THE NEWSDESK: Foodbanks are under attack by those trying to sell us a culture of blame

South Wales Argus: UNDER ATTACK:  A foodbank volunteer at work UNDER ATTACK: A foodbank volunteer at work

THEY used to sell us aspiration - bigger mortgages, an en-suite bathroom, designer kettles, sports cars.

Now, the credit crunch has taken those rose-tinted glasses away from our faces. Aspiration - what aspiration? Austerity means working longer hours just to tread water financially. And we realise just how crazy those days of make-over lives and make-over TV were. Just what sort of treadmill we were all on to buy STUFF.

Bingeing on designer clothes and chef's ready meals? We now know there's a real price to pay. Things can only get better for a short while.

What worries me, though, is what's replacing it. The new message being sold to us by the murkier elements of society.

That fear is the new aspiration. You might not ever be able to afford to buy that dream home now, but you can hate those less fortunate than yourself, those who are different in some way.

Channel that frustrated, thwarted aspiration into blame.

Which is why the Mail on Sunday's "expose" of the people who go to foodbanks makes my skin crawl.

Dear God, people might actually be going to foodbanks more than once! How dare people be needy for more than the allotted "worthy" poor period.

How dare they still have the "trappings of employment" like Sky TV and a smart phone having just been made redundant?

How dare charities who want to help people not act like the Security Service and vet those who come to them as properly worthy?

Of course, they must be feckless, these foodbank users, mustn't they?

Because if they are not, what we have here is a real problem driven by the economics in which we now find ourselves. While unemployment may be down and wages are finally set to outstrip inflation, it's hard to argue that most people in this country are more prosperous.

Because many employed people now have more than one part-time job, working long hours, where once they had one.

Because wages have been frozen or cut in real terms for the best part of a decade.

Because people feel unable to pay into pension pots because they need to pay for the upkeep of their families.

Last week, we reported that 16,455 adults and children in Gwent have been forced to turn to one charity’s food banks in the last year, more than triple the amount from the year previous.

The figures released by the Trussell Trust show the thousands who received food support from Trussell Trust food banks in the last 12 months compared to 4,314 in April 2012-March 2013.

Torfaen reported the highest rate of users with 5,346 people receiving emergency food in April 2013-March 2014. The eight Trussell Trust food banks in Gwent provide three days’ nutritionally balanced food to people in crisis. At least 90 per cent of food given out by the food banks is donated by the public.

In the last year, new food banks have opened in Newport and Monmouth, which account for the huge increase in figures

It's telling that in his Easter sermon, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said today: "In this country, even as the economy improves there is weeping in broken families, in people ashamed to seek help from foodbanks, or frightened by debt. "

It doesn't take a genius to work out that foodbanks are needed or why they are needed.

Still, demonising the poor is a lot easier than taking a look at the large corporations not paying their fair whack of tax, isn't it?

A nice, soft target without the ability to retain expensive lawyers or lobbyists.

What gives me hope is that within hours of the delightful treatment of the Trussell Trust by the attack dogs of the right wing Press, the charity reportedly saw a more than six-fold increase in the number of donations on its Just Giving page.

Before the first donations yesterday with comments specifically referencing the Mail, there had only been around 250 public donations since the page launched in late January this year.

That number increased to over 1,500 by mid afternoon today.

I am glad it is clear that a large section of us do not sit there poring over and agreeing with this venemous stuff while we tuck into our Easter eggs.

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:56pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Katie Re-Registered says...

"It's telling that in his Easter sermon, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said today: "In this country, even as the economy improves there is weeping in broken families, in people ashamed to seek help from foodbanks, or frightened by debt. "

It doesn't take a genius to work out that foodbanks are needed or why they are needed."

...And, my friends, some homophobic preacher who thinks that getting to the top of a rat race to head some heterosexist, gender normative, bigoted man-made cult called a 'religion' sure as hell ain't no genius:)!
"It's telling that in his Easter sermon, the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said today: "In this country, even as the economy improves there is weeping in broken families, in people ashamed to seek help from foodbanks, or frightened by debt. " It doesn't take a genius to work out that foodbanks are needed or why they are needed." ...And, my friends, some homophobic preacher who thinks that getting to the top of a rat race to head some heterosexist, gender normative, bigoted man-made cult called a 'religion' sure as hell ain't no genius:)! Katie Re-Registered
  • Score: -27

6:22pm Sun 20 Apr 14

sooty001 says...

As a pensioner who served his country in the Royal Navy, as did my father before me, I feel ashamed that in the 21st century people have to depend on food banks to just survive and that includes people who are working.How in Gods name can any decent politician let this happen. The time has come for this and any future government to sort out this tragedy and put this country FIRST and to feed the OUR people properly before we worry about other country's problems.
As a pensioner who served his country in the Royal Navy, as did my father before me, I feel ashamed that in the 21st century people have to depend on food banks to just survive and that includes people who are working.How in Gods name can any decent politician let this happen. The time has come for this and any future government to sort out this tragedy and put this country FIRST and to feed the OUR people properly before we worry about other country's problems. sooty001
  • Score: 49

6:41pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Woodgnome says...

I would like to know the facts about foodbanks please. The issue is far too important for spin by any camp.
I would like to know the facts about foodbanks please. The issue is far too important for spin by any camp. Woodgnome
  • Score: 3

7:15pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.
£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python. Dai Rear
  • Score: -30

7:29pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Lliswerry Man says...

Very well done story and the truth for a change. Shame it will not be viewed or heard by those who can make a difference, only by those keyboard warriors who think they know how others live but really have no idea what really goes on behind others doors, only go on the hearsay they hear via chinese whispers or down the pub.
They would rather believe the JK tv shows or mainstream news stories, all paid for by those who can afford to make the poor look like the enemy of the state.

I am a paycheck away from needing a foodbank, and know many others in the same situation, I do not drink alcohol, nor smoke.... no drugs or fancy spanish/foreign holidays... and times are becoming so hard, with rising costs, and lowering incomes, whilst those at the top, the very top are simply adding 0000000's to their already overinflated bank accounts and what for?

