US & UK are poor societies with some very rich people.

In my area you are unable to access a food bank without an referral from social or medical services. I am more worried about those who are too proud or unable to access food banks.

What a shameful situation this is in a modern developed country.

Exactly! No-one should have to depend on charity. It's distressing that so many of us bury our relatively affluent heads in the sand and ignore the REAL POVERTY that is around us, and the unfairness of the system that makes it hard to claim life-sustaining benefits. All who say it's easy should try it!

If you mean my post Whitewavemarks then think again. Every word of it is true.

To answer your question, OP, I would greatly prefer to live in a country where the gap between the poorest and the richest is not as shockingly large as it has become or is becoming in practically all European countries.

If it is not possible to either provide even the poorest in society with jobs or benefits that they actually can live off, the better-off and rich people need to realise that they have a duty of care and should be using some of their wealth to relieve destitution.

JdotJ

Maudi

Some 37,000 asylum seekers and Afghan refugees are living in UK hotels at a cost of £4.7m per day, revised Home Office figures show.

A Home Office official said yesterday the total hotel bill was £1.2m a day but the department has since clarified the actual overall daily cost is £4.7m.

It it understood the £1.2m is to accommodate Afghan refugees and another £3.5m a day is spent on asylum seekers.

A spokesman said the use of hotels was unacceptable and a short-term solution.(copied from BBC website)

Perhaps if we weren't spending astronomical amounts on housing asylum /illegals in 4 star hotels, providing health care/dentists, food, pocket money the list goes on there would be more money available, oh no forgot some posters welcome the dinghy boats, perhaps you can't have it both ways, there is only a certain amount of money to go round, perhaps its time to get our priorities right and look after our own people first. Please no posts saying they are not illegal blah blah blah.

I agree

Genuine cases, yes. But as someone who works in a foodbank we get people at the door wanting food but arriving in cars, with mobile phones, expensive watches, an address in a very nice house/area, then one of their many children standing there will 'let slip' they've just come back from holiday.
They will not accept 'own brand' tinned food, has to be a 'label'. Only PG Tips tea (all other brands handed back to us, we then found out a particular demanding chap was selling it in his shop)!!
I could go on but won't bother.

I don’t believe that post

Norah

I would prefer people to give generously to charity and roll up sleeves to help the poor, as part of peoples everyday life.

I have no problem with extreme wealth, as with that comes the ability to give back, worldwide, extremely huge amounts. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, McKenzie Scott, Warren Buffet come to mind.

Bill Gates: "The Microsoft co-founder announced this week that he's donating $20 billion to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, while reiterating his pledge to give away “virtually all of my wealth to the foundation” and eventually drop off the list of the world's wealthiest people altogether. Jul 15, 2022"

www.gatesfoundation.org/about/foundation-fact-sheet

Poor people should not have to rely on the whims of the very rich.
As previously stated, wealth should be distributed more evenly.
The rich have not become this way off their own backs, they have used the poor to make their wealth.

Maudi

Some 37,000 asylum seekers and Afghan refugees are living in UK hotels at a cost of £4.7m per day, revised Home Office figures show.

A Home Office official said yesterday the total hotel bill was £1.2m a day but the department has since clarified the actual overall daily cost is £4.7m.

It it understood the £1.2m is to accommodate Afghan refugees and another £3.5m a day is spent on asylum seekers.

A spokesman said the use of hotels was unacceptable and a short-term solution.(copied from BBC website)

Perhaps if we weren't spending astronomical amounts on housing asylum /illegals in 4 star hotels, providing health care/dentists, food, pocket money the list goes on there would be more money available, oh no forgot some posters welcome the dinghy boats, perhaps you can't have it both ways, there is only a certain amount of money to go round, perhaps its time to get our priorities right and look after our own people first. Please no posts saying they are not illegal blah blah blah.

I agree

Genuine cases, yes. But as someone who works in a foodbank we get people at the door wanting food but arriving in cars, with mobile phones, expensive watches, an address in a very nice house/area, then one of their many children standing there will 'let slip' they've just come back from holiday.
They will not accept 'own brand' tinned food, has to be a 'label'. Only PG Tips tea (all other brands handed back to us, we then found out a particular demanding chap was selling it in his shop)!!
I could go on but won't bother.

I also read this article (all of it) over the weekend and was shocked - but not surprised unfortunately. Needless to say this is unlikely to be reported in the MSM which is unforgivable. All of us should be completely aware of how unequal our society is. I have no issue with the wealthy but feel profoundly sad and hopeless at the attitudes that seem to abound these days of “them and us”. I thought Brits cherished the idea of Britain being a “fair” society for all. By endorsing the view (yes that is Victorian) that there are deserving and undeserving poor and in the main charities should support them is shameful and undemocratic.

I'm horrified with the way this country has been run for the past 12 yrs, having rich people give money by choice is too erratic to work & poor people have to right to have their money given by the state rather than on a whim of some wealthy person. I relied on benefits when I was younger & broke but like most benefit claimants I eventually got work but I want that stepping stone to be available to anyone in need. Research showed benefit cheats were just a small percentage, smaller than those deliberately keeping money away from the taxman. I want a properly functioning reliable NHS, decent wages for all as we had in the 1970's and social care so I will be voting Labour asap but I do appreciate that some might vote LibDem just to get rid of their Tory

in greed we trust, a title of an article i read many years ago, have things changed? A good book. 'mans rise to civilisation' 'talks about how with the europeans invading the americas, changed the native people their culture of sharing everthing ,to a gradual one of hoarding.Lots of references in the bible, to hoarding and its ill effects.What are people scared of?

nanna8

It’s changed then. I find that difficult to comprehend.

