Food Banks

[Gnasher]

As you can see, I was specifically referring to the example of a person who gambles away what limited funds they have. You could extrapolate that to other poor choices: alcoholism, drug addiction etc, but being "young, old or sick" in and of itself was obviously not on my radar.

Of course you were talking about gambling, you talk about gambling because it suits your agenda.

 

The threads about food banks, food banks which are sprouting up all over the country due to govt welfare cuts.

 

The vast majority you use food banks have not got the money to gamble.

[Strontium]

I do. 

 

This is more an argument on tit for tat so to speak that went on when it was axed. 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10446149

Okay, so this is about widening a pilot scheme, rather than implementing it permanently nationwide, but thank you for digging it out.

 

You are overlooking a few things. Firstly, we were in a more precarious financial position in 2010, and this proposal was unfunded (as, indeed, were many Labour spending promises it made when it knew it was going to lose the election). Secondly, in the interim, we have had a report which recommended extending free school meals provision, so there was a good deal more evidence for implementing the policy in 2013 than there was in 2010. And I'm sure we all want governments that implement evidence-backed policy.

[Strontium]

Of course you were talking about gambling, you talk about gambling because it suits your agenda.

 

The threads about food banks, food banks which are sprouting up all over the country due to govt welfare cuts.

 

The vast majority you use food banks have not got the money to gamble.

Good grief, there is something of the whopper about you.

 

I was talking about gambling because The Big Green Bastard mentioned it, and I was responding to him. If you're not convinced, scroll up; it's right there on the screen.

 

And you still haven't provided the necessary evidence to support your claim that food banks are springing up because of government welfare cuts.

 

As I mentioned previously, what evidence we have got shows that the biggest factor in why people use food banks is that their (legitimate) claims take an aeon to be processed by the DWP.

[General Dryness]

I accidentally negged this, should have been a rep, someone help a girl out? 

 

Done. And one for you too.

[lifetime fan]

Good grief, there is something of the whopper about you.

 

I was talking about gambling because The Big Green Bastard mentioned it, and I was responding to him. If you're not convinced, scroll up; it's right there on the screen.

 

And you still haven't provided the necessary evidence to support your claim that food banks are springing up because of government welfare cuts.

 

As I mentioned previously, what evidence we have got shows that the biggest factor in why people use food banks is that their (legitimate) claims take an aeon to be processed by the DWP.

And those claims are taking longer under the coalition.

[Carvalho Diablo]

Good grief, there is something of the whopper about you.

 

I was talking about gambling because The Big Green Bastard mentioned it, and I was responding to him. If you're not convinced, scroll up; it's right there on the screen.

 

And you still haven't provided the necessary evidence to support your claim that food banks are springing up because of government welfare cuts.

 

As I mentioned previously, what evidence we have got shows that the biggest factor in why people use food banks is that their (legitimate) claims take an aeon to be processed by the DWP.

 

Whilst I disagree with this part, it is fair to say that the pressures exerted on DWP staff to clobber people with sanctions and disallowances has played a massive part in the use of food banks.

 

The PCS guy in tonight's telly program spoke the truth when he said Jobcentre's do not have targets, but there are "benchmarks" and "expectations"  rammed down staff's throats regularly.

 

I helped a colleague and member last year, by fighting management who intended to place my friend on a warning simply because her DMA (Decision making and appeals) referral rates were fairly significantly below those of her peers. My friend won her case when we pointed out that there were (supposed to be) no targets, benchmarks or expectations against which to measure her performance in that area of work. Management in out place were livid, but hey, they should at the very least, have the balls to come out, fess up and tell the truth.

[Section_31]

Imagine if the Inland Revenue took tax evasion as seriously as the DWP's gestapo do following old bastards on disabled scooters to the pub.

[Stu Monty]

Imagine if the Inland Revenue took tax evasion as seriously as the DWP's gestapo do following old bastards on disabled scooters to the pub.

 

Or imagine if they were so keen to incentivise efficient payment instead of non-payment to deserving recipients.

 

Apparently anywhere up to £100bn in lost tax isn't incentive enough for massive investment in making HMRC work. Almost as if there's no real will to do it. Strange.

 

Wonder what Vodafones expenses for meals with HMRC bods ran to?

[Strontium]

Imagine if the Inland Revenue took tax evasion as seriously as the DWP's gestapo do following old bastards on disabled scooters to the pub.

UK tax receipts are at their highest ever level.

 

Obviously someone somewhere is taking something seriously.

[Gnasher]

Good grief, there is something of the whopper about you.I was talking about gambling because The Big Green Bastard mentioned it, and I was responding to him. If you're not convinced, scroll up; it's right there on the screen.And you still haven't provided the necessary evidence to support your claim that food banks are springing up because of government welfare cuts.As I mentioned previously, what evidence we have got shows that the biggest factor in why people use food banks is that their (legitimate) claims take an aeon to be processed by the DWP.

Good god man, the only whopper on this thread is you!

 

The evidence is all around you, from the govts own think tank, church leaders, official figures show they've increased drastically since the welfare cuts were implemented (46,000 to approx 500,000 using foodbanks) there is even lady on this thread who works in one telling you what the situation is. You choose not to hear.

