No surprise you immediately resort to personal attacks without tackling the main point I’ve made, disappointing but not a surprise.
As I quite clearly said, every system and every country has people living below the poverty line, those that don’t are a tiny minority across the world and certainly aren’t similar to us, as a society or culture, they certainly aren’t a major western economy either.
You ignored this point completely and instead said I leave myself open to ridicule, without making any sort of intelligent point yourself.
“You seem unable to grasp food banks in the UK are a symptom of a deeper malaise”
Do you know what “malaise” means?
Even trying to make the point you are, it’s a poor choice of word, I think you’re trying to sound clever.
On the contrary, I do find it a problem but I just disagree with the solution you think is obvious, which has been tried before and hasn’t worked.
This is why foodbanks illuminate a deep underlying malaise in our society.
Human beings have four basic needs: shelter, clothing, water and food. Without these things, we die.
During the Second World War, millions of British people joined in the war effort, at the time of the nation’s greatest existential crisis. Hundreds of thousands died in defence of the nation, including the defeat of the enemies who had posed that threat. There was an overwhelming feeling following the war that things could not go back to being the way they were.
The solution was the creation of the welfare state. The four pillars of the welfare state were that everybody would have access to healthcare that was free at the point of use, every child would have access to free education whilst still of school age, everyone would have to legal advice, representation and assistance, and everyone would have access to social security from the cradle to the grave. That included making sure those four basic human needs were met. This is what people like Captain Tom demanded on their return from the war: the people had not let the nation down in its time of greatest need. In future, the nation would not let the people down in their individual times of need.
As you know, food banks rely on voluntary contributions. That is, people giving to foodbanks food that they have bought themselves. It is then distributed by the foodbanks to people in need.
The number of foodbanks however has increased substantially since David Cameron became Prime Minister. There were fewer than 100 foodbanks before that time. Now there are over 2000.
Historically, foodbanks in this country were often used not by those who had been refused assistance by the state, but by those who would or could not engage with it, often for mental health reasons. That role has changed in the last 10 years. Now, foodbanks are relied on heavily by people who have been refused assistance by the state at the point they need it.
Access to foodbanks is controlled. You cannot just rock up and ask for a bagful of free food. Access is usually dependent on a letter of referral, a sort of voucher system, from a government agency or a quasi government agency - for instance the DHSE or the Citizens Advice Bureau.
And there is the problem. The issue of a voucher indicates an acceptance on the part of the state that the person it is issued to is in desperate need. But instead of meeting that basic human need itself, the state now passes on the task of ensuring its citizens can feed themselves to agencies who cannot perform that task without the individual acts of charity of a number of private citizens.
Do you see the problem? The malaise? The state has abdicated its basic duty to ensure its people are fed and pushed it on to the charitable sector. It is disgraceful that any civilised, developed nation should leave nothing but charity between its citizens and starvation. It is even more disgusting that this represents such an appalling and flagrant breach of the post-war compact.
This is nothing to do with socialism, or poverty. It is about the state we live in turning its back on its people when they are in positions of the most dire need. That is why the reasons why the individual reasons why the individual visitors to foodbanks are largely irrelevant. They need food, that basic human need that any civilised society should acknowledge is a basic duty of the state where it’s citizens are unable to feed themselves. And the state is now failing to meet that need.
Nor is this, at least in historical terms, a Tory/labour issue either. Even in the dark days of the 70s and 80s governments of both hues made financial provision for the neediest, at the point of need. That obligation on the part of the state has been abandoned in the last ten years. That is disgusting.
Maybe your world view is that there is nothing inherently wrong in the state abandoning its most basic duty to its people so that there is only charity between them and not being able to feed their families. If so, I find that disappointing , but that’s up to you.
As to the rest of your post, you’re a bright bloke but you have posted idiotic comments twice in reply to me in this thread. If you want to continue this or any other exchange - I remind you that you first replied to me, not the other way round - don’t do it a third time.
