- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
He referred to Britain's mess, not the global mess as you stated in your post #37
and the site receives a small commission
Food banks - your views
- Thread starter yorkshirechap
- Start date
- Status
MWHCVT
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 28,467
- Name
- Matthew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I said no such thing as the GFC was caused mainly by the actions of the Labour Party, I suggest you read what I said without being to blinkered by your political alegence or beliefs...I'm a realist and the simple fact of the matter is the longer we as a country go on spending more than we earn, the worse the situation will get and we need to get our house in order as soon possible, if you believe it's okay to spend more than you have you really are deluded...it's not a case of me believing the story of whichever party, it's a case of believing in simple economics
Britain's mess is the same mess as the global mess! That was the whole point being made.
The alternative point of view would have to be that the entire developed world had a financial crisis, except Britain, which had its own, distinct, unique crisis. Which would only be argued by a simpleton.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Which I also never said. You're certainly on a roll, I'd quit now if I were you.
It's actually not simple economics. The country's economy does not work at all like a household budget, regardless of how often Gideon Osborne likes to make that analogy in support of his small government ideology.
I didn't say you said that. I said that if one were to try to untangle "Britain's mess" from the global mess they'd be on a fool's errand.
Steve Smith
Joe
- Messages
- 9,284
- Edit My Images
- No
It's because no government has control of it. It just happens.
Then you would be very wrong. I heard on the radio a few months ago that benefit cheats account for about 0.1% of the benefits budget. It would be much more profitable to go after big businesses avoiding tax.
And you should stop getting your facts and opinions from the likes of The Daily Mail.
Steve.
Last edited:
Correctamundo.
- Messages
- 20,926
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Whats wrong with having food banks and people donating their excess food to charity. Nothing.
There will always be poor people and rich people, those that work and are successful and those that do not. If those that are successful wish to assist those who aren't - that is their choice.
There will always be poor people and rich people, those that work and are successful and those that do not. If those that are successful wish to assist those who aren't - that is their choice.
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd love to see some figures that support that. Even a little bit, because as far as I'm aware the amount paid due to fraudulent claims is lots less then 1%.(Too much I agree but not really far outnumbering anything) Thats less then underpayment and overpayment due to genuine error.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 5,022
- Name
- Mike
- Edit My Images
- No
@Steve Smith
Here are the 2013/2014 estimated for reference. £1.2 Billion is still a lot of Fraud.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ment_data/file/371459/Statistical_Release.pdf
Yes it is less than 1% and I do stand corrected but it is still a hell of a lot of money going to the common crook......... and there is still £2.2 Billion as a result of Claimant/Official Error
and for your future reference I do not read the Daily Mail and you should never assume that all TPers are gutter press readers..... I am a Times reader ... Thats when I can be arsed to read a paper
Last edited:
- Messages
- 547
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- No
It's probably all down to her then:
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...-news/shame-cheating-heywood-gran-90k-3662329
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...-news/shame-cheating-heywood-gran-90k-3662329
- Messages
- 21,341
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Bless, the Germans were alright because they still had a manufacturing capacity. Britain on the other hand ran down their manufacturing significantly during new labour years, as the city (golden goose) provided so much more...
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
It's an awful lot less then us defrauded from other areas in government though. Maybe better sort them out first
- Messages
- 1,467
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Wow, New Labour "ran down" our manufacturing capacity significantly!!!! I don't know how old you are but have a look at the period from 1979 onwards to see what happened to our manufacturing capacity and how the Tory's led by Maggie set out to destroy manufacturing in the UK in favour of the City and the privileged elite. That's not having a go at you personally Byker28i. As someone that worked through that period I just couldn't get my head around the fact that you may have thought it was a recent New Labour strategy.
