The cost of Brexit for us; the ordinary people

All this 'tell it to the poor' doesn't really wash, as there have been complaints about the
Plight of the poor/use of food banks for years and years and years, when we were in the EU ( we still are in technically) and presumably in the 'good times'.
We have to do what we think is right for the UK now, and although the economy was not the main reason most voted Leave, we may well find that we are doing rather well.

Some of my relatives and friends who know a lot about the economy than I do voted Brexit.
One of them worked with Mervyn King for years who has just said that Brexit will be a positive move, the sooner the better and that we should leave the single market and go for a 'hard Brexit'.

Sadly, the poor will always be with us, in or out of the EU and we need to help those who have fallen on hard times.
Judging by the crowds of families shopping this week there is no shortage for many, however.

A lot more
(Typo)

Of course there are no shortages for many. What the crowds don't tell you is how many people stayed at home, worried sick about their bills. People who are about to be evicted or have their utilities cut off don't tend to go out with post-Christmas shoppers.

My local CAB is overwhelmed with people needing help, mainly with financial issues - and this is a relatively wealthy area. Being in debt is still a reason for many people to feel ashamed, so they don't go around with badges saying how poor they are.

So there will always be the poor and homeless, will there, so we just leave them out of the equation, do we?

In 2004, there were two foodbanks.
In 2007-8 there were 22
In 2011 there were 100.
In Jan 2014 there were close to 1000.

Again, roses, you say that the economy was not the main reason most voted to leave.
You do not know. Nobody knows, because they have not been asked.

Food bank use in Germany and France is much higher than in Britain. In 2014, 1.5 million people a week used food banks in Germany and there are twice as many food banks in France as there are in Britain.

No, I'm not saying it's right that people should have to rely on food banks at all - but obviously being a member of the EU doesn't solve the problem.

So? Big deal. People using food banks don't count, do they not?
We are a rich economy and we have millions begging for food. Great!
There are far more people in poverty in Eastern EU countries. Why not compare us to them, and we'll look positively benign - unless, of course you are one paypacket or benefit mistake away from a foodbank.

Nor will not being a member of the EU.

I wouldn't place any reliance what Mervyn King says. He was a firm supporter of the 'austerity' policy which is responsible for the rise of food banks.

Sorry. X post. First sentence in my post was a response to Ana's last at 11.46

Why do you keep saying people who use food banks don't count, durhamjen? No one else has sad it. Is that really what you think?

All this 'tell it to the poor' doesn't really wash, as there have been complaints about the
Plight of the poor/use of food banks for years and years and years, when we were in the EU ( we still are in technically) and presumably in the 'good times'.

Who said that?

That doesn't express the view that food bank users 'don't count'.

although hopefully in time there will be a really good healthy economy going here, but some things are just more important

Jeez! That sounds like a line from a Victorian moral story for children (one of the sort written to keep 'the poor' contented with their station in life)

^hopefully in time^ What an insecure basis for voting for major constitutional and economic change.

This topic has drifted from the effect of the EU. Of course there will always be people 'at the bottom of the pile' - logically, there have to be. Claiming that poverty can be eradicated completely is about as nonsensical as claiming that all pupils should achieve above average outcomes (as a certain M Gove did - doh!)

The problem is likely to be that far more people than the very poorest find their living standards falling. If that figure reaches 50% of the population, bread and circuses won't be enough.

The point is if the effect of leaving the EU is indeed that certain groups (especially those who are already vulnerable) become poorer, then it does matter. It matters a great deal and it makes me cross when they are casually dismissed just so that some people can crow about sovereignty or some such nebulous concept. If (and it's a big 'if'), the country as a whole does benefit from Brexit, some kind of support needs to be put in place for those who will lose out - that's what a real democracy is about, not putting a cross in a box. Keir Starmer seems to be doing his best to grapple with the fallout, but I read recently that he's having to contend with a lack of support from the Labour Party leadership and a shortage of resources.

Actually dd I agree with you on a great deal of your last post.
All the claims on here about the economy getting poorer and people using food banks is a specious one.As Ana says us being in the EU has done nothing in particular to help keep numbers of food banks down or alleviate levels of poverty.
I really think it's about more than 'crowing' about sovereignty , which isn't a nebulous concept anyway, but when all the EU strings have been cut we will be able to decide everything ourselves and not have any old thing imposed on us.I know all about veto, but in the end the EU crushes most opposition.We may well be very glad that the majority voted to leave.

Keir Starmer could well be the next Labour Leader ( and probably should be right now.)

