Shoplifting food

[RosieH]

BrandNewGuy, where have you been?

Chris Mould, director of the Trussell Trust, said: "Every day we meet parents who are skipping meals to feed their children or even considering stealing to stop their children going to bed hungry. It is shocking that there is such a great need for food banks in 21st-century Britain, but the need is growing." http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jun/25/breadline-britain-growth-food-parcels

"There has been rapid expansion in food banks over the past two years in response to growing numbers of people unable to feed themselves or their families as a result of rising living costs, shrinking incomes and welfare benefit cuts.

The vast majority of food banks do not currently receive direct state funding, and are regarded by ministers as exemplars of the "big society" approach to social problems. They are volunteer-run and exist on public food donations sourced through churches, companies, schools and public "bin collections" organised outside supermarkets." http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/21/councils-invest-food-banks-welfare-cuts

Bin collections!

[*Bob*]

Oh I see - semantics.

Good point. So 'sometimes things get so bad for people that they have to steal food'. Not that things have recently got bad 'in general', but that generally there will always be people for whom things have got bad. Though it's possible I suppose that if things had got worse recently for some people who were already on the edge, then they might be said to have got 'so bad' recently.

Anyway. Anyone hungry? Let's do lunch.

[BrandNewGuy]

But isn't there a difference between using a food bank because budgets are squeezed and walking into the Co-op and taking loads of meat?

[woodrot]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> woodrot Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > > > Is it now ok to steal food, maybe things

> have

> > > got

> > > > so bad for people that they have to

> > >

> > > No and no it hasn't.

> >

> >

> > No and yes it has

>

> Show me why people have to steal food because it's

> "got so bad".

Nowe you mention it, of course. How wrong I have been. Luckily you are there to put me right.I was blind and now I can see etc.

brandnewguy - barndnewcommonsensegy more like - shooting from the hip, giving the weedling, simpering so called liberal apologists a wake up call.

[RosieH]

That wasn't your question. This guy clearly isn't stealing because he needs to feed himself.

However, your question was "Show me why people have to steal food because it's "got so bad"."

I've done that.

Food banks don't have enough food to meet demand. People are going hungry, in modern Britain. What would you propose?

[BrandNewGuy]

You haven't shown why people "have to steal food". You've shown me that it happens.

I don't have a "proposal", though any food solution would have to reflect two big factors:

1. Rising basic food prices across the globe, which were the main immediate cause of the "Arab Spring" unrest and riots elsewhere in the world. Those prices are going up again...

2. Phenomenal quantities of wasted food because of our complex system of food production and distribution, and the demands for convenience and choice.

[woodrot]

OK

on a sensible note, how do think this may impact some people :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19629997

[woodrot]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You haven't shown why people "have to steal food".

> You've shown me that it happens.

>

> I don't have a "proposal", though any food

> solution would have to reflect two big factors:

>

> 1. Rising basic food prices across the globe,

> which were the main immediate cause of the "Arab

> Spring" unrest and riots elsewhere in the world.

> Those prices are going up again...

> 2. Phenomenal quantities of wasted food because of

> our complex system of food production and

> distribution, and the demands for convenience and

> choice.

No one "has" to do anything if I was being pedantic, but its impossible to generalise on much when humans and their perception / actions are involved- this is why economics is classed as a science, but in reality its nothing of the sort- 2+2 can actually = 5 if you spend enough time on it.

at the most basic level, barring some kind of Malthusian wet dream, food price inflation / relative to incomes is here to stay. Whether we decide to blame the Chinese, the vampire squid speculators of Goldman Sachs or inequalities being exaggerated by globalism, its not going to get any better for those on the bottom.

Agriculture depends on oil to a massive degree, from the blates obvious fuel consumption side , but alos in the production of fertilisers and chems needed to keep production high. I dont wish to be pigeonholed as some kind of stalinistic monothought anti globalist - but until the link between oil and food can be reduced ( we literally eat oil in essense ) , then its going to be messy. Again, not wishing to be labelled as a peak oil theory devotee, we are running out of this stuff are a serious rate bludz

[BrandNewGuy]

Agreed 100%

[MrBen]

I'm just trying not to think too hard about the guy trying to shift yoghurts down the nearest pub.

[woodrot]

an 8 pack of greek style yogurts = one rock of crack at yesterdays market rates

[DaveR]

This was the response from Martin Narey (head of Barnardos 2005-2011 and ex-chair of the End Child Poverty coalition) to the Save the Children campaign that suggested that poor families routinely cannot afford to buy enough food:

"Child poverty in the UK is very real, but it?s not the simple poverty that Save the Children describes. Low income is certainly at the heart of it, but it?s also about poverty of aspiration, education and parenting. But I know why Save the Children is talking about missed meals: it captures public attention. Many times when I ran Barnardo?s ? and during the five years in which child poverty was our No 1 priority ? I declined to sign up to campaigns suggesting that British families do not get enough in benefits to feed or clothe their children. I did so for two reasons: because it?s not true, but also because such campaigns suggest that if we met the very basic requirements of a hot meal and warm clothing, people would think that poverty had been lifted.

This isn?t to say that there are not emergencies when families do need urgent help with food or clothing. But they are generally short-term and caused by an administrative glitch, a marital separation, because money has been lost and sometimes, frankly, because it has been squandered on drink or drugs. Such crises are not symptomatic of the welfare state?s failure to provide families with enough money for the basics of life"

I can't post a link to the whole article because of the Times subscription stuff.

People may well steal food because on a particular day they don't have enough money to buy it, but that's clearly not the same as saying that there are lots of people who, on an ongoing basis, cannot afford to feed themselves and their familes.