"Cost of living crisis" nonsense

chris_m

Fella wrote: »

This is completely wrong. Governments can & do both destroy economies & create powerful ones.

For an excellent example of the former, just look at the basket-case of Africa - which used to be the bread-basket of Africa until the current regime really got going in Harare.

kwmlondon

Fella wrote: »

This is completely wrong. Governments can & do both destroy economies & create powerful ones. If you don't think Governments affect economies who DO you think affects them?

The markets.

boatman

mayonnaise wrote: »

There is no cost of living crisis.
car insurance premiums plummeting,

Yes they have dropped from the past couple of years but only because they were stupidly high, mainly due to companies hiking the claims from each other to increase profits and making us pay for it.

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21588079-bizarre-microeconomics-british-car-insurance-wacky-race

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

So food banks...what changed?

Food banks were unheard of in 2007 yet were everywhere by 2010. Benefits weren't cut, wages went down a little in real terms but not by that much.

What did change was that you couldn't borrow money so easily. People were required to pay down short term debt for the first time in a decade. I suspect that food banks are simply chickens coming home to roost.

Alas not all chickens

There is still too much state spend

free range overspends

Thrugelmir

Fella wrote: »

Can't believe the Tories are giving this nonsense the oxygen of publicity.

Seems to be the Labour partys current line of debate. Along with attacking business in general.

Given the same shadow cabinet in the main were in bed with the bankers. A fine line to walk in my view.

BillJones

lemonjelly wrote: »

Actually, there is far more nonsense in your statement than mine.

No-one "relies" on big business. Big business rely on people.

People existed before big business. They'll exist after it too.

So you do not get your elecricity from a big company, don't buy your food or clothes from a big company, and don't live in a house that was constructed by a big company?

I don't believe you.

lvader

Labour is starting to sound like a Monti Python sketch about the Romans.

Loughton_Monkey

Generali wrote: »

So food banks...what changed?

Food banks were unheard of in 2007 yet were everywhere by 2010. Benefits weren't cut, wages went down a little in real terms but not by that much.

What did change was that you couldn't borrow money so easily. People were required to pay down short term debt for the first time in a decade. I suspect that food banks are simply chickens coming home to roost.

They tend to concentrate on tinned and packaged food rather than fresh or frozen chickens. These people can't afford to pay for the gas to cook a chicken anyway.

I strongly suspect that Channel 4 (or others) are planning a sequal to "Benefits Street" which will concentrate on food banks and their clientelle. Most of them probably have "regulars" by now. I think they try to ration what you can have, but I can't believe they can keep it up forever......

Sounds heartless, I know, but I can only believe it will all have nasty consequences. Firstly, we had the madcap Brownian philosophy of throwing money, tax credits, and benefits around like crazy. Not just for the unemployed but for the lower paid as well. It taught people that you don't really have to work hard for a living, because you can 'live' on benefits and have plenty over for that 51" Plasma TV, the trainers, and at least 3 nights a week down the pub and the bingo hall.

Now this beanfeast is being cut back, the balloon principle simply squeezes the same dross into some other direction. Which means that even if benefits are now frozen, or even cut back a bit, then provided the week's groceries come from the food bank, then there's still plenty for the beer, fags, and gambling...... but not, of course, the exponential cost of rolling over and churning your payday loan from Wonga and others....

I am not talking about the majority of those on benefits, but the 'professionals' who can sniff out a food bank from 12 miles away.

Speaking for myself, if only someone could analyse and disect, say, 50 food bank 'regulars', and then come up with an accurate set of accounts for how much money pours into their households, and how it all flows out, then I would be one of the first to contribute to my local food bank [if we have any here]. This would be if I could detect any degree of pure 'misfortune' or genuine hardship that was not self inflicted.

Yorkie1

Generali wrote: »

And everyone in the UK can still feed, clothe and house themselves with state help.

Nobody is starving.

Generali wrote: »

So food banks...what changed?

Food banks were unheard of in 2007 yet were everywhere by 2010. Benefits weren't cut, wages went down a little in real terms but not by that much.

What did change was that you couldn't borrow money so easily. People were required to pay down short term debt for the first time in a decade. I suspect that food banks are simply chickens coming home to roost.

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

They tend to concentrate on tinned and packaged food rather than fresh or frozen chickens. These people can't afford to pay for the gas to cook a chicken anyway.

I strongly suspect that Channel 4 (or others) are planning a sequal to "Benefits Street" which will concentrate on food banks and their clientelle. Most of them probably have "regulars" by now. I think they try to ration what you can have, but I can't believe they can keep it up forever......

Sounds heartless, I know, but I can only believe it will all have nasty consequences. Firstly, we had the madcap Brownian philosophy of throwing money, tax credits, and benefits around like crazy. Not just for the unemployed but for the lower paid as well. It taught people that you don't really have to work hard for a living, because you can 'live' on benefits and have plenty over for that 51" Plasma TV, the trainers, and at least 3 nights a week down the pub and the bingo hall.

Now this beanfeast is being cut back, the balloon principle simply squeezes the same dross into some other direction. Which means that even if benefits are now frozen, or even cut back a bit, then provided the week's groceries come from the food bank, then there's still plenty for the beer, fags, and gambling...... but not, of course, the exponential cost of rolling over and churning your payday loan from Wonga and others....

I am not talking about the majority of those on benefits, but the 'professionals' who can sniff out a food bank from 12 miles away.

Speaking for myself, if only someone could analyse and disect, say, 50 food bank 'regulars', and then come up with an accurate set of accounts for how much money pours into their households, and how it all flows out, then I would be one of the first to contribute to my local food bank [if we have any here]. This would be if I could detect any degree of pure 'misfortune' or genuine hardship that was not self inflicted.

Wrt to food banks, people can't self-refer. They have to be referred to them by particular agencies.

I am not sure, but I think I've read that they don't have many 'regulars'. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has some excellent, objective analysis of the situation.

Many people are in dire straits and need them because the DWP takes so long to sort out benefit applications when people first need to claim and are thus completely without any income whatsoever.

But then, (and this isn't particularly directed at anyone I've quoted here or more widely, just a general comment on attitudes in society), that doesn't fit the popular image of the scrounging welfare dossers.

vivatifosi

Yorkie1 wrote: »

Wrt to food banks, people can't self-refer. They have to be referred to them by particular agencies.

Many people are in dire straits and need them because the DWP takes so long to sort out benefit applications when people first need to claim and are thus completely without any income whatsoever.

Apologies for blunt edit of your post, tablet prevents anything more finessed.

Agree with first quoted para, that's my understanding too.

With regard to second, a lot of those referred end up there because of screw ups in the system, or unavailability of crisis loans. That's my understanding anyway. SIL collects for our local food bank so have a good idea of its workings if not others.