It has been changing for a while nanna8: www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/killed-benefits-cuts-starving-soldier-3923771 - 2014.... This country does not value caring, hence the emphasis on Charity which is 'free'.... Assisting people who are ill, whatever the cause, to cope with a complex, altered and altering health and welfare system is an undervalued front line skill l that this country seems to prefer not to pay for adequately, while several Charities have very highly paid executives. However in the present financial crisis fewer and fewer people, even in 2 income families, will have the spare capacity to work - and it can be challenging and time consuming work as well as very rewarding - as volunteers... The future looks bleak for many of us in the present climate...

Grantanow

Of course wealth should be better distributed and the tax system is one way of achieving that but Truss and her Tories are heading in the opposite direction. She thinks it's fairer that the rich get a bigger rebate when taxes are cut.

I'm not sure that "fairness" is in her vocabulary. "Levelling up" and "just about managing" certainly aren't.

M0nica

Did LendLease/ Marsall plan affect my life? You bet it did! as a result I did not grow up in a nazi state and paid for the NHS that ensured my childhood illness was treated frequently and well without my parents having to worry about the cost.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Lend-Lease contributed hugely to the Allies' victory in WW2, but didn't fund the NHS. It paid for essential supplies and weapons. The Marshall Plan funded the NHS and wasn't paid back.

The US gave Marshall Plan funding for two main reasons. It wanted a market for its exports. Without the money, Western Europe couldn't have afforded them. Secondly, it wanted a socially, politically and economically stable buffer zone against the Soviet Union.

Lend-Lease and the Marshall Plan were different.

Of course wealth should be better distributed and the tax system is one way of achieving that but Truss and her Tories are heading in the opposite direction. She thinks it's fairer that the rich get a bigger rebate when taxes are cut.

I lived in Sweden for a few years while it was a real socialist country and the gap between rich and poor wasn't so great. Unfortunately all that has changed and they have moved more and more to the right since then. Very sad.

Did LendLease/ Marsall plan affect my life? You bet it did! as a result I did not grow up in a nazi state and paid for the NHS that ensured my childhood illness was treated frequently and well without my parents having to worry about the cost.

growstuff

Whitewave You're still confusing the two.

Lend-Lease was used by the UK and some other countries to pay for the war effort.

Both Germany and the UK received Marshall Plan money. Germany used it their share to rebuild its shattered economy, whereas the UK used much of its share for the NHS and the Welfare State.

Germany obviously didn't receive Lend-Lease funds.

Marshall plan money didn't need to be repaid.

Bit embarrassing - seeing as I looked at post war economics when doing my degree? 100 years ago.

Ukraine is currently being loaned $billions to fight the Russians by the US and others, there will be a payback over the following decades.
At the end of WW2 Germany and Japan had their whole infrastructure destroyed and had to rebuild and re-equip from scratch. Britain suffered much less, buildings and machinery used for war production did not get replaced. Germany and Japan became much more efficient we did not

Thank goodness I can say I didn’t vote for Brexit.

I wonder if those who voted for Brexit because they thought UK manufacturing would increase and the so-called elites would be brought down a peg or two have seen the light yet.

Brexit was always about a handful who manipulated the masses for their own ends. The Truss government looks as though it's not even going to try and hide it.

Ooops! I meant "The UK excelled ...".

Glorianny excelled in life sciences and innovation before 2016, but since then has lost billions of pounds in funding and has suffered from the barriers from collaborating with others in the EU.

Whitewave You're still confusing the two.

Lend-Lease was used by the UK and some other countries to pay for the war effort.

Both Germany and the UK received Marshall Plan money. Germany used it their share to rebuild its shattered economy, whereas the UK used much of its share for the NHS and the Welfare State.

Germany obviously didn't receive Lend-Lease funds.

Marshall plan money didn't need to be repaid.

Norah

Glorianny "I don't think I said it altered your life. I said it was a deal not a completely altruistic donation.
It was also an attempt to keep the US out of the war.
I don't think it is anything to do with age. It's an interest in history and historic dealings. Young people are probably as unaware of it as they are many other historic events, but it isn't just the old who discuss such things."

Agreed. It wasn't altruistic, it was a way to keep the US out of the war a bit longer and off their land, or that was my dad's opinion.

I merely wondered if repaying was a big impact on our economy.

I am "old people" no debate there.

It's interesting to speculate as well that if there was one field the UK excelled in at the time it was invention and innovation. Had the rights to radar, jet engines and other things remained in UK hands how much would they be worth? The US of course valued technology and took German scientists at the end of the war as well.

growstuff

Lend-Lease and the Marshall Plan were different. Lend-Lease was a wartime arrangement. The Marshall Plan was money given to countries in Western Europe as part of the European Recovery Program and didn't have to be repaid. The UK received more than any other country. The money played an important role in preventing the Soviet Union from having a greater influence in post-war Europe and achieving more political stability.

Yes, that is right. The monies were largely used to boost the UKs influence in the Empire, and in re-arming, not for the Welfare state. Whereas Germany used it to build their economy. That is why the U.K. struggled so badly post war until the decision to join the common market was made. Our first application was rejected but eventually with the demise of de Gaulle we reapplied and was successful.