[Misc] Poverty just now

[DavidinSouthampton]

Just to set the record straight this from HoC Library. I seem to remember Labour as the government then.

The Trussell Trust opened its first UK food bank in 2000 and operates over half of food banks in the country. IFAN represents food banks outside the Trussell Trust and since 2020 has been collecting data from them across the UK. Both the number of food banks and the quantity of emergency food parcels they distribute has increased over time, with the exception of a partial drop after the Covid-19 pandemic subsided.

I started working for the Churches in and around Southampton in 1993 and there was a food bank ( and a basics bank) in the City then. Soon after one opened in Winchester, too. The Trussell Trust, which is based just up the road in Salisbury, visited both to see how they did it in the early days. That was all under a Tory Government.

What is frightening/disgusting/shameful is how much more they are used and needed now than ever before, and that was happening before the current “cost of living crisis”.

There are a number of examples from the past (probably not so much if at all now) of Tory politicians in their ignorance decrying food banks and assuming they were places people could go along and just help themselves - NO, people have to be referred by responsible people or agencies and only normally for three days worth.

And Local Authorities can not afford to do what they need to do to help people who are really in need. Mrs DiS yesterday was in a meeting at a local school in Southampton where the subject of persistent absence of one child came up. It was a story of a very difficult family background, mother with serious mental health issues (not her fault) and the relevant people in the City Council too stretched to do anything about it - “we see far worse than that, they’re ok”. And in the meantime that child’s life chances are going down the drain.

all this is happening against a background where an ignorant MP like Philip Lee can stand up in Parliament in the cost of living debate recently and say we shouldn’t raise taxes because “what we don’t want is a bloated public sector as they do in France”. The truth of the matter is that the public sector has given up all hope of doing their job properly and can not do anything for loads of people who really need serious help.

To be fair, there are plenty of decent Tories around who would be - who are - appalled by all this too.

 

[NODC]

This is undeniably a complete failure of governance by the present incumbents (who have been in power for 12 years). This is squarely on them and I’m afraid I have zero confidence that they’re even vaguely competent enough to deal with it.

However, it is also a failing of our wider electoral system. Putting in systems which will fix this issue takes time and money, and no Government is prepared to do this lest it be seen as unpopular, see them kicked out and let the other side in at the next election. It’s the same issue that dogs major infrastructure projects, serious reform of public services and the like.

During the post-war consensus type politics which ran from 1945 to 1979 this didn’t matter hugely as while both sides were different flavours, they still did the same basic things while in power. Now we live in more adversarial times with Governments more interested in distracting “wedge” issues than putting plans in place for long term benefits, this is only going to get worse.

Arguably the only times recently when it has appeared a Government is secure enough electorally to be able to actually do big ticket things were 1982-1988 (post-Falklands Thatcher through to the start of her downfall) and 1997 - 2005 (when Blair was conquering all before him).

I often think that certain area need to be outside of the political picture, for instance health should be a long term plan that is agreed cross party and who every is in power continues the plan. I would of thought a basic level of living would also be universally agreed

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I often think that certain area need to be outside of the political picture, for instance health should be a long term plan that is agreed cross party and who every is in power continues the plan. I would of thought a basic level of living would also be universally agreed

that‘s far too much like common sense, and not much chance of it happening under the present regime.

Soon after Johnson was elected with a big majority, I can remember Therese Coffey’s opposite number in whatever post she was making a mess of at the time offering to work with her on something - cross party cooperation. Coffey’s reaction was to dismiss it out of hand. “Why would we want to do that? We’ve got a huge majority, we can do what we like!l”

As someone who believes in and longs for some form of consensus politics, I was appalled and disgusted by that - the mark of an extremist government In the grip of the loony right.

 

[Lenny Rider]

Speaking to a friend this last night, he came up with a very telling question, have we ever had a politician in this country, on either side, who came out and said:
"I will make sure no child ever has to go to school hungry in this country"?

A simple promise, a basic human right, but has it ever happened or do we have someone in Westminster who will make it happen?

 

[beorhthelm]

Speaking to a friend this last night, he came up with a very telling question, have we ever had a politician in this country, on either side, who came out and said:
"I will make sure no child ever has to go to school hungry in this country"?

