children (and us come to that). Thankfully, DH got another job although we had to move to another area. Extremely reluctantly I might add.

I have read through this whole thread again, and I have to say I am shocked at the level of judgement and intolerance shown by some posters. We dont know why some people fall into the position where they need food banks, the reasons are probably as many as the candidates, the important thing is that there is help for people when they need it. As to Norway, I lived and worked there for 2 years, fantastic country with great people, and they do have state nurseries and yes they dont have many single parents on benefits, BUT they pay huge amounts of income tax because as a socialist country that is how they work. They are fortunate that the oil industry has been a good income stream, and they are spending it wisely. I dont think the posters on this thread who would like a return to the so called good old days would like to pay even more tax. Cactus60, did your local charity shop honestly say that 'people on benefits only want new or fashionable furniture' really?? Charity shops by law are not allowed to sell anything that doesn't have the correct fire certification label, we found that when we tried to donate a sofa that had been re-upholstered ( label had been taken off). So, do we think then that as soon as someone loses their job they should give their dog away, sell their tv, sell the kids toys, and only then go cap in hand to the food bank? I appreciate that there are a feckless few, as there are in the working population, but we shouldn't be demonizing the many because of the few.

GrannyA Well said. that is spot on.

What has gone wrong is Government benefit cuts in a time of a recession and not enough jobs to be had.

AKA so can you explain who you consider to be the undeserving poor ?

This reminds me of Mrs. Cecil Alexander's Hymn "All things bright and Beautiful."

Perhaps the attitudes expressed in the (now ommitted) verse 3 are still around in the current government of Posh Boys.

"The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
God made them high and lowly,
And ordered their estate."

GrannyA and GillT57 I agree entirely with both your posts.

They were a pleasure to read in fact! Heartening!