Foodbanks: this gov should hang their heads in shame

1235

Comments

  • James2001James2001 Posts: 73,434
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I love how agitated righties get whenever foodbanks get mentioned. They're one of the worst symptoms of how the Tories are ruining the country and shitting on the poor, and they clearly don't like being reminded of that.
  • Chester666666Chester666666 Posts: 9,020
    Forum Member
    food banks have saved IDS's arse as it's down to the ridiculous and stupid sanction regime/targets that there's a need for food banks
    the DWP have removed why people get sent to food banks so that the gullible believe theres no link
  • James2001James2001 Posts: 73,434
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The gullible like to believe that people can just turn up at a food bank and demand free food, so they can spend their money on booze, **** and sky TV. Of course the reality is different, but the Tories and the rightie press don't want you to know that.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    James2001 wrote: »
    I love how agitated righties get whenever foodbanks get mentioned. They're one of the worst symptoms of how the Tories are ruining the country and shitting on the poor, and they clearly don't like being reminded of that.

    I thought is was Lefties who were getting their knickers in a twist over the existence of food banks. Those on the right don't see them as necessarily a bad thing and some might say that they are part of the Big Society in action.
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    LostFool wrote: »
    I thought is was Lefties who were getting their knickers in a twist over the existence of food banks. Those on the right don't see them as necessarily a bad thing and some might say that they are part of the Big Society in action.

    Well I don't think is a good thing, to have thousands of people every standing in a queue waiting to be given a food parcel, how can it be a good thing people having to beg for food
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    food banks have saved IDS's arse as it's down to the ridiculous and stupid sanction regime/targets that there's a need for food banks
    the DWP have removed why people get sent to food banks so that the gullible believe theres no link

    One way or the other benefits are having to be cut, it doesn't matter who's in charge.

    They are going to have to be cut a lot more as well, so it will get worse.

    We have 6 million more mouths to feed and no extra revenues to pay for them.
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One way or the other benefits are having to be cut, it doesn't matter who's in charge.

    They are going to have to be cut a lot more as well, so it will get worse.

    We have 6 million more mouths to feed and no extra revenues to pay for them.

    So all of these 6million pay no tax?
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    So all of these 6million pay no tax?

    Not enough to pay for their upkeep, otherwise we wouldn't have a £120B deficit.
  • tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    One way or the other benefits are having to be cut, it doesn't matter who's in charge.

    They are going to have to be cut a lot more as well, so it will get worse.

    We have 6 million more mouths to feed and no extra revenues to pay for them.
    Considering the biggest spend by far is on the untouchable pensioners and working people, then the only prospect that the Government face under your scenario will the abolition of working age benefits, at best for specific sectors of society who don't vote or are undesired by politicians - ie. under 25's, potentially under 35's and single people.

    I'd rather that not happen.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Considering the biggest spend by far is on the untouchable pensioners and working people, then the only prospect that the Government face under your scenario will the abolition of working age benefits, at best for specific sectors of society who don't vote or are undesired by politicians - ie. under 25's, potentially under 35's and single people.

    I'd rather that not happen.

    Pensions are not untouchable, the pension age is being increased which is the only sensible way to tackle that issue.
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    Pensions are not untouchable, the pension age is being increased which is the only sensible way to tackle that issue.

    So they increased the pension age, and have increased the school leaving age, what will these things really do.
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Not enough to pay for their upkeep, otherwise we wouldn't have a £120B deficit.

    So they do pay something , as much as the rest of us.
  • katywilkatywil Posts: 1,245
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    Well as you have to be referred toa food bank , I would assume that you have to show need. I doubt that you can walk up to them and ask for food because you are a bit " short " at the moment

    just show up, say you need food. you will be referred. no one is ever told to go away
  • johnny_boi_UKjohnny_boi_UK Posts: 3,761
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tim59 wrote: »
    So they increased the pension age, and have increased the school leaving age, what will these things really do.

    What else can they do?
  • tim59tim59 Posts: 47,188
    Forum Member
    What else can they do?

    But what is it really Achieving.
  • johnny_boi_UKjohnny_boi_UK Posts: 3,761
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tim59 wrote: »
    But what is it really Achieving.

    It's holding back the inevitable, so basically nothing. I'm guessing the government are pinning their hopes on the western economies recovering which is risky.

    Now what else could the government do?
  • alan29alan29 Posts: 34,612
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The largest proportion of those using food banks are in work. But their employers are not paying a living wage ....... they rely on state subsidies by way of benefits and charitable handouts to subsidise what they won't pay themselves.
  • EnnerjeeEnnerjee Posts: 5,131
    Forum Member
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    So all of these 6million pay no tax?

    Some do, but the black economy shouldn't be underestimated within the migrant community. Also, a lot of staff in restaurants (Chinese for example) that are owned by people from the same country of origin are often given "under the table" top-ups. This money is then banked in their own country to buy property which is cheaper than here.

    There's a great deal of seepage of money from the the UK that would otherwise remain invested here.
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    katywil wrote: »
    just show up, say you need food. you will be referred. no one is ever told to go away

    Link to that please?
  • alan29alan29 Posts: 34,612
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    katywil wrote: »
    just show up, say you need food. you will be referred. no one is ever told to go away

    If, and I repeat if that happens it is not supposed to. But I guess it is impossible to remotely control every kind hearted volunteer.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    So they do pay something , as much as the rest of us.

    The statistics show that the net effect is they pay no tax. Earn no income and are a drain on finances.
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The statistics show that the net effect is they pay no tax. Earn no income and are a drain on finances.

    So none of this 6 million pay tax, earn no income and are a drain on finances. Let me see these statistic please?
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    So none of this 6 million pay tax, earn no income and are a drain on finances. Let me see these statistic please?

    http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1113/051113-migration-report
  • Auld SnodyAuld Snody Posts: 15,171
    Forum Member
    ✭✭

    Is this what you mean. From that report:

    UK immigrants who arrived since 2000 are less likely to receive benefits and less likely to live in social housing than UK natives. What’s more, over the decade from 2001 to 2011, they made a considerable positive net contribution to the UK’s fiscal system, and thus helped to relieve the fiscal burden on UK-born workers

    Are you sure?
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Auld Snody wrote: »
    Is this what you mean. From that report:

    UK immigrants who arrived since 2000 are less likely to receive benefits and less likely to live in social housing than UK natives. What’s more, over the decade from 2001 to 2011, they made a considerable positive net contribution to the UK’s fiscal system, and thus helped to relieve the fiscal burden on UK-born workers

    Are you sure?

    Yes, if you don't understand statistics, that is what you might conclude.

    Lets assume every single immigrant gets employed straight away, pays tax and claims no benefits.

    This is the gross effect you are crowing about.

    But what happens if for every immigrant a native becomes unemployed?

    The net effect is that every immigrant entered the country and went straight on the jobless register.

    It doesn't matter which is claiming, the net effect is the same.

    You see, you have to read an interpret the raw data to see what is going on, its further obfuscated by our system of in work benefits and the effects of wage depression which shifts the costs off the jobless register and onto benefits.

    But overall the net effect is that every single immigrant has entered the country and gone straight onto benefits.

    That's why we have a £100+b deficit, that's why we have foodbanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.