People need to start asking the REAL questions... where is ALL the money going, HOW is the UK Government in so much debt... ITS not the poor...... the costs for Welfare are very small in comparison to what gets paid into the STATE coffers.
And as for Labour singing the same songs as the CONDEMS, shame on them also, the party of the people? for the people? not anymore they are not.
Very well done story and the truth for a change. Shame it will not be viewed or heard by those who can make a difference, only by those keyboard warriors who think they know how others live but really have no idea what really goes on behind others doors, only go on the hearsay they hear via chinese whispers or down the pub. They would rather believe the JK tv shows or mainstream news stories, all paid for by those who can afford to make the poor look like the enemy of the state. I am a paycheck away from needing a foodbank, and know many others in the same situation, I do not drink alcohol, nor smoke.... no drugs or fancy spanish/foreign holidays... and times are becoming so hard, with rising costs, and lowering incomes, whilst those at the top, the very top are simply adding 0000000's to their already overinflated bank accounts and what for? People need to start asking the REAL questions... where is ALL the money going, HOW is the UK Government in so much debt... ITS not the poor...... the costs for Welfare are very small in comparison to what gets paid into the STATE coffers. And as for Labour singing the same songs as the CONDEMS, shame on them also, the party of the people? for the people? not anymore they are not. Lliswerry Man
  • Score: 33

8:10pm Sun 20 Apr 14

dky1899 says...

A news story or a personal blog based on her political ideology? Either way not worthy of a supposedly, independent newspaper.

I'm waiting for Maria's next blog as to how she gives up her time (or even money) to help run/fund one of the food banks on a permanent basis. I'm guessing though that she's waiting for one to be set up by the Labour (or any other political) party - but as we all know they just leave it for others to clean up the mess they've left behind.
A news story or a personal blog based on her political ideology? Either way not worthy of a supposedly, independent newspaper. I'm waiting for Maria's next blog as to how she gives up her time (or even money) to help run/fund one of the food banks on a permanent basis. I'm guessing though that she's waiting for one to be set up by the Labour (or any other political) party - but as we all know they just leave it for others to clean up the mess they've left behind. dky1899
  • Score: -14

8:39pm Sun 20 Apr 14

JanJenkins says...

When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene JanJenkins
  • Score: 17

9:33pm Sun 20 Apr 14

Mr Angry says...

That nice Mr Duncan Smith said he could survive on fifty odd quid a week
That nice Mr Duncan Smith said he could survive on fifty odd quid a week Mr Angry
  • Score: 11

10:01pm Sun 20 Apr 14

brynglas says...

Lliswerry Man wrote:
Very well done story and the truth for a change. Shame it will not be viewed or heard by those who can make a difference, only by those keyboard warriors who think they know how others live but really have no idea what really goes on behind others doors, only go on the hearsay they hear via chinese whispers or down the pub.
They would rather believe the JK tv shows or mainstream news stories, all paid for by those who can afford to make the poor look like the enemy of the state.

I am a paycheck away from needing a foodbank, and know many others in the same situation, I do not drink alcohol, nor smoke.... no drugs or fancy spanish/foreign holidays... and times are becoming so hard, with rising costs, and lowering incomes, whilst those at the top, the very top are simply adding 0000000's to their already overinflated bank accounts and what for?

People need to start asking the REAL questions... where is ALL the money going, HOW is the UK Government in so much debt... ITS not the poor...... the costs for Welfare are very small in comparison to what gets paid into the STATE coffers.
And as for Labour singing the same songs as the CONDEMS, shame on them also, the party of the people? for the people? not anymore they are not.
@Lliswerry Man. I agree with you. I hope things improve for you.
[quote][p][bold]Lliswerry Man[/bold] wrote: Very well done story and the truth for a change. Shame it will not be viewed or heard by those who can make a difference, only by those keyboard warriors who think they know how others live but really have no idea what really goes on behind others doors, only go on the hearsay they hear via chinese whispers or down the pub. They would rather believe the JK tv shows or mainstream news stories, all paid for by those who can afford to make the poor look like the enemy of the state. I am a paycheck away from needing a foodbank, and know many others in the same situation, I do not drink alcohol, nor smoke.... no drugs or fancy spanish/foreign holidays... and times are becoming so hard, with rising costs, and lowering incomes, whilst those at the top, the very top are simply adding 0000000's to their already overinflated bank accounts and what for? People need to start asking the REAL questions... where is ALL the money going, HOW is the UK Government in so much debt... ITS not the poor...... the costs for Welfare are very small in comparison to what gets paid into the STATE coffers. And as for Labour singing the same songs as the CONDEMS, shame on them also, the party of the people? for the people? not anymore they are not.[/p][/quote]@Lliswerry Man. I agree with you. I hope things improve for you. brynglas
  • Score: 6

10:04pm Sun 20 Apr 14

brynglas says...

Mr Angry wrote:
That nice Mr Duncan Smith said he could survive on fifty odd quid a week
Lol, he wouldn't try out his boast though, even when he was challenged to by a huge online petition with over 480,000 signatures!
[quote][p][bold]Mr Angry[/bold] wrote: That nice Mr Duncan Smith said he could survive on fifty odd quid a week[/p][/quote]Lol, he wouldn't try out his boast though, even when he was challenged to by a huge online petition with over 480,000 signatures! brynglas
  • Score: 13

10:09pm Sun 20 Apr 14

brynglas says...

JanJenkins wrote:
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
You're right Jan. The Tories regard the poor as enemies.
[quote][p][bold]JanJenkins[/bold] wrote: When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene[/p][/quote]You're right Jan. The Tories regard the poor as enemies. brynglas
  • Score: 0

10:22pm Sun 20 Apr 14

brynglas says...

Dai Rear wrote:
£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.
You mention "the Left" ranting.