Ah well! I don't agree that we've had 'any old thing imposed on us' and I still maintain that Brexit was the wrong decision and will come back to haunt the people who voted for it. Sorry, but I don't think much of your analysis, which seems more like wishing on a star. Try asking Theresa May what sovereignty means - I think you'll find it's meaningless.

I bet the Conservatives can't believe their luck, because there is no effective opposition. Labour needs to cut through all the Brexitism and tribalism and start attacking the government for ignoring the people who will lose out (most of us) and come up with real policies.

There's another thread about the NHS. Labour has a new Shadow Health Secretary, Jon Ashworth. If he's worth his salt, he'll have spent the Christmas break doing some real research and taking advice from experienced politicians about the NHS, because there's an open goal waiting for him. Small pressure groups achieve almost nothing. What's happening needs somebody with clout at national level, who will stand up in parliament and make some big, powerful speeches. Then politicians need proper briefing before they go on programmes such as QT, so they don't come out with meaningless soundbites. They need their messages to hit home, not just about food banks and the very poorest, but to everybody - because everybody will have an opportunity to vote in the next election.

So there will always be the poor and homeless, will there, so we just leave them out of the equation, do we?
I didn't say that at all - I said there will always be poor and we need to help them - quite, quite different!
How do you manage to misinterpret posts so thoroughly?

There have been poor since time immemorial, whatever any governments do there still are and will be; the minumum wage may go up for workers but that means everyone wants to move up the scale so it is a Catch 22 situation. Benefits go up too but it is probably the working poor who are harder up.

If food was as expensive as it is in some other countries then there could be more people going to food banks - it is relatively cheap as a proportion of income in comparison to many other countries.

And in the 'rich' USA, which spends least as a proportion of income on food, there is a high percentage of people queuing at soup kitchens.
There are not as many people in such dire poverty in this country as in other countries many of which have a higher number of billionaires.

I bet the Conservatives can't believe their luck, because there is no effective opposition. Labour needs to cut through all the Brexitism and tribalism and start attacking the government for ignoring the people who will lose out (most of us) and come up with real policies.

Labour need to accept that most of their former supporters want to see an end to mass immigration, an ideology which middle class Fabian socialists are so firmly wedded to that it trumps all other values!

Jalima, comparisons with other countries don't matter. What matters is the way we treat our poor, even more so after Brexit.
Theresa May has done none of what she said she would on the doorstep of No. 10.
By the way, I didn't say you did say that. It wasn't just you talking about the poor.
Can you show me how they are being helped?
Brexit has taken over all thought of helping people.
www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/12/20/the-governments-indifference-to-child-poverty/

We no longer have poor children - no child poverty unit needed.

'Theresa May has done none of what she said she would on the doorstep No 10'
Bearing in mind she's only been in power for six months, six weeks of which parliament was in recession for the summer break, isn't that rather a stupid comment dj? Perhaps if there was SOME sort of opposition, never mind an effective one, she could be geed along a bit, but as it is, limping along on the opposition benches is putting it kindly!!!

Very true!

She doesn't need opposition to put into practice her idea of working for all.

'That means fighting against the burning injustice that if you are born poor, you will die on average nine years earlier than others. If you're black, you're treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you are white. If you're a white, working-class boy, you're less likely than anyone else in Britain to go to university. If you're at a state school, you're less likely to reach the top professions than if you were educated privately.

If you are a woman, you will earn less than a man. If you suffer from mental health problems, there's not enough help to hand. If you're young, you'll find it harder than ever before to own your own home.

But the mission to make Britain a country that works for everyone means more than just fighting these injustices.

If you're from an ordinary working-class family, life is much harder than many people in Westminster realize. You have the job, but you don't always have the job security. You have your own home, but you worry about paying the mortgage. You can just about manage, but you worry about the cost of living and getting your kids into a good school.

If you're one of those families. If you're just managing. I want to address you directly. I know you're working around the clock, I know you're doing your best, and I know that sometimes, life can be a struggle. The government I lead will be driven not by the interests of a privileged few, but by yours.

We will do everything we can to give you more control over your lives. When we take the big calls, we'll think not of the powerful but you. When we pass new laws, we'll listen not to the mighty, but you. When it comes to taxes we'll prioritize not the wealthy, but you. When it comes to opportunity, we won't entrench the advantages of the fortunate few. We will do everything we can to help anybody, whatever your background, to go as far as your talents will take you.'

If she had done any of this, there would be no opposition needed. She's done the opposite.

All this inside five six months!! Super woman indeed! Glad you agree the opposition is irrelevant/pathetic!