On a general note - Reading this thread is quite scary as it tallies with my experience of working with people day in, day out, in various parts of the UK and from many differing backgrounds. There is fear, confusion and lots of ill informed blame whipped up by a sensationalist media, particularly towards what used to be called 'the working class'. If anyone is interested in a readable and well researched book about the decline in attitudes towards the working class and why some communities have been decimated and scapegoated have a look at a book by Owen Jones - Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class. It may give a few people a differing perspective on a number of issues and clarify some of the nonsense.......
The very fact that we are living in a society now that is ruled by fear.................fear of terrorism, fear of losing our jobs, fear of difference and diversity, fear of standing up for anything and anyone that is not us or our immediate family is a sad state of affairs. When did people start looking the other way rather than looking to help others?
The fact that we have to have food banks is a national disgrace. The fact that we live in a society where people that may need to use food banks, often at a huge cost to their self esteem and sense of self worth, are then often marginalised and their integrity called into question, because of unsubstantiated stories compounds the issue.
Until people really start thinking about the issues that we all need to be aware of in the UK and that affect large swathes of our society, and stop relying on spin, sound bites and 'urban myths' we will continue to struggle. It's a pretty crap world out there for many people who do have a sense of personal responsibility and aren't feckless, want to work, want to contribute, work hard to instil decent values in their children and want to help others. By the way, the language used in blue is from the 18th Century when discussing whether there was a 'deserving poor'. How far have we come?
Happy new year folks..........
- Messages
- 1,467
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi Ade, I hope your well? I was out earlier with that 70-200mm I purchased from you a few years back. Still going strong.
Have a good one!
Chris
- Messages
- 16,666
- Name
- Ade
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I`m good thanks pal, glad the lens is still going strong, the body I got off you gave years of good service before being upgraded.
Bring on Barcalona.........
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I started work for Ford in 1979 and it was pretty much boom time, loads of overtime and plenty of work. 20 yrs later, overtime started to dry up to the point there were periods of years without any, workloads decreased, factories were being shut and downsized and companies under the Ford umbrella were sold off. Whilst it's true Ford have had to make further closures within the UK recently, things are looking rosy, plenty of overtime and plenty of work. I'll leave it to you to workout which parties were in power during those periods.
- Messages
- 23,539
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
Destruction of the manufacturing industry? I think we may need to start looking back to winters of discontent and both parties trying to deal with the trades union movement. Also, for as long as I can remember, there has been an attitude that manufacturing and production jobs were only done by those who could not do anything else and that working class kids should better themselves, so it's not surprising British industry has been crumbling since the 60s.
As for foodbanks, western societies will always have some who are in need, for a variety of reasons. I see it as good that ordinary people help provide support to those in need, and for those truly in need, there's nothing demeaning about them. I'd be happier still if we never needed them, but while you give people freedom over their affairs (as it's right to do) some will have hard times.
As for foodbanks, western societies will always have some who are in need, for a variety of reasons. I see it as good that ordinary people help provide support to those in need, and for those truly in need, there's nothing demeaning about them. I'd be happier still if we never needed them, but while you give people freedom over their affairs (as it's right to do) some will have hard times.
Yves Geza
Urchin
- Messages
- 2,160
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Wow! Where do I begin to deconstruct your revision of British history! Perhaps I should ask, Chris, how old are you?
The Thatcher governments didn't run down British industry. It was already on its knees when she came to power in 1979 as the result of a mixture of the policies of successive Governments through the '60s and '70s, heavy unionisation and dreadful inefficiency which became unsustainable when the Western world went through the huge oil fuelled inflation after the Yom Kippur War! Do you remember we needed loans from the IMF in 1976? Before "Thatcher" caused all those problems!
As for suggesting that the City's Big Bang was only in favour of the privileged elite, you seem to have missed the essential classless "meritocracy" of that new breed of City wide-boy trader! The people who benefited most were clever Del-Boys rather than Old Etonian tie wearers! I agree that didn't help morality but I'll return to why that immorality might have been a good thing!