Your comment has only three sentences, 155 words in total. The middle sentence has 104 words alone, including
Lambeth
vicar
Nitwit
civilization
babbles
abortion
wimmins
I think that easily qualifies as a rant!
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: £10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.[/p][/quote]You mention "the Left" ranting. Your comment has only three sentences, 155 words in total. The middle sentence has 104 words alone, including Lambeth vicar Nitwit civilization babbles abortion wimmins I think that easily qualifies as a rant! brynglas
  • Score: 6

7:58am Mon 21 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

OK. I rant Comrade brynglas.. The stuff from the left above-"you're only one paycheck away...." "the Tories are....""the "rich" are eating the "poor", "they" are stealing all our tax money and spending it on themselves and nothing is spent on dolees", "I haven't got around to getting a job and how can I live on £N" are not, although they appear with monotonous regularity under every "bedroom tax", food bank, "dolee dies of rickets" story. That's OK then.
You don't like Cameron (and I've no time for the man) He's very proud of giving a borrowed £10 billion to "Aid Agencies" and NGO's so they can buy for themselves and foreign dictators lots of nice motors. That's how I started my rant-though I appreciate you were too busy determining from its construction that I studied German at A-Level actually to read what it said. What about that money?
OK. I rant Comrade brynglas.. The stuff from the left above-"you're only one paycheck away...." "the Tories are....""the "rich" are eating the "poor", "they" are stealing all our tax money and spending it on themselves and nothing is spent on dolees", "I haven't got around to getting a job and how can I live on £N" are not, although they appear with monotonous regularity under every "bedroom tax", food bank, "dolee dies of rickets" story. That's OK then. You don't like Cameron (and I've no time for the man) He's very proud of giving a borrowed £10 billion to "Aid Agencies" and NGO's so they can buy for themselves and foreign dictators lots of nice motors. That's how I started my rant-though I appreciate you were too busy determining from its construction that I studied German at A-Level actually to read what it said. What about that money? Dai Rear
  • Score: 5

9:58am Mon 21 Apr 14

Bobevans says...

JanJenkins wrote:
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week

Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice
[quote][p][bold]JanJenkins[/bold] wrote: When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene[/p][/quote]I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice Bobevans
  • Score: 9

10:11am Mon 21 Apr 14

davidcp says...

Who's getting £52 a week? Not the claimants on £38,000 a year, that's for sure.
Who's getting £52 a week? Not the claimants on £38,000 a year, that's for sure. davidcp
  • Score: -1

10:19am Mon 21 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

The "cap" at 25K was funny too wasn't it? Since real, working, people, on average, GROSS 25K a year, before the State rips them off, whilst the dear old dolees get our 25K NET
The "cap" at 25K was funny too wasn't it? Since real, working, people, on average, GROSS 25K a year, before the State rips them off, whilst the dear old dolees get our 25K NET Dai Rear
  • Score: 0

10:20am Mon 21 Apr 14

Magor says...

We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.
We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party. Magor
  • Score: 12

11:27am Mon 21 Apr 14

Mervyn James says...

Magor wrote:
We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.
What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones....

UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough.
[quote][p][bold]Magor[/bold] wrote: We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.[/p][/quote]What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones.... UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough. Mervyn James
  • Score: 6

12:04pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Cymru Am Beth says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Magor wrote:
We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.
What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones....

UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough.
"UK workers do the longest hours for the least money" thanks to the uncontrolled immigration so loved by the previous Labour Government.
This situation has been caused mainly by cheap labour from Eastern Europe.
But who are the most supportive party when it comes to staying in Europe?
You guessed it, Labour.
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Magor[/bold] wrote: We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.[/p][/quote]What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones.... UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough.[/p][/quote]"UK workers do the longest hours for the least money" thanks to the uncontrolled immigration so loved by the previous Labour Government. This situation has been caused mainly by cheap labour from Eastern Europe. But who are the most supportive party when it comes to staying in Europe? You guessed it, Labour. Cymru Am Beth
  • Score: 6

12:57pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Evil Flanker says...

Bobevans wrote:
JanJenkins wrote:
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week

Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice
I see so people choose to be poor, as for temporary there are more than one benefit, for example disability, this is long term support.

You have no idea.
[quote][p][bold]Bobevans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JanJenkins[/bold] wrote: When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene[/p][/quote]I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice[/p][/quote]I see so people choose to be poor, as for temporary there are more than one benefit, for example disability, this is long term support. You have no idea. Evil Flanker
  • Score: 3

1:00pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Evil Flanker says...

@Bobevans - Just to add to that, is disability a lifestyle CHOICE too ?
@Bobevans - Just to add to that, is disability a lifestyle CHOICE too ? Evil Flanker
  • Score: 2

1:08pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Evil Flanker wrote:
Bobevans wrote:
JanJenkins wrote:
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week

Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice
I see so people choose to be poor, as for temporary there are more than one benefit, for example disability, this is long term support.

You have no idea.
Indeed. And ESA which you get if you're an alcoholic or drug addict.....
[quote][p][bold]Evil Flanker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bobevans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JanJenkins[/bold] wrote: When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene[/p][/quote]I see you come out with the myth of only £52 a week Benefits as well are meant to provide temporary support and not as a long term lifestyle choice[/p][/quote]I see so people choose to be poor, as for temporary there are more than one benefit, for example disability, this is long term support. You have no idea.[/p][/quote]Indeed. And ESA which you get if you're an alcoholic or drug addict..... Dai Rear
  • Score: 3

1:13pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Magor says...

Cymru Am Beth wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Magor wrote:
We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.
What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones....

UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough.
"UK workers do the longest hours for the least money" thanks to the uncontrolled immigration so loved by the previous Labour Government.
This situation has been caused mainly by cheap labour from Eastern Europe.
But who are the most supportive party when it comes to staying in Europe?
You guessed it, Labour.
Wales is being hammered by cheap migrant labour.Many jobs were created in Wales due to lower wages but employers can now set up anywhere in the UK and employ mainly migrants. That is why no new jobs are being created and existing firms are re-locating to England.
[quote][p][bold]Cymru Am Beth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Magor[/bold] wrote: We do need a massive change in this country so at the next elections do not vote for the same old parties,or round here party.[/p][/quote]What are the alternatives ? Labour has adopted tory policies as it is, the UKIP is Tory right wing and how ! 'Punish the poor' is the religion of hate and the elite, and the daily mail readers..... They are accredited as being poor by choice and ripping 'tax payers' off, perhaps someone will tell us where the law says poor people do not have to pay VAT, TV licenses, utility bills etc. For the official record the people who obtain the majority of benefits are the working poor, NOT chav scroungers with 50" TV sets and smart phones.... UK workers do the longest hours for the least money in Europe. How anyone can attack the fact a million families are having to ask for food is beyond belief, and shows what a nasty, self-centred , bigoted, and hateful society we have become. Vote Tory why don't you.... all pigs in the same trough.[/p][/quote]"UK workers do the longest hours for the least money" thanks to the uncontrolled immigration so loved by the previous Labour Government. This situation has been caused mainly by cheap labour from Eastern Europe. But who are the most supportive party when it comes to staying in Europe? You guessed it, Labour.[/p][/quote]Wales is being hammered by cheap migrant labour.Many jobs were created in Wales due to lower wages but employers can now set up anywhere in the UK and employ mainly migrants. That is why no new jobs are being created and existing firms are re-locating to England. Magor
  • Score: 5

1:21pm Mon 21 Apr 14

b3talover says...

Dai Rear wrote:
£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.
Proof or GTFO.
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: £10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.[/p][/quote]Proof or GTFO. b3talover
  • Score: 0

1:43pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Evil Flanker says...

b3talover wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.
Proof or GTFO.
Simple, in fact Dai under quoted...

If you want proof, simply google UK Deficit 22.4 billion!
[quote][p][bold]b3talover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: £10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.[/p][/quote]Proof or GTFO.[/p][/quote]Simple, in fact Dai under quoted... If you want proof, simply google UK Deficit 22.4 billion! Evil Flanker
  • Score: -6

5:39pm Mon 21 Apr 14

b3talover says...

Evil Flanker wrote:
b3talover wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
£10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.
Proof or GTFO.
Simple, in fact Dai under quoted...

If you want proof, simply google UK Deficit 22.4 billion!
Yes but you ARE Dai... Supporting your own Daily Mail views as usual.
[quote][p][bold]Evil Flanker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]b3talover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: £10,000,000,000 of our money or rather money borrowed against our grandchildren's' futures, was given to "overseas aid" agencies this year to do with what they will after buying all the staff a Shogun each and block booking Nairobi's finest hotel. In the meantime the Left rant about everyone starving here and the "Look I think I'm a social worker from Lambeth or maybe I'm some kind of vicar but I'm sure the office is in Lambeth" Arch Nitwit babbles on about the end of civilisation as we know it, as another 180, 000 human beings are killed by abortion "doctors" (oh we social workers can't get involved in wimmins' rights you know") and this paper whose staff have affiliated to some food bank drivels away about a popular Sunday newspaper without ever wondering why the Observer or the Sunday Indie failed or are failing. It's like a bad script from Monty Python.[/p][/quote]Proof or GTFO.[/p][/quote]Simple, in fact Dai under quoted... If you want proof, simply google UK Deficit 22.4 billion![/p][/quote]Yes but you ARE Dai... Supporting your own Daily Mail views as usual. b3talover
  • Score: -2

5:52pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

He's not. And I don't read the Mail, though a lot more read it than the Guardian and the Independent put together.
He's not. And I don't read the Mail, though a lot more read it than the Guardian and the Independent put together. Dai Rear
  • Score: 3

6:16pm Mon 21 Apr 14

SlopingBird says...

Excellent editorial Maria. Anyone who still believes that the poor are lazy, feckless or fraudulent is simply putting their head in the sand. My experience of volunteering at a food bank for six months was a real eye-opener, especially when two people I knew (from school years ago) came in on the same day. Few of us are in a position where we don't need the next pay cheque nowadays. Young people/families are becoming desperate and yet still there are people (mainly Daily Mail readers) who continue to **** them for their 'misfortune' and constantly pronounce that if poor people tried harder they'd be able to buy that £300k semi and have holidays abroad. It's very hard if not impossible to pick yourself up from rock bottom. Anyway, good on you for saying what needed to be said.
Excellent editorial Maria. Anyone who still believes that the poor are lazy, feckless or fraudulent is simply putting their head in the sand. My experience of volunteering at a food bank for six months was a real eye-opener, especially when two people I knew (from school years ago) came in on the same day. Few of us are in a position where we don't need the next pay cheque nowadays. Young people/families are becoming desperate and yet still there are people (mainly Daily Mail readers) who continue to **** them for their 'misfortune' and constantly pronounce that if poor people tried harder they'd be able to buy that £300k semi and have holidays abroad. It's very hard if not impossible to pick yourself up from rock bottom. Anyway, good on you for saying what needed to be said. SlopingBird
  • Score: 3

7:01pm Mon 21 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

SlopingBird wrote:
Excellent editorial Maria. Anyone who still believes that the poor are lazy, feckless or fraudulent is simply putting their head in the sand. My experience of volunteering at a food bank for six months was a real eye-opener, especially when two people I knew (from school years ago) came in on the same day. Few of us are in a position where we don't need the next pay cheque nowadays. Young people/families are becoming desperate and yet still there are people (mainly Daily Mail readers) who continue to **** them for their 'misfortune' and constantly pronounce that if poor people tried harder they'd be able to buy that £300k semi and have holidays abroad. It's very hard if not impossible to pick yourself up from rock bottom. Anyway, good on you for saying what needed to be said.
So, read the Mail and join the nouveau riche. Or maybe, don't be so silly and , for goodness sake, stop quoting the vacuous "Shelter" "you're only one paycheck from the night shelter" propaganda (of which Goebbels would have been bloomin' proud) It's been hammered to death.
I have actually dealt professionally with some of the people who use FB's. They are perfectly pleasant, mostly. But no more "desperate" or "starving" than when I dealt with them in the first decade of this millennium , or the last decade of the last millennium or indeed the decade before that.
[quote][p][bold]SlopingBird[/bold] wrote: Excellent editorial Maria. Anyone who still believes that the poor are lazy, feckless or fraudulent is simply putting their head in the sand. My experience of volunteering at a food bank for six months was a real eye-opener, especially when two people I knew (from school years ago) came in on the same day. Few of us are in a position where we don't need the next pay cheque nowadays. Young people/families are becoming desperate and yet still there are people (mainly Daily Mail readers) who continue to **** them for their 'misfortune' and constantly pronounce that if poor people tried harder they'd be able to buy that £300k semi and have holidays abroad. It's very hard if not impossible to pick yourself up from rock bottom. Anyway, good on you for saying what needed to be said.[/p][/quote]So, read the Mail and join the nouveau riche. Or maybe, don't be so silly and , for goodness sake, stop quoting the vacuous "Shelter" "you're only one paycheck from the night shelter" propaganda (of which Goebbels would have been bloomin' proud) It's been hammered to death. I have actually dealt professionally with some of the people who use FB's. They are perfectly pleasant, mostly. But no more "desperate" or "starving" than when I dealt with them in the first decade of this millennium , or the last decade of the last millennium or indeed the decade before that. Dai Rear
  • Score: -2

