What people sometimes forget when commenting on foodbanks is that people can quite quickly fall on hard times, after living a self-supporting life previously.
This means that yes, they will still have possessions, transport, houses etc, as they bought them when they were earning. If we go down the road of 1930's means testing, and insist that people are in absolute poverty before they can claim anything, it would be a hugely retrograde step. It could take the unemployed years to get back on their feet after a setback if, as well as waiting to get paid, they had to start again with furniture, buying a car to get to work etc, and it would strip away all dignity from people who, through no fault of their own, became unemployed.
There would also, sadly, be an increase in exploitation of the poor, as people would have little choice but to rely absolutely on their employers to keep them in work. In the past, the threat of being sacked (often for asking for more money or better conditions) without a reference was enough to keep people subservient. Clearly, there are people who will think that this was a good thing, but I like to think that they are in the minority. A basic safety net is essential to a civilised society - without it, the crueller aspects of human nature are allowed to flourish.
