100 Foodbanks

Foodbanks are

  • Sign of a successful United Kingdom

    Votes: 6 16.2%
  • A necessity

    Votes: 4 10.8%
  • Sign of a failing United Kingdom

    Votes: 18 48.6%
  • An embarrassment

    Votes: 15 40.5%

  • Total voters
    37

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
If you live in a bedsit with one electric ring to cook on, and a prepayment meter that the landlord has jacked up the price, are you going to choose fresh veg or a tin of something? Fresh produce and no fridge?
A bag of grapes or 5 hours heating? Which would you choose?
Setting aside the lawfullness - or otherwise - of some of what you suggest, fair questions... but wouldn't you think it reasonable to expect all that to be an incentive to someone not to be in such a situation?
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
As a society prior to the welfare system, we used to have workhouses etc, to provide for the poor of the parish, however, there was a great deal of shame in having to access that support, this meant people worked hard to support themselves, along with implementing the welfare state we have incrementally removed all shame from accessing the benefits, in fact replaced shame with "our rights" to the benefit. This has removed the brake on claiming, with the result that there has become an increasing underclass of people who are incapable of taking responsibility for themselves, expect the state to organise everything for them (category b above) and the left has encouraged everyone to claim (working families tax credits etc, which in reality subsidised the likes of Amazon, allowing them to pay a wage that can't be lived on).

We need to change the welfare system, so it incentivises taking control of our own lives, bring back some form of social disapprobation towards claiming, while still maintaining a social welfare net. We also need to teach how to shop and cook, from scratch.
The opinion of his peers was for long the surest way to control a man's actions or, rather, for him to control them. And the parochial system under the 'Poor Laws' was certainly a way to ensure that all but the genuinely needy would not receive any 'benefits', since people were far less likely to take money out of their neighbour's pockets unless they genuinely needed it. Many times I've advocated 'people's' panels to assess whether benefit claimants are worthy of receiving our money; left-liberals decry it, being too stupid to realise / admit that it's supposed to be just what is done anyway, but by unaccountable public 'servants'.

I see no shame for individuals seeking help from the public purse for genuine need, if I was in such a situation I'd take it, it's part of what I pay my tax for, like calling the police or using the NHS. And I see nothing wrong with shaming those who could work but won't; every pound they receive is straight out of my / our collective pocket, and stopping me spending it or saving it as I would otherwise choose to do, that most probably being on my children.


Edit: incentivises seems an ugly word, I don't recall its use before the last couple of decades; 'encourages' sounds more pleasant to me.
 

primmiemoo

Member
Location
Devon
And those that are more deserving than feckless can often have to much pride self respect to go cap in hand asking for help. Or just feel embarrassed. Should not though.

Except that there are people who are misread as proud. For some who experience a change in circumstances, they can be so overwhelmed with shame that they don't have the means to ask. If nobody is looking out for them, it would be easy to fall through the gaps in the system.
 

Pasty

Member
Location
Devon
Would it not be an idea to rustle up a few friends around her and all chip in to a box of decent groceries for her once a week. Cases like this deserve decent help .
...it's just an idea not a criticism.
Tap up some of the local farm shops for a bag of spuds and a few veg etc etc .
Trouble is all these things need organising. I'm already VC of the parish council, chair of the playing field, VC of the finance committee and a director of a local charity to help vulnerable people in times of need. All of which I get nothing for but satisfaction that I may have made at least one person's life a little better after mine fell apart and some very kind people put me back together as best they could with no expectation of reward other than friendship. People are busy busy these days and for a lot of people pay is naff and job security is rubbish. I consider myself very lucky to be where I am and in good health so I help where I can and hope when I need help maybe someone else will feel the same.

Your idea is basically to create another food bank which may well have the same issues as those I mention. It's admirable that these people give their time but it's just a sign of the times that it could probably be a lot better. Personally, I don't have time to do that, as most don't .
 

Pasty

Member
Location
Devon
If you live in a bedsit with one electric ring to cook on, and a prepayment meter that the landlord has jacked up the price, are you going to choose fresh veg or a tin of something? Fresh produce and no fridge?
A bag of grapes or 5 hours heating? Which would you choose?

Very True.
 

JimAndy

Member
Mixed Farmer
Setting aside the lawfullness - or otherwise - of some of what you suggest, fair questions... but wouldn't you think it reasonable to expect all that to be an incentive to someone not to be in such a situation?

you be surprised how easy it is to end up like this due to no fault of your own, how many people who paid NIC all their life's and being told by the government of the day that they be getting a good pension when they retire are now being told that they get less than the basic wage and have to work till they 70+, or did pay into the company pension, only to find that the company has went bust and the pension funds are well short of the cash they need to pay out. suddenly you en't got the retirement you had planned. or your wife/husband leaves you taking your home and savings. i know of one old couple who are living hand to mouth beside me (we do what we can for them) because the wife need surgery, but would have been 3-4 years on the NHS waiting list, so the hubby used their life saving to go private as he could bare to see the wife in pain
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
A State supplied crystal ball for each and every Citizen?
No, the application of a bit of common sense and forethought by every citizen. (y)

you be surprised how easy it is to end up like this due to no fault of your own, how many people who paid NIC all their life's and being told by the government of the day that they be getting a good pension when they retire are now being told that they get less than the basic wage and have to work till they 70+, or did pay into the company pension, only to find that the company has went bust and the pension funds are well short of the cash they need to pay out. suddenly you en't got the retirement you had planned. or your wife/husband leaves you taking your home and savings. i know of one old couple who are living hand to mouth beside me (we do what we can for them) because the wife need surgery, but would have been 3-4 years on the NHS waiting list, so the hubby used their life saving to go private as he could bare to see the wife in pain
No, I wouldn't be surprised at all, having seen it; hence my first class of people in the earlier post. (y)
 

merino

Member
Location
The North East
What with your previous, can't help thinking this is just a go for a lefty whinge. But, giving the benefit of the doubt... let's ask why the food banks are there, shall we...? Obvious answer = because some people can't afford to feed themselves, and it seems reasonable to break this down:

a) Some of these are people who have / have had a genuine run of bad luck, despite doing all that they reasonably could have been expected to do to see themselves right.

b) Some are profligate idiots and time-wasters who can't be arsed to do anything for themselves, just wanting others to do everything for them, scum in my view.

c) Some are 'vulnerable' people who have come here from abroad for a better life, meaning either they want to work and contribute to as well as gain from this society, or that they are just immigrant scum much along the lines of our own lot in (b).