10:25am Tue 22 Apr 14

Mervyn James says...

Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?). Mervyn James
  • Score: 4

11:05am Tue 22 Apr 14

Dai Rear says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion" Dai Rear
  • Score: 0

11:55am Tue 22 Apr 14

Llanmartinangel says...

Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way. Llanmartinangel
  • Score: 2

12:19pm Tue 22 Apr 14

endthelies says...

Llanmartinangel wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.
Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it.
[quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.[/p][/quote]Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it. endthelies
  • Score: 3

12:44pm Tue 22 Apr 14

davidcp says...

"The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it."

The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other.

However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy).

Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute.
"The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it." The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other. However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy). Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute. davidcp
  • Score: -1

12:46pm Tue 22 Apr 14

Woodgnome says...

Readers are right to be critical of a government under who's watch reliance on food banks is increasing daily. However it should not be forgotten that food banks emerged under the Trussell trust in 1999 that is at a time fairly and squarely under the Labour governments watch.

As I said in an earlier post what we need are the facts - not spin and rhetoric from Maria and the various camps.
Readers are right to be critical of a government under who's watch reliance on food banks is increasing daily. However it should not be forgotten that food banks emerged under the Trussell trust in 1999 that is at a time fairly and squarely under the Labour governments watch. As I said in an earlier post what we need are the facts - not spin and rhetoric from Maria and the various camps. Woodgnome
  • Score: 4

12:54pm Tue 22 Apr 14

endthelies says...

davidcp wrote:
"The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it."

The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other.

However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy).

Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute.
I didn't say that the haves shouldn't have at all. I am suggesting that the pendulum should be pointed at both. This government are just absolutely intent on making poorer people out to be the bad guys, when they have plenty of their own that they should be looking at and punishing. People in glass houses..........
[quote][p][bold]davidcp[/bold] wrote: "The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it." The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other. However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy). Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute.[/p][/quote]I didn't say that the haves shouldn't have at all. I am suggesting that the pendulum should be pointed at both. This government are just absolutely intent on making poorer people out to be the bad guys, when they have plenty of their own that they should be looking at and punishing. People in glass houses.......... endthelies
  • Score: -2

1:47pm Tue 22 Apr 14

Cymru Am Beth says...

endthelies wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.
Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it.
Oh come on.
Labour politicians were the worst offenders in the expenses row.
They are all politicians so they have all got their snouts in the trough some way or another.
Look at Prestcott and the Kinnock's and Tony B Liar.
You would be hard pressed to find any worse examples of hypocrisy.
They would sell their soul to the devil to make a fast buck.
[quote][p][bold]endthelies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.[/p][/quote]Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it.[/p][/quote]Oh come on. Labour politicians were the worst offenders in the expenses row. They are all politicians so they have all got their snouts in the trough some way or another. Look at Prestcott and the Kinnock's and Tony B Liar. You would be hard pressed to find any worse examples of hypocrisy. They would sell their soul to the devil to make a fast buck. Cymru Am Beth
  • Score: 4

1:48pm Tue 22 Apr 14

Llanmartinangel says...

davidcp wrote:
"The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it."

The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other.

However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy).

Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute.
Very well put. It is curious that, even in the Panorama programme re food banks, that of the cases they highlighted, two were a girl and her boyfriend, both under twenty, who had decided to have a child (they didn't even have somewhere to live) and another guy who, by his own admission, had given up several jobs because he had problems 'working for people' and 'liked drugs'. Another woman fixed the problem herself by getting a job. In other words, pretending people can't join a FB queue because they are (a) stupid (b) make idiotic decisions or (c) because it's free, is just too simplistic. I absolutely accept that there are those in genuine need but how the numbers of those stack with the other three, I doubt anyone on here knows for sure.
[quote][p][bold]davidcp[/bold] wrote: "The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it." The assumption is implied that the have's shouldn't have it. If you argue that 'all' the poor should have deserved help you can't then argue that the deserving 'haves' should not be allowed to 'have', because when you do that you remove fairness from your argument. You can't generalise one way and not the other. However, you can temper your views - for example, by saying SOME have's don't deserve it, and SOME poor are there because they don't use their personal responsibility - either by choice (their fault) or because they haven't been taught how to (society's fault in terms of education and/or philosophy). Thus allowing for the 'fact' (if not philosophically justifying) that SOME don't deserve to have and SOME poor are there because they are happy not to contribute.[/p][/quote]Very well put. It is curious that, even in the Panorama programme re food banks, that of the cases they highlighted, two were a girl and her boyfriend, both under twenty, who had decided to have a child (they didn't even have somewhere to live) and another guy who, by his own admission, had given up several jobs because he had problems 'working for people' and 'liked drugs'. Another woman fixed the problem herself by getting a job. In other words, pretending people can't join a FB queue because they are (a) stupid (b) make idiotic decisions or (c) because it's free, is just too simplistic. I absolutely accept that there are those in genuine need but how the numbers of those stack with the other three, I doubt anyone on here knows for sure. Llanmartinangel
  • Score: 3

2:08pm Tue 22 Apr 14

Bobevans says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used Bobevans
  • Score: 3

2:08pm Tue 22 Apr 14

Bobevans says...

Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used Bobevans
  • Score: 3

2:31pm Tue 22 Apr 14

ollie72 says...

My only concern about foodbanks (and I contribute on a weekly basis) is the foodstuffs that I am asked to contribute. People seem to have forgotten how to cook, and I am regularly asked for packets of instant mash, or tins of meatballs etc - all processed, pre-made foods. Surely if people were given the skills to cook from scratch, food could go a lot further?

As a kid (late 1970's), Monday tea time was always the leftover veg from Sunday dinner, fried up with some eggs ("Monday scramble" as my mother always called it). There would always be a bread and butter pudding made up with the stale slices of bread at the end of the week, and we always had a bag of broken biscuits in the cupboard, as they were so much cheaper than whole ones!

We weren't particularly poor, everyone I knew was the same - everybody got the maximum benefit from their food budget.

While I am sure that most of us are happy to help - if we are in the fortunate position to do so - it would be nice to know that people were being given the skills to make good food from basic ingredients. Surely this is the way to cut down on food costs - while also cutting down the salts/sugars/preserv
atives that kids are getting from processed foods?

By the way, I still pride myself on making a stew that will last for 3 days for my whole family for around £5...
My only concern about foodbanks (and I contribute on a weekly basis) is the foodstuffs that I am asked to contribute. People seem to have forgotten how to cook, and I am regularly asked for packets of instant mash, or tins of meatballs etc - all processed, pre-made foods. Surely if people were given the skills to cook from scratch, food could go a lot further? As a kid (late 1970's), Monday tea time was always the leftover veg from Sunday dinner, fried up with some eggs ("Monday scramble" as my mother always called it). There would always be a bread and butter pudding made up with the stale slices of bread at the end of the week, and we always had a bag of broken biscuits in the cupboard, as they were so much cheaper than whole ones! We weren't particularly poor, everyone I knew was the same - everybody got the maximum benefit from their food budget. While I am sure that most of us are happy to help - if we are in the fortunate position to do so - it would be nice to know that people were being given the skills to make good food from basic ingredients. Surely this is the way to cut down on food costs - while also cutting down the salts/sugars/preserv atives that kids are getting from processed foods? By the way, I still pride myself on making a stew that will last for 3 days for my whole family for around £5... ollie72
  • Score: 4

4:39pm Tue 22 Apr 14

endthelies says...

Cymru Am Beth wrote:
endthelies wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.
Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it.
Oh come on.
Labour politicians were the worst offenders in the expenses row.
They are all politicians so they have all got their snouts in the trough some way or another.
Look at Prestcott and the Kinnock's and Tony B Liar.
You would be hard pressed to find any worse examples of hypocrisy.
They would sell their soul to the devil to make a fast buck.
I agree. Any mps who fiddle their expenses should lose their jobs and all the privileges that go with it. Be they Labour, cons, libdem or monster raving loony. I'm just stating that Cameron doesn't have a leg to stand on when criticising those who have to receive benefits when he himself is fully prepared to turn a blind eye to the thieves in his own party. Sorry you don't like it but its the truth.
[quote][p][bold]Cymru Am Beth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]endthelies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]Gordon Brown was a compassionate socialist. He raised over 140 taxes (in a supposed boom) on working people who had the wherewithal to get off their butts and squandered it on an industrial scale. What we see now is the pendulum swinging the other way.[/p][/quote]Well it seems the tory party are happy to see the 'hard working people' they keep telling us they represent being forced to use foodbanks whilst letting their own Maria Miller pocket £45,000. Cameron obviously felt she hadn't done anything really wrong because he felt he should just carry on in her position without any repercussions. But heaven forbid if you're a working class person who needs some support to get on your feet ! How dare you even ask for any support. You don't deserve it (according to some folk). Practice what you preach Cameron. Don't let your own steal from the tax payers an get away with it. The pendulum is swinging squarely towards the haves and away from the people who are struggling. absolutely no doubt about it.[/p][/quote]Oh come on. Labour politicians were the worst offenders in the expenses row. They are all politicians so they have all got their snouts in the trough some way or another. Look at Prestcott and the Kinnock's and Tony B Liar. You would be hard pressed to find any worse examples of hypocrisy. They would sell their soul to the devil to make a fast buck.[/p][/quote]I agree. Any mps who fiddle their expenses should lose their jobs and all the privileges that go with it. Be they Labour, cons, libdem or monster raving loony. I'm just stating that Cameron doesn't have a leg to stand on when criticising those who have to receive benefits when he himself is fully prepared to turn a blind eye to the thieves in his own party. Sorry you don't like it but its the truth. endthelies
  • Score: 6

9:30am Wed 23 Apr 14

Gareth says...

Lovely article Maria. I was reminded of a line I heard a while ago about the time we used to wage a war on poverty, not the poor.

So after a thoughtful article about not blaming those who are less fortunate, it was good to see the opening few comments where posters offered others support for their situation.

Yes, the finger-pointing brigade then found the story and kicked off their obligatory blame game, but it was nice while it lasted.

Thanks Maria.
Lovely article Maria. I was reminded of a line I heard a while ago about the time we used to wage a war on poverty, not the poor. So after a thoughtful article about not blaming those who are less fortunate, it was good to see the opening few comments where posters offered others support for their situation. Yes, the finger-pointing brigade then found the story and kicked off their obligatory blame game, but it was nice while it lasted. Thanks Maria. Gareth
  • Score: 2

7:45pm Wed 23 Apr 14

Mervyn James says...