And what you call the demonised working class, largely aren't the old working class at all. Many of those people bought their council houses, shared in the last thirty year's steady economic growth and are now what you'd describe as middle class! I'll avoid commenting on the quality of Owen Jones' research behind his polemics but they are written for a readership very different from the skilled workers on the factory floor. They're written essentially for people who, even more than envying the successful, want to make and maintain clients among the least fortunate- to keep them down rather than raise them up!
As for fear, the '60s, '70s and '80s were characterised by a real fear. Fear of nuclear Armageddon and World War III which only subsided when capitalism out-economied and out-spent the Iron Curtain block through the '80s!
I'd suggest that therein lies the root of the 2008 banking crisis. Wise macro-economists have pointed out that very loose, too loose financial regulation by the immoral wide boys allowed mature economies to keep spending on crap they didn't need. That especially included buying all the crap that China manufactured [more cheaply than we ever could] so that China could grow its economy and reward its population since Tiananmen Square by trade and industry rather than by war and conquest! I think that loose regulation will probably be looked back on as a good price to pay for that peace!
Furthermore people of course haven't changed much from the 18th century. Human psychology changes far more slowly than that in spite of the 'spin' that we're all more enlightened and egalitarian than our parents and grandparents. Animals are always nervous of out groups and 'the other'. That is basic, fundamental animal nature. It doesn't matter what the law and media tell us we're allowed to think and what views are permissible. Secretly, inside their own heads, people still commit the "thought crimes" of fear that they always did! When you listed a set of fears, you didn't mention fear of voicing an opinion that disagrees from the officially or online 'correct' one.
Because people haven't changed, they also have a sense of decency towards their own ingroup and colleagues. It was a member here and friend who told me at the time how his 2008/2009 had been difficult because he and his workmates had all gone on three or four day weeks to keep their metal finishing business open and the staff all in some sort of employment until business improved. That was their strategy and it was surely wholly laudable. They "cut their cloth".
Food banks are a part of others' strategy - both giving and receiving. I wonder if anybody would actually starve if they were taken away? I recently watched a TV documentary about immigrants on benefits. When the State took away their benefits, I was very aware in the final few moments of the programme that somehow communities had taken them under their wings - in exactly the same way as my own great-grandparents' immigrant community did in the 19th century; decades before any benefits were paid to anybody! As described earlier in the thread, the picture is not simple. Some food bank clients have identified them as an alternative source for the food they want to liberate funds for the i-phones or cigarettes they also want. I don't consider them a National Disgrace, I consider them just one part of a much picture of giving and taking and sharing or witholding according to choice and according to how people choose and identify the 'ingroup' that they want to be part of.
Happy New Year
ETA - Oh gefukk! Ancient mariner posted the edited version of my post while I was typing out the wordy version!
Last edited:
KIPAX
Seriously Likeable
- Messages
- 20,992
- Name
- KIPAX Lancashire UK
- Edit My Images
- No
Neither party was "in power".. the power was with the unions. they where the ones ruining the country (unlimted pickets. secondry pickets. sympathy strikes. closed shop workforce) not the goverment. ... step forward maggie thatcher who crushed the unions and the "power" is returned to the goverment ..
there... now carry on
KIPAX
Seriously Likeable
- Messages
- 20,992
- Name
- KIPAX Lancashire UK
- Edit My Images
- No
I would give to food banks. cloths banks.. stuff at lower lever that actually gets to the poeple who need it.. I would never give to a large charity ... theres no way ANY of my hard earned cash is going to people who are earning dusgusting amounts of money ... have you seen the wages some of these poeple are on.. and its donations that pay these wages.. the money you put in a tin.. some of it goes to these people.. they are getting rich from your donations... no thanks.... foodbanks and the like.. charities at ground floor that gets 100% to the poeple.. hell yes!
The Salvation Army’s top employee earns between £140’000-£150’000.
They have a further 22 employees who earn more than £60’000 per year.
Barnado’s top employee earns between £150,000-£159,999.
They have a further 35 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The NSPCC’s top employee earns between £160,001-£170,000.
They have a further 51 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Marie Curie’s top employee earns between £160,001-£170,000.
They have a further 24 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Macmillan’s top employee earns between £170,001 – £180,000.
They have a further 43 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The British Heart foundation has 3 who earn between £150,000-£180,000.
They have a further 33 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The British Red Cross’ top employee earns £200,001 – £210,000.
They have a further 34 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Age UK have 2 employees earning between £160,000-190,000.
They have a further 36 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Cancer Research UK have 11 employees earning between £140,000-230,000.
They have a further 178 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Save the children have 9 employees earning between £145,000-£249,000.
They have a further 108 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The Salvation Army’s top employee earns between £140’000-£150’000.
They have a further 22 employees who earn more than £60’000 per year.
Barnado’s top employee earns between £150,000-£159,999.
They have a further 35 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The NSPCC’s top employee earns between £160,001-£170,000.
They have a further 51 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Marie Curie’s top employee earns between £160,001-£170,000.
They have a further 24 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Macmillan’s top employee earns between £170,001 – £180,000.
They have a further 43 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The British Heart foundation has 3 who earn between £150,000-£180,000.
They have a further 33 employees who earn more than £60,000.
The British Red Cross’ top employee earns £200,001 – £210,000.
They have a further 34 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Age UK have 2 employees earning between £160,000-190,000.
They have a further 36 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Cancer Research UK have 11 employees earning between £140,000-230,000.
They have a further 178 employees who earn more than £60,000.
Save the children have 9 employees earning between £145,000-£249,000.
They have a further 108 employees who earn more than £60,000.
MWHCVT
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 28,467
- Name
- Matthew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
This is exactly why very few large charities see my donation....
Case in point there was one I saw on TV tonight that has to have one of the most synical ploys I've ever seen....choosing to feature a little girl that needs help that just happens to be called "Elsa" yeah right
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Most of that was before 1979 and before I started working. There was still a strong unionised element when I started and I'm glad it's long gone, I think the turning point for our union was when we were voting by a show of hands on a pay deal, the union tried to fiddle the vote by saying we had rejected the offer and were going to strike. Lucky for them they were standing on a balcony and hastily pulled up the ladder they had used to gain access, as they were about to be lynched. They hastily had a revote. After that we had proper ballots and it was before Maggie stepped in with her measures to curb the unions.Neither party was "in power".. the power was with the unions. they where the ones ruining the country (unlimted pickets. secondry pickets. sympathy strikes. closed shop workforce) not the goverment. ... step forward maggie thatcher who crushed the unions and the "power" is returned to the goverment ..
there... now carry on
- Messages
- 908
- Name
- Tracy
- Edit My Images
- No
You have hi-lighted any problem with the so called bedroom tax that the number of families/people needing to downgrade is far, far higher than the number of properties available but unfortunately you still have to pay the "tax" even if you want to move but can't
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
To be honest, I'm not too worried what these people earn, at the end of the day they are providing people with jobs. That's more money going back into the economy and not coming out.
If I feel the charity is a good cause, they'll get a donation.
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
As far as I recall that is not the "Government" doing that, the local council has got discretion on how to implement that part. I would lobby them first.You have hi-lighted any problem with the so called bedroom tax that the number of families/people needing to downgrade is far, far higher than the number of properties available but unfortunately you still have to pay the "tax" even if you want to move but can't
- Messages
- 29,465
- Name
- Bat-Frog
- Edit My Images
- No
My mother was taken care of in her last weeks in a macmillan hospice.
After her death my family raised a lot of money for them and they never saw a penny of it.
Instead, of giving them the money, we asked what equipment they needed. We then bought it and it was given to the unit which cared for mum.
100% of the donation right where it was needed.
- Messages
- 15,804
- Name
- Neil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I agree, which takes us back to what I said earlier about overzealous local government employees in a position of power not doing their jobs properly.
- Messages
- 908
- Name
- Tracy
- Edit My Images
- No
You are probably right but the Government started the tax, it doesn't affect me luckily but I do know people who it has!