Of course the 'benefits' system should preclude the need for food banks, but it doesn't. That is partly because some people fit into category (b) and the second half of (c); it is also partly because the benefits aren't high enough.

I have no idea what could be successfully done, in legislatory terms, to cater for the scummy types. It seems to me - and I've met, worked with, defended / prosecuted loads of them - that a large number are simply incapable of taking responsibility for themselves; to the point where the public / state needs to take that responsibility, fully.

For the remainder, I think the benefits should be increased; but, being a horrible 'right-wing-nationalist' (I am a nationalist with a small 'n', but not really right wing) I think that should not be done by taking more money from taxpayers. Instead, I think it should be found by reducing what we give to those who could help themselves but can't be bothered to and from what we send as non-strategic and non-emergency foreign aid.

I would also see non-beneficial - meaning not of benefit to the UK - immigration hammered, with direct repatriation and right of appeal only from country of origin. This need not affect people in genuine need of asylum, but would be aimed at all others. And that's because it is manifestly absurd for us to allow, and for the Left / Liberals to encourage the importation of other countries' poor while we still have our own to deal with.

Thank
Setting aside the lawfullness - or otherwise - of some of what you suggest, fair questions... but wouldn't you think it reasonable to expect all that to be an incentive to someone not to be in such a situation?
No, the application of a bit of common sense and forethought by every citizen. (y)


No, I wouldn't be surprised at all, having seen it; hence my first class of people in the earlier post. (y)

The idea of an undeserving poor has been around in the UK for nearly two centuries.
If it informed a practical response to poverty (especially at a low budget) surely it would have done so by now?
 

Muck Spreader

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Limousin
Uk had food banks under labour government,,,,,,
May well be the case, but their use has certainly accelerated under the Tories.

1627839713444.png
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
Thank



The idea of an undeserving poor has been around in the UK for nearly two centuries.
If it informed a practical response to poverty (especially at a low budget) surely it would have done so by now?
Not sure about some of that, but... it is patently obvious that not all the 'poor' are deserving, the obvious corollary being that some are undeserving. The system of two hundred years ago did work in that it meant the skivers couldn't benefit from it very easily; but it failed in that it was horribly hard on many of those who genuinely warranted help. I don't believe it's beyond our wits to work out something effective now.
 

merino

Member
Location
The North East
Not sure about some of that, but... it is patently obvious that not all the 'poor' are deserving, the obvious corollary being that some are undeserving. The system of two hundred years ago did work in that it meant the skivers couldn't benefit from it very easily; but it failed in that it was horribly hard on many of those who genuinely warranted help. I don't believe it's beyond our wits to work out something effective now.

Hard on people?
I'll confess that my main interest is looking after cows, but I know for a fact pre welfare state Britain contained monstrous things.
The work house in particular resulted in serious abuses to societies most vulnerable.
Though for me the question is really what about all the dead child prostitutes?
Did they deserve it?
Cause before they're dead they're teen skanks.
Bear in mind that their society absolutely thought they deserved it.
The assumption of an undeserving poor is the the idea that underpinned those monstrous abuses and allowed them to be perpetuated.
Do you not believe people have inherent rights to shelter and food?
 
Last edited:

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
Hard on people?
I'll confess that my main interest is looking after cows, but I know for a fact pre welfare state Britain contained monstrous things.
The work house in particular resulted in serious abuses to societies most vulnerable.
Though for me the question is really what about all the dead child prostitutes?
Did they deserve it?
Cause before they're dead they're teen skanks.
Bear in mind that their society absolutely thought they deserved it.
The assumption of an undeserving poor is the the idea that underpinned those monstrous abuses and allowed them to be perpetuated.
Do you not believe people have inherent rights to shelter and food?
What a stupid question, and one that shows you haven't read what I've written in earlier posts. Don't you believe that people have a responsibility to themselves and their children? :unsure:

As for 'monstrous things', I have spent what often seemed like too much time going through some of these in revolting detail; including horribly abused children and dead prostitutes - sometimes one and the same thing - and all that after nigh-on a century of 'welfare' in this country, and with much of it having occurred within that 'welfare' system. And it still is.

There seems to be a general 'assumption' on the hard-left that some people deserve to benefit from the efforts of others - denying those others the ability to do as much for themselves and their own children as they might otherwise - while making no effort in any way to better themselves and their own situations. I deplore that, it disgusts me, it is irrational and it never has proven itself a way to improve anyone or anything.

Benefits for children and the disabled should be sufficient to allow a comfortable, healthy and dignified standard of living, I have not heard anyone argue against this. Benefits, excluding those related to children and the disabled, are and should be nothing more than a safety net preventing destitution, allowing stabilisation and promoting recovery /advancement. They absolutely should not be a lifestyle choice or an 'alternative' to personal responsibility, and freedom. (y)

It may have skipped your notice that I am one of the few proponents of UBI you'll find on TFF.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 65 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.1%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 6 3.2%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,287
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top