Bobevans wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used
No doubt that when the balloon went up and he was challenged, he closed down his e-mail, front door, and social media sites, nothing to hide of course. I thought the only professional beggars were eastern bloc migrants and City bankers. Let's face it, it wasn't done to highlight how easy it was, but to add fuel to the blame culturists he works for. Apparently it worked on you. There is NO evidence of wholesale advantage taking by those wanting food parcels, except perhaps some daily mail and toilet media reporters.....
[quote][p][bold]Bobevans[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]He was just demonstrating that there is no real restriction on who can get food vouchers. No fraud took place the vouchers were not used[/p][/quote]No doubt that when the balloon went up and he was challenged, he closed down his e-mail, front door, and social media sites, nothing to hide of course. I thought the only professional beggars were eastern bloc migrants and City bankers. Let's face it, it wasn't done to highlight how easy it was, but to add fuel to the blame culturists he works for. Apparently it worked on you. There is NO evidence of wholesale advantage taking by those wanting food parcels, except perhaps some daily mail and toilet media reporters..... Mervyn James
  • Score: -4

2:54pm Sat 26 Apr 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Dai Rear wrote:
OK. I rant Comrade brynglas.. The stuff from the left above-"you're only one paycheck away...." "the Tories are....""the "rich" are eating the "poor", "they" are stealing all our tax money and spending it on themselves and nothing is spent on dolees", "I haven't got around to getting a job and how can I live on £N" are not, although they appear with monotonous regularity under every "bedroom tax", food bank, "dolee dies of rickets" story. That's OK then.
You don't like Cameron (and I've no time for the man) He's very proud of giving a borrowed £10 billion to "Aid Agencies" and NGO's so they can buy for themselves and foreign dictators lots of nice motors. That's how I started my rant-though I appreciate you were too busy determining from its construction that I studied German at A-Level actually to read what it said. What about that money?
If your principal point point was criticism of (to your mind) egregious foreign aid, why on earth the segue to some empty-headed excoriation of a woman's right to choose?
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: OK. I rant Comrade brynglas.. The stuff from the left above-"you're only one paycheck away...." "the Tories are....""the "rich" are eating the "poor", "they" are stealing all our tax money and spending it on themselves and nothing is spent on dolees", "I haven't got around to getting a job and how can I live on £N" are not, although they appear with monotonous regularity under every "bedroom tax", food bank, "dolee dies of rickets" story. That's OK then. You don't like Cameron (and I've no time for the man) He's very proud of giving a borrowed £10 billion to "Aid Agencies" and NGO's so they can buy for themselves and foreign dictators lots of nice motors. That's how I started my rant-though I appreciate you were too busy determining from its construction that I studied German at A-Level actually to read what it said. What about that money?[/p][/quote]If your principal point point was criticism of (to your mind) egregious foreign aid, why on earth the segue to some empty-headed excoriation of a woman's right to choose? The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: -1

3:00pm Sat 26 Apr 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
[quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb? The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 0

7:29pm Sat 26 Apr 14

Mervyn James says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts. Mervyn James
  • Score: 0

7:32pm Sat 26 Apr 14

Mervyn James says...

We should add, the same posters here attacked the councils for wanting to pay them a decent wage,, I think they just are bullies most of them,perfectly at home in Victorian society, god bless them every one... NOT !
We should add, the same posters here attacked the councils for wanting to pay them a decent wage,, I think they just are bullies most of them,perfectly at home in Victorian society, god bless them every one... NOT ! Mervyn James
  • Score: 0

10:39pm Sat 26 Apr 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Mervyn James wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
Get no arguments from me, Mr James
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.[/p][/quote]Get no arguments from me, Mr James The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 1

10:30am Sun 27 Apr 14

scraptheWAG says...

Mervyn James wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do
[quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.[/p][/quote]the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do scraptheWAG
  • Score: -1

3:52pm Sun 27 Apr 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

scraptheWAG wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do
Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion.

And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?!
[quote][p][bold]scraptheWAG[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.[/p][/quote]the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do[/p][/quote]Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion. And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?! The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 1

4:28pm Sun 27 Apr 14

scraptheWAG says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
scraptheWAG wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do
Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion.

And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?!
im forced through my taxes to pay for their dla
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scraptheWAG[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.[/p][/quote]the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do[/p][/quote]Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion. And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?![/p][/quote]im forced through my taxes to pay for their dla scraptheWAG
  • Score: -1

5:31pm Sun 27 Apr 14

endthelies says...

ollie72 wrote:
My only concern about foodbanks (and I contribute on a weekly basis) is the foodstuffs that I am asked to contribute. People seem to have forgotten how to cook, and I am regularly asked for packets of instant mash, or tins of meatballs etc - all processed, pre-made foods. Surely if people were given the skills to cook from scratch, food could go a lot further?

As a kid (late 1970's), Monday tea time was always the leftover veg from Sunday dinner, fried up with some eggs ("Monday scramble" as my mother always called it). There would always be a bread and butter pudding made up with the stale slices of bread at the end of the week, and we always had a bag of broken biscuits in the cupboard, as they were so much cheaper than whole ones!

We weren't particularly poor, everyone I knew was the same - everybody got the maximum benefit from their food budget.

While I am sure that most of us are happy to help - if we are in the fortunate position to do so - it would be nice to know that people were being given the skills to make good food from basic ingredients. Surely this is the way to cut down on food costs - while also cutting down the salts/sugars/preserv

atives that kids are getting from processed foods?