A simple promise, a basic human right, but has it ever happened or do we have someone in Westminster who will make it happen?

say it? quite probably yes.

delivered it? no. though there are schemes for breakfasts at primary school to help that particular issue.

 

[Lenny Rider]

say it? quite probably yes.

delivered it? no. though there are schemes for breakfasts at primary school to help that particular issue.

But in the 21st century, almost a quarter of the way through it, we still have kids in this country, county actually, turning up to school hungry, a disgrace.

 

[hart's shirt]

Many people conclude that people are poor through some fault of their own.

This kind of reasoning makes it easy to close their hearts and hands to the needy.

But we are not to invent reasons for ignoring the poor.

We are to respond to their needs no matter who or what was responsible for their condition.

 

[rogersix]

But in the 21st century, almost a quarter of the way through it, we still have kids in this country, county actually, turning up to school hungry, a disgrace.

It's almost like we need some sort of equality of opportunity. Philosophy again len, what do you make of it all?

 

[Lenny Rider]

Many people conclude that people are poor through some fault of their own.

This kind of reasoning makes it easy to close their hearts and hands to the needy.

But we are not to invent reasons for ignoring the poor.

We are to respond to their needs no matter who or what was responsible for their condition.

But for the overwhelming majority its not their fault. (my caveat is the very small group of society who have no intention of working, just claim off the state, then moan they don't get enough)

But for the 'real' people at the coal face, who really need help because of their circumstances, its like as a society we've almost forgotten about them?

Then the media compound it, especially at this time with reams of Xmas TV ads, depicting the perfect festive season ,at the same time as previously mentioned, kids are going to school hungry every morning.

It truly is a f***ed up world atm.

 

[Lenny Rider]

It's almost like we need some sort of equality of opportunity. Philosophy again len, what do you make of it all?

To reiterate, it really is a f***ed up world atm

Does make you think, maybe not in the UK, but would the likes of JFK, Martin Luther King and RFK eradicated starvation, poverty, racial injustice etc?

So therefore the 'higher powers' deemed they be killed off before they could really achieve anything?

 

[rogersix]

To reiterate, it really is a f***ed up world atm

Does make you think, maybe not in the UK, but would the likes of JFK, Martin Luther King and RFK eradicated starvation, poverty, racial injustice etc?

So therefore the 'higher powers' deemed they be killed off before they could really achieve anything?

it's a fools errand, waiting for a superhero to save ourselves from ourselves.

maybe we should all do our bit, starting with thinking about who we vote for and what we hope to achieve by it

 

[Lenny Rider]

it's a fools errand, waiting for a superhero to save ourselves from ourselves.

maybe we should all do our bit, starting with thinking about who we vote for and what we hope to achieve by it

It upsets a few on here I know, but I vote for a person who looks out for all of his constituents whether they voted for him or not, he's Tory but he still has the interests of everyone in East Worthing and Shoreham. He can't be unique, that behaviour must be replicated right across the nation regardless of the colour of the rossette?

Maybe its when they achieve 'real' power that the problem starts?

What's that saying 'Absolute power corrupts absolutley'?

 

[Peteinblack]

Many people conclude that people are poor through some fault of their own.

This kind of reasoning makes it easy to close their hearts and hands to the needy.

But we are not to invent reasons for ignoring the poor.

We are to respond to their needs no matter who or what was responsible for their condition.

I recall when Marcus Rashford was promoting his 'free school meals in the holidays' last year, Daily Mail readers with their customary snobbery and snidey sneering were screaming "If people can't afford to feed their kids, they shoudn't have them. Why should my hard-earned taxes feed their brats.?"

A widespread mindset which reveals a complete inability or unwillingness to think or empathise. Lots of people can afford their children when they have them, but later experience an awful change in their circumstances which means they end up struggling - a serious debilitating long-term illness meaning they or their partner have to stop work; death of a spouse (cancer, horrific traffic accident, a serving soldier or police officer killed in the line of duty), divorce, redundancy, employer imposing pay cuts, etc.

The fact is that apart from pensioners, by far the largest category of people 'on benefits' today are those in paid employment, but whose wages or salaries are insufficient to live on - yet we never read in the Tory tabloids about employers and corporate bosses milking the welfare state!

Also, how often are we told that the route out of poverty is to "work harder" - advice which is so glib as to be insulting; for 99% of working people in this country, it does not matter how much harder they work, they still receive the same wage or salary. The only people who will prosper if workers work harder and boost their company's profits are the CEOs who'll get a multi-million bonus or salary increase, and the shareholders who'll share a multi-million-pound dividend bonanza. The work force will probably stay on the same wage or salary and be told to be grateful they have a job.

The whole system is totally f*cked.

 

[beorhthelm]

The fact is that apart from pensioners, by far the largest category of people 'on benefits' today are those in paid employment, but whose wages or salaries are insufficient to live on...

that is what you are supposed to think, the benefits have been extended to create dependancy. yet the levels of income that benefits still apply are far higher than a pension or those in long term illness. that welfare then suppresses wages demands, why ask or move for more when you'll get the same total? yep, totally f***ed.

 

[The Clamp]

But for the overwhelming majority its not their fault. (my caveat is the very small group of society who have no intention of working, just claim off the state, then moan they don't get enough)

But for the 'real' people at the coal face, who really need help because of their circumstances, its like as a society we've almost forgotten about them?

Then the media compound it, especially at this time with reams of Xmas TV ads, depicting the perfect festive season ,at the same time as previously mentioned, kids are going to school hungry every morning.

It truly is a f***ed up world atm.

It’s always been a f***ed up world. Humans are a deeply flawed species. And always have been.
It’s taken a while to get to the nadir we now face. We’ve messed up the planet beyond repair and we aren’t stopping anytime soon. We wage wars. We commit genocide. We rape. We murder. We steal. We let kids starve. We blame foreigners and poor people. Of course, some people do some good but it’s a pitifully small amount in the big scheme of things.
There is enough to go around but we horde and scrimp and grub until we have more than we need for a lifetime.

Good news is, because we are rendering the planet uninhabitable and because we built weapons that could wipe out the entire global population in 8 seconds flat, the chances of being around for more than about another 50 years are remote.

The planet would be far better off without humans but unfortunately we are hell-be t on destroying if for every species on earth.

It’s astonishing to me that in the infinitesimal amount of time we have been on this earth we have managed to completely destroy a planet that has been in existence for over 4.5 billion years. We are rotten to the core and don’t deserve this amazing planet we have inherited.

Anyone got any nice plans for the weekend?

 

[dsr-burnley]

Speaking to a friend this last night, he came up with a very telling question, have we ever had a politician in this country, on either side, who came out and said:
"I will make sure no child ever has to go to school hungry in this country"?

A simple promise, a basic human right, but has it ever happened or do we have someone in Westminster who will make it happen?

If they have, they were fools or liars. The idea that any politician can ensure that no child is ever neglected, no child is ever abused, that no parent is ever incompetent or uncaring - you must have a very high opinion of politicians if you think they can stop that.

With £1, you can give a child breakfast for a week. (Porridge costs less than that.) Surely the number of people who have cut back so far that they cannot save £1, is miniscule? If they can't manage £1 for a week's breakfast, then wouldn't that be because the benefits system has crashed rather than that the correct benefits are insufficient?

 

[goldstone]

How is poverty defined? Are you living in poverty if you can't afford the latest model of mobile phone?

 

[Blue3]

prices are increasing on everything at an alarming rate as an example butter was £1.50 a few months ago, our local Asda this week butter on Monday the price had risen to £2.00 two days later it was £2.15 and yesterday it was £2.50

 

[beorhthelm]

How is poverty defined? Are you living in poverty if you can't afford the latest model of mobile phone?

formally in UK its is defined as 60% of median income. with median income at £31400, anyone earning below ~19000 is in poverty. then divergences for households, with children, different prefixd meanings of poverty.

 

[MJsGhost]

prices are increasing on everything at an alarming rate as an example butter was £1.50 a few months ago, our local Asda this week butter on Monday the price had risen to £2.00 two days later it was £2.15 and yesterday it was £2.50

I popped to my local village shop for a pack of butter today...

THREE QUID!

I am happy to pay more there because it wouldn't exist if we didn't support it (community-owned & not-for-profit), AND it's a 5-mile+ round trip to shop anywhere else, but three fecking quid!

That means there's at least a quid's worth in a portion of mash when I'm cooking!