food banks

Unpalatable truth about food banks the Left finds so hard to swallow

Pimping the poor is a global issue. ?But more are exposing this. ?In the UK they have the Daily Mail. ?In the US they have Fox and in NZ we have Whaleoil.

Food banks have recorded a surge in numbers, but figures have been overstated by Labour politicians with a political motive to make the effects of the cuts seem as bad as possible, writes Steve Bird

The Left have been controversially supported in their view that the popular use of food banks is down to cuts by high-ranking churchmen, who say that although Britain is the world?s seventh largest economy, ?people are going hungry?.

A recent letter to the Left-wing Daily Mirror signed by 27 of the country?s 59 Anglican bishops argued that government ministers had ?an acute moral imperative? to take action.

Interestingly, the key charity behind the growth of emergency food banks is the?Trussell Trust, which organises more than 400 such banks. Run by Chris Mould, a Labour Party member, it has waged an increasingly political campaign to try to show that welfare reforms are leaving people starving.

The trust says that between April last year and December, around 500,000 people were given three days? worth of food at its banks. If true, that means more than 8 per cent of the population has been forced to use charity food hand-outs.

Ah, Labour and numbers. ?Another LMAO (Labour Means Accuracy Optional) moment. ? The interesting thing is that the real number can be quite sufficient to make a certain point, but no, Labour has to LMAO them. ? Read more »

Busting the poverty pimps

Our media loves to pimp the poor and tell us stories about poverty. The same happens in the UK and like here they get busted every time.

The latest poster child for the perils of poverty has just been busted for being a stupid cow.

This week, a charity called Church Action On Poverty launched a poster campaign that says ?Britain Isn?t Eating?, mocking the Tories? famous 1979 election campaign poster ?Britain Isn?t Working? that helped Margaret Thatcher to victory.

This time, the charity claims, the long queues are not for the dole office, but for food banks. ?Thousands are going hungry because of benefits changes,? it protests.

I thought of those posters when I read the story of Katie McGill, a 28-year-old unemployed single mum.

In an interview this week, Katie claimed her benefits payments soon won?t leave her enough to buy food and basic necessities for her two children.

Another victim of ?cruel Tory cuts?? Hardly.

This Christmas, Katie gave her two children Mya-Renee, three, and Calvin, eight, two new bikes, TVs, DVDs and numerous computer games ? all paid for after she took out eight payday loans that have left her ?3,000 in debt.

The result? The repayments mean she?ll have no money left over from her welfare cheques to feed her children. Another candidate for the food banks, then.

Now, I realise that not all families in need have been as foolish as Katie ? and that there are thousands who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own, and who, with the cost of living soaring, are in genuine need. But I also suspect that there are a lot of self-indulgent and irresponsible fools like Katie. ? Read more »

Poor Choices

The Prime Minsiter was castigated for saying that people who use food banks make poor choices. The Slowly Sinking Tabloid pinko hugging editor decided that this was a good excuse to hook into the government this week and so they produce as evidence,?Jack? (not his real name). (No link to actual story due to Bloggers Union action)

BACK AT the Downtown Community Ministry, “Jack” (not his real name) outlines his weekly expenses. From the $240 he receives in benefits, he pays $120 in rent, $50 for cigarettes and $20 on beer. Power is automatically deducted at $25 a week. “By the time I have a bit of fun, that’s dole day gone.”

Nearly a third of his ‘income’ is spent on piss and fags. If that isn’t poor choices then what is?

Next thing we will hear form the pinkos is that the government forces him to drink and smoke more than a third of his ‘income’.

I’d say that most people would look at ?Jack? (not his real name)?and suggest he get a grip. He is choosing to go without food so he can have beer and ciggies, that is demonstrably a poor choice. The Prime Minister is right.