By the way, I still pride myself on making a stew that will last for 3 days for my whole family for around £5...
Ive looked into this and the reason they only have tinned foods is because they do not have the facilities to keep fresh foods. Most have to be refrigerated (especially meats) and have short sell by dates. I do agree with you that the cheapest way to eat is to buy veggies and eggs etc and cook your own meals from scratch. I'm a great believer that we should have domestic science back in schools with proper cooking lessons, not like they have now where the children bring in ready made pastry because they are not given enough time in a lesson to make it from scratch.
[quote][p][bold]ollie72[/bold] wrote: My only concern about foodbanks (and I contribute on a weekly basis) is the foodstuffs that I am asked to contribute. People seem to have forgotten how to cook, and I am regularly asked for packets of instant mash, or tins of meatballs etc - all processed, pre-made foods. Surely if people were given the skills to cook from scratch, food could go a lot further? As a kid (late 1970's), Monday tea time was always the leftover veg from Sunday dinner, fried up with some eggs ("Monday scramble" as my mother always called it). There would always be a bread and butter pudding made up with the stale slices of bread at the end of the week, and we always had a bag of broken biscuits in the cupboard, as they were so much cheaper than whole ones! We weren't particularly poor, everyone I knew was the same - everybody got the maximum benefit from their food budget. While I am sure that most of us are happy to help - if we are in the fortunate position to do so - it would be nice to know that people were being given the skills to make good food from basic ingredients. Surely this is the way to cut down on food costs - while also cutting down the salts/sugars/preserv atives that kids are getting from processed foods? By the way, I still pride myself on making a stew that will last for 3 days for my whole family for around £5...[/p][/quote]Ive looked into this and the reason they only have tinned foods is because they do not have the facilities to keep fresh foods. Most have to be refrigerated (especially meats) and have short sell by dates. I do agree with you that the cheapest way to eat is to buy veggies and eggs etc and cook your own meals from scratch. I'm a great believer that we should have domestic science back in schools with proper cooking lessons, not like they have now where the children bring in ready made pastry because they are not given enough time in a lesson to make it from scratch. endthelies
  • Score: 2

5:36pm Sun 27 Apr 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

scraptheWAG wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
scraptheWAG wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Dai Rear wrote:
Mervyn James wrote:
Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).
Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"
So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?
Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.
the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do
Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion.

And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?!
im forced through my taxes to pay for their dla
As am I. What do you propose as an alternative, a never-ending cycle of referenda on all matters? Shall we compare salaries? If I earn more than you, do I get more of a say? Or would you prefer zero tax, and some heightened state of nature?
[quote][p][bold]scraptheWAG[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]scraptheWAG[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dai Rear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mervyn James[/bold] wrote: Yesterday a reporter posed as a poor ailing father to get validation to go to a food bank then when he got £40 worth of free food ripped into the poor that were genuinely eligible. Another daily mail 'exposure' ? This is deliberately promoting hate campaigns at the poorest in our society, just because he was able to exploit a freebie, meant everyone who got free food did the same.... propaganda ! (And why wasn't he taken to court for fraud ?).[/p][/quote]Because his intention was neither dishonest nor to permanently deprive but I guess you lefties think that reading the Mail is a crime anyway. Don't think Philby, Maclean, Burgess, Blunt, Vassall et al ever read the Mail, but of course they were good blokes , not like working people unhappy at the level of taxation in our country. But of course socialism is wonderfully "compassionate" though I've never quite worked out how taking my dosh and spending it on someone you want to spend it on counts as "compassion"[/p][/quote]So it is not possible - by your understanding - to differentiate between any given left-leaning individual and the Cambridge 5? What a terrifyingly dark world you inhabit, with threats at each and every turn. How do you sleep, poor lamb?[/p][/quote]Daily Mail is a hate rag, and anyone who reads it has to buy in to that hate. As averse to the S*N readers who just moves fingers along the lines of large print, and called Hillsborough dead 'thugs'. The intention was clear they wanted to discredit the poor who needed food, because a disgraceful and un-elected coalition was being held to account for the fact 1 million in the UK have to do this. Last week the wailers here said the poor were all watching 50" TV's and drugged up to the eyeballs and too lazy to work so took advantage of food handouts, I doubt these 'wailers' have any understanding at all about what goes on, or why things happen. WORKING poor are taking food parcels too, try reading some facts.[/p][/quote]the unemployed do have 50" plasma and full sky the two i know who claim DLA do[/p][/quote]Are you aware of the tension in that statement? "The unemployed" is a blanket reference, and infers all, yet you then state it is the experiences of but two individuals on which you base this assertion. And so what, anyway? Who the hell are you, or anyone for that matter, to tell anyone how they are to manage their own income?![/p][/quote]im forced through my taxes to pay for their dla[/p][/quote]As am I. What do you propose as an alternative, a never-ending cycle of referenda on all matters? Shall we compare salaries? If I earn more than you, do I get more of a say? Or would you prefer zero tax, and some heightened state of nature? The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Sun 27 Apr 14

endthelies says...

JanJenkins wrote:
When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat .
Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene
Jan, having been off sick from work for nearly a year and trying to fight to keep my job, and then being told I am to ill to work and therefore medically retired, I know exactly where you are coming from. To get any benefits was a nightmare and in fact, It took over 14 weeks to have benefit sorted when I finished work and then it was not the correct amount. There was tribunal hearings and assessments after that (which took another year in total) and God only knows the stress I was under which made my illness even worse. Unless you've been there, no one knows how hard it is.
[quote][p][bold]JanJenkins[/bold] wrote: When your benefit cheque doesn't turn up, and you living hand to mouth, how are you going to feed your family. You get £52 each as a couple per week.Out of that you pay you water rates, electricity and Gas and Tv Licence and telephone rental.( either BT or mobile. ) you must have one or other as there is no other way to contact anybody at the benefit office. You must have internet connection for job search. so that leaves very little for food.So if your payment doesn't turn up and you tell the benefit Office what happens next is. You are told you must to wait three working days for them to sort your payment out, which stretches to five if there's a weekend , and seven days this Easter weekend, So I presume that for those £-& days those receiving benefits that payment have been cocked up by the office don't eat . Your family, apparently are Not supposed to help/sub you , as that makes additional funds available to you, and those are taken into account when your benefit is assessed. A GP ,Social worker or community officer are the only ones that can give you a chit for the food bank. How Low Can You Go to deny somebody the chance of food, especially when its not of your own making??????? I have understand how somebody can survive on £52 a week its obsene[/p][/quote]Jan, having been off sick from work for nearly a year and trying to fight to keep my job, and then being told I am to ill to work and therefore medically retired, I know exactly where you are coming from. To get any benefits was a nightmare and in fact, It took over 14 weeks to have benefit sorted when I finished work and then it was not the correct amount. There was tribunal hearings and assessments after that (which took another year in total) and God only knows the stress I was under which made my illness even worse. Unless you've been there, no one knows how hard it is. endthelies
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree