Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Food Banks
Apparently even more people are using them now. http:// www.dai lymail. co.uk/n ews/art icle-26 05661/A lmost-O NE-mill ion-Bri tons-se ek-food -bank-h elp-fol lowing- 162-per cent-ju mp-numb er-peop le-seek ing-eme rgency- food-he lp.html
When something is free, demand will always outstrip supply. Are we saying that if these food banks disappeared, these people would starve to death?
When something is free, demand will always outstrip supply. Are we saying that if these food banks disappeared, these people would starve to death?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.there you go^. if its non nutritional rubbish as you seem to be suggesting now. What's the point of dishing it out.
Millions of people seem to manage, very nicely some of them, on their benefits. Why are these people different?
I'm sure there are people, unfairly, sanctioned but 400,000 people had repeat sanctions last year. It would be interesting to know why. If they are people that just cant help themselves (possibly through drink/drugs) shouldn't there come a point when society gives up on them. be cruel to be
Millions of people seem to manage, very nicely some of them, on their benefits. Why are these people different?
I'm sure there are people, unfairly, sanctioned but 400,000 people had repeat sanctions last year. It would be interesting to know why. If they are people that just cant help themselves (possibly through drink/drugs) shouldn't there come a point when society gives up on them. be cruel to be
-- answer removed --
oops, pressed wrong button.
cruel to be kind, as it were. If there are children involved wouldn't it be kinder all round to remove them from such an environment.
Also, when sanctioned, there are 2 or 3 different funds you can apply to for (lower) subsistence benefits which are worked out to keep you fed etc.
cruel to be kind, as it were. If there are children involved wouldn't it be kinder all round to remove them from such an environment.
Also, when sanctioned, there are 2 or 3 different funds you can apply to for (lower) subsistence benefits which are worked out to keep you fed etc.
To answer the op's question, no, I don't think they would starve to death, but life would be very hard. However, maybe some of them should consider whether they can afford to have a(nother) child, if they are on limited income. I know that jobs may be lost at any time, but the man who was interviewed on ITV news earlier, said that he had been unable to get work for the last 5 years. He was then seen walking away pushing a young child in a buggy. Perhaps they should have delayed adding to the family until they could afford to do so?
Amazing ignorance in some the replies to this post. I help out with my local Food Bank and we are over whelmed sometimes. Can iI suggest that all those that don't understand how the Trussell Trust are now dispensing nearly a million three-days packs a year of food consider volunteering with local Food Bank, and see for themselves what the situation is. Those people have nothing to lose but their ignorance.
Back in in early 70's when Mic and I got together we had nothing and I mean nothing. There was no housing benefit, tax credits and any other benefit that now seems to be the right of the work shy. We worked our way out of having nothing by working 18 hour days. Now that we have saved and doing okay we have to pay full whack for Mics care. We have never had anything for free. Pay for care, pay for pads, even pay for creams for Mics pressure sores which were courtesy of the hospital. I DO feel for the genuine, but the work shy who pay in nothing and then get every thing for free really get my back up.