That tree used to be a smaller tree.
And that food bank used to be a regular bank.
– Homer Simpson.
With a cradle-to-grave benefits system here in the UK, I’m surprised that so many need to visit a food bank. So I started to do some research on why people require this extra help when we have a safety net already in place.
The answer was clear: it is the benefits system itself that pushes people further into poverty and keeps them there.
The UK tax system utilises the force of the government to transfer wealth from one group to another – fine you may think? The problem is, the system should work on equality principles but instead the wealthy elite, such as banks and the medical/drugs industry quickly gain control of the system. Tax is snatched away for corporate and foreign welfare with only scraps going to the poor. What they like to call a trickle down economy or the horse and sparrow – the horse is fed so much corn that the birds (us) can pick through the shit and feast on the undigested corn.
“The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.”
As the benefits system grows so does the government and so does the amount of money it requires to function. Imagine if benefits were no longer required by anyone, the government would have to shrink. They do not want this to happen so they do not want you to thrive without their aid. The system now serves the government and not those they claim to help. The victims are left hanging and have to look at food banks, all the while shouting how the benefits system needs to be extended, which is exactly what the government wants. As a country, we have spent trillions trying to eradicate poverty with very little success and the answer is not to chuck trillions more at the problem.
The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results. It seems common sense then that this corrupt economic policy needs to be rejected if poverty is to be a thing of the past, which is possible if people not only start embracing their freedom but demand more freedom. Then we need to use this freedom to keep our money out of the hands of crooked politicians who, with our current laws, can send their goons to rip you out of your bed and throw you into a cage if you refuse to pay into their latest scheme.
The government/media also use the benefits system to fuel the resentment between rich and poor and encourage class warfare and racial tensions. This leads to the government demanding more money from you so they can initiate more people into their firm and put policies in place that allows them to continue to grow, which is the ultimate goal of any corporation.
“The government/media also use the benefits system to fuel the resentment between rich and poor and encourage class warfare and racial tensions.”
During my research into food banks, I came across an article in The Guardian by Maya Bly that was a response to the Postman Pat lookalike, Jacob Rees-Mogg. He stated that food banks were ‘uplifting’ and this somewhat angered Maya Bly. Now I’m no fan of the Tories or this man stuck in the past just like his views and the policies of his party. But when I read the article, all sympathy for poor old Maya Bly disintegrated. People, such as Maya, who look to the government to such a degree are why the poor will continue to grow in numbers while the middle-class shrinks and those who truly benefit from the government control of our money – the privileged – will always prosper.
Maya is the type of person who thinks the government are there to clothe and feed us even if it comes at the cost of our freedom. This is clear from The Guardian piece and I would invite you to have a read. I also noted that Maya Bly is a pseudonym, presumably because she does not want any fees received from the article to affect her benefits claims. Either that or she is a manufactured person designed to fit The Guardian’s narrative.
“Does she know that some people, like myself, go to work for the majority of the day, miss out on their children growing up, work late, walk miles and still can’t afford the basics?”
Some of the highlights include:
“the charitable instincts of the well and worthy are being increasingly put-upon as the shrinking welfare state neglects its duty of care.” I don’t understand why the state has a duty of care beyond individuals who are unable, truly unable, to look after themselves. Maya, I don’t think falls into this category, as her article is well written and I get the impression that she has at least above average intelligence. In which case she should be able to feed herself without the assistance of the government.
“I do not do this lightly because, frankly, I feel humiliated having to ask for this type of charity.” Ashamed to ask for charity but expects the government to provide? I would like to ask her where she sees the difference? It’s crazy to me, where does she think the money comes from?
“Weighing up the need for food and toiletries against the physical cost of sorting it out.” So she is getting items for free, things she states she would not make it through the month without but has the cheek to complain about having to go collect it. How lazy is that? What, you want someone to fetch it for you? Again, just craziness. Does she know that some people, like myself, go to work for the majority of the day, miss out on their children growing up, work late, walk miles and still can’t afford the basics? But don’t worry, we’ll feel sorry for you and how your free shit is not hand-delivered on a silver platter.
And finally, something Maya and I can agree on: “my need to use a food bank is entirely linked to the reality of the chaotic and brutal benefits system.” The only difference is that her way to fix the system is to throw other people’s money at it and extend a fouling government. Whereas I say, the less money we give the government to waste, the better we will all be.