 

Your denials are starting to sound so ridiculous I'm beginning to wonder if you're a close relative to this fella? You share the same sense of delusion,

 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yfAeMtcURg0

[Strontium]

 

Good god man, the only whopper on this thread is you!

 

The evidence is all around you, from the govts own think tank, church leaders, official figures show they've increased drastically since the welfare cuts were implemented (46,000 to approx 500,000 using foodbanks) there is even lady on this thread who works in one telling you what the situation is. You choose not to hear.

 

Your denials are starting to sound so ridiculous I'm beginning to wonder if you're a close relative to this fella? You share the same sense of delusion,

 

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yfAeMtcURg0

 

Once again: correlation is not proof of causation.

 

There has been a lot more rain since welfare cuts were implemented; this does not mean welfare cuts are making it rain more.

 

I don't know why this has to be explained to you time and time again.

 

And anecdotal evidence only counts for so much.

[Furmedge]

Melons, absolutely spot on.

[VladimirIlyich]

I think my main issue with it is when it's actively marketed as a fun and social pass time to people who are probably sat at home bored. You get it all day, the you get it before Emmerdale and other shows.

 

Bookies were like pubs, they didn't come and find you you found them when you were old enough. Now people are being actively targeted with free bets, free money, easier than ever access. I think there are right and wrong ways of doing these things and it's getting well out of hand.

Dont disagree with you at all.

Saturation coverage through the gogglebox will always reach the masses this way.

Pay enough money to Politicians and they will do any dance you like. Especially those who are already filthy rich,never fails.

[Gnasher]

Once again: correlation is not proof of causation.There has been a lot more rain since welfare cuts were implemented; this does not mean welfare cuts are making it rain more.I don't know why this has to be explained to you time and time again.And anecdotal evidence only counts for so much.

 

SD, your denials are sounding more and more absurd by the day,

 

 

"Poor driven to foodbanks by coalition benefit curbs"

 

This from a leading tory think tank,

http://news.sky.com/story/1220096/poor-driven-to-food-banks-by-benefits-curbs

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/mar/03/70000-job-seekers-benefits-withdrawn-unfairly-thinktank

 

SD, You continue to bury your head in the sand. You can play pretty politics all you like and you can act the bitch to Ian Duncan Smith till the cows come home but food bank use has increased dramatically these past few years and the policies this govt have implemented are the major cause.

[VladimirIlyich]

Like being young, old or sick, you mean?

Or poor.

[Champ]

Like being young, old or sick, you mean?

  

Or poor.

Stronts comment suggested that find the answer to why people make bad life choices and we crack the welfare bill. While bad life choices may account for some people being poor there is very little we can do about being young or becoming old (the sickness one, I grant you is more complex) and indeed it is the cost of providing for people in retirement that accounts for the bulk of this country's welfare bill

[melons]

Okay, so this is about widening a pilot scheme, rather than implementing it permanently nationwide, but thank you for digging it out.

 

You are overlooking a few things. Firstly, we were in a more precarious financial position in 2010, and this proposal was unfunded (as, indeed, were many Labour spending promises it made when it knew it was going to lose the election). Secondly, in the interim, we have had a report which recommended extending free school meals provision, so there was a good deal more evidence for implementing the policy in 2013 than there was in 2010. And I'm sure we all want governments that implement evidence-backed policy.

 

It's ok sweetie, a simple, "you're right melons, Labour did initiate it. I never knew that" would have done. 

[Jairzinho]

[Stu Monty]

UK tax receipts are at their highest ever level.

 

Obviously someone somewhere is taking something seriously.

 

HAHA!

 

On the same thread he's lecturing people about providing proof of causation! There's literally one post seperating the two comments!

 

Amazing work. This truly is your masterpiece Dog.

[Stu Monty]

To be fair, given that the reciepts were £12.3bn in 1965 as opposed to being around £550bn now you can see that SD does have a point. The goverment of the day clearly takes tax collection over 400 times more seriously than we used to. Which is to be applauded.

 

Soooooo. Dishonest or just a fucking simpleton, what are we going for?

[Hand Shandy]

How about dishonest simpleton?

[Stu Monty]

I'm willing to retract both possibilities if he's willing to flesh out exactly why he thinks that tax receipts being the highest ever is down to specific actions by this government. It's a claim that could be made in virtually any year on record so I'm keen to know why he feels it is such a significant indicator of the government's will in this area.

[Strontium]

 

To be fair, given that the reciepts were £12.3bn in 1965 as opposed to being around £550bn now you can see that SD does have a point. The goverment of the day clearly takes tax collection over 400 times more seriously than we used to. Which is to be applauded.

 

Soooooo. Dishonest or just a fucking simpleton, what are we going for?

 

Oh, the two aren't mutually exclusive - you are dishonest and a simpleton.

[Strontium]

It's ok sweetie, a simple, "you're right melons, Labour did initiate it. I never knew that" would have done.

 

But they didn't "initiate" anything.

[Strontium]

 

I'm willing to retract both possibilities if he's willing to flesh out exactly why he thinks that tax receipts being the highest ever is down to specific actions by this government. It's a claim that could be made in virtually any year on record so I'm keen to know why he feels it is such a significant indicator of the government's will in this area.

 

Really, how many times do I need to post details of the agreements the Treasury has signed with tax havens around the world? Twice isn't enough, clearly.