- Messages
- 17,486
- Name
- Hugh
- Edit My Images
- No
When I had a proper job, I used to earn more then £60k for a fairly middling responsibility job. Just because someone earns that in a charity doesn't mean they couldn't earn far more away from the charity. And in parts of the uk that's only an average salary.
Let's look at you example of cancer research. You talk about the salaries, but an nhs consultant will earn £100k without any private work, move to leading an oncology group at a big pharma and double that. Those salaries look cheap. Depending of course on the job done
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Firstly it is not a tax. That was just a very well organised campaign that was started by Labour. Secondly it has helped lots of people and move some of the housing stock in the right hands of families waiting for housing they just couldn't get. A friend of mine was really happy to down size.
Yes the government provided the tools. Local government councils choose how to apply them and often without any consideration of the individual. That vote should really be take up locally.
- Messages
- 7,505
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Councils have no discretion over charging the bedroom tax, you might prefer it to be called the "under occupancy charge" but the majority of the country including the press, councils and charities like Shelter call it the bedroom tax, that is the name that has entered common usage, whether you like it or not.
There is an extremely limited fund for discretionary payments allowed as a 'propaganda' payment by the government, unfortunately almost all disabled claimants won't qualify for it as their DLA or PIP is included in discretionary payment application claims (even though it is supposed to be excluded from all income assessments).
Last edited:
- Messages
- 908
- Name
- Tracy
- Edit My Images
- No
No it's not a "tax" but has been labelled as one by many organisations, yes it has helped some people but on the whole it has been a disaster with many families being forced to choose between food/heating etc which is partly the reason that food banks have had to be introduced! Also there are a lot of people that have felt forced to move, sometimes away from areas they have lived in for nearly all their lives and away from family and friends "just" so they can escape paying the 'surcharge' it might be labelled a success by some but for many it has become a nightmare
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
Just like many others move out to afford a house with a size they prefer. If it was my choice I'd have our house and land in central London. But as I can't afford it I had a choice, do with less or move out. I choose to move out. And amazingly that was my own money
The balance is wrong in many circumstances and good tools have been introduced to redress that balance. Naturally some will think they loose out, they are free to fund their own lifestyle naturally.
The balance is wrong in many circumstances and good tools have been introduced to redress that balance. Naturally some will think they loose out, they are free to fund their own lifestyle naturally.
MWHCVT
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 28,467
- Name
- Matthew
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just like many others move out to afford a house with a size they prefer. If it was my choice I'd have our house and land in central London. But as I can't afford it I had a choice, do with less or move out. I choose to move out. And amazingly that was my own money
The balance is wrong in many circumstances and good tools have been introduced to redress that balance. Naturally some will think they loose out, they are free to fund their own lifestyle naturally.
Exactly, as possibly draconian as this might sound to some but if you want to or need to live on the states money, you have to accept that you also have to live in the way the state dictates...within reason of course... If you want to live your own life exactly as you wish (within the law of course) then you need to do so with your own money
- Messages
- 12,856
- Name
- Sir will do
- Edit My Images
- No
And on the food banks. I don't have the data, but I wonder whether this is really as new as people make it out to be. Through the church and affiliated charities this has been provided for as long as I can remember in some shape or form.
I wonder whether it is a bit like credit and loans. People hold no barriers and aren't afraid anymore of what the neighbours think. Thus making it more normal and mainstream than it used to be.
I think it is fantastic, as it has always been, as a measure of last resort. However when it becomes structural and part of everyday life, it acts like drugs dealers and creates a dependency. Ultimately I think some tough love is much kinder and will have lasting impact.
I wonder whether it is a bit like credit and loans. People hold no barriers and aren't afraid anymore of what the neighbours think. Thus making it more normal and mainstream than it used to be.
I think it is fantastic, as it has always been, as a measure of last resort. However when it becomes structural and part of everyday life, it acts like drugs dealers and creates a dependency. Ultimately I think some tough love is much kinder and will have lasting impact.
- Status