Food banks donating to the picket line

[Burgey]

Is that directed at me?

No, at Wirral's own Ayn Rand.

 

[GIMH]

How do you know the people don't need the food ffs, whatever their cause?

There's no problem with it at all, because part of giving food to a charity organisation is that you pass on the task of distributing that food to the organisation as it sees fit. That's part of the deal of you giving the food to that organisation instead of delivering it directly to people yourself.

You're sounding like some sanctimonious God-botherer here. "I give to the poor, but only the poor I deem worthy." Genuine ****ishness on display.

Nah, you’re being dishonest here.

Like I don’t give a **** if someone who visits a food bank is poor because they’ve been unemployed for months or if they have a gambling addiction that’s led to empty stomachs and cupboards. It is what it is and it’s a system there to help those who need it.

Using those contributions to fuel a strike is aiding political action. Those people are on the picket line by choice. If people want to go feed them, go for it, but save the food banks for the people who actually need them.

 

[Burgey]

I mean using funding against a donor's explicit wishes will put your DGR status in jeopardy over here.

I know when I take old clothes to an Op Shop that I specify to the charity in question "For donation to trade unionists only. No Tories." FMD this is rank idiocy of the highest order.

 

[GIMH]

No, at Wirral's own Ayn Rand.

Not particularly a big fan of Rand.

 

[GIMH]

I know when I take old clothes to an Op Shop that I specify to the charity in question "For donation to trade unionists only. No Tories." FMD this is rank idiocy of the highest order.

Do you know how food banks work here in the motherland?

 

[Burgey]

Nah, you’re being dishonest here.

Like I don’t give a **** if someone who visits a food bank is poor because they’ve been unemployed for months or if they have a gambling addiction that’s led to empty stomachs and cupboards. It is what it is and it’s a system there to help those who need it.

Using those contributions to fuel a strike is aiding political action. Those people are on the picket line by choice. If people want to go feed them, go for it, but save the food banks for the people who actually need them.

I'm not being dishonest at all. If they need feeding, you feed them. Whether they need it because they're in a picket line, or because they've put their pay up their nostrils. Either way, it's the need that gets addressed. Implicit in your position is a value judgment about one person's cause of hunger over another. it's ****ed. The charity is there to address the need, not to make a judgment over whether the person who needs it is there because it's their own fault. The argument applies just as much to someone with a gambling addiction - don't feed them because if you do you're propping up a pernicious industry which feeds off vulnerabilities of those addicted to its product.

 

[GIMH]

They provide three days food to people in a crisis, generally, so it’s not like a gambling addict would be able to live on it permanently so they had extra disposable to gamble. Doesn’t work like that.

If any of these blokes on the picket are skint then fine, send someone there to give them fair game contributions and tell the rest of the ****s to get their wallets out and do a butty run. That’s how you feed them, same as everyone else who’s not in crisis. Leave the emergency supplies for those in emergencies, not those who think it’s still the 70s.

 

[Burgey]

But how do you know they aren't struggling to feed themselves and their families?

 

[Burgey]

Look, I have to go and hear a case. If the punter has lost her leg but doesn't share my political beliefs, I'll be sure to hose her out because she's not worthy. More of this anon.

 

[GIMH]

Look, I have to go and hear a case. If the punter has lost her leg but doesn't share my political beliefs, I'll be sure to hose her out because she's not worthy. More of this anon.

If I didn’t think people should receive charity unless they shared my political beliefs then I wouldn’t believe in charity much at all. That’s not what I am saying and you know this.

 

[Burgey]

Lol re-read your OP ffs

 

[GIMH]

Must have missed the part where I said statists shouldn’t receive charity

 

[Burgey]

Your whole opening post was based on not giving food to people because of their political stance ffs.

 

[Bahnz]

I certainly think it is and the food bank in question would not be getting another cent from me. Competing food banks would become more attractive in comparison. In the end my funding would go to a charity more in line with my view of how welfare should be distributed. Others may differ.

The free market is a beautiful thing.

Fair point, but I imagine most food banks aren't going to bother getting too specific about who they donate to. It'll generally just be bins set up with a sign saying "donate to the homeless and needy", not "donate to the working class riffraff looking to leech an extra undeserved quid an hour off their industrious capitalist superiors".

 

[Daemon]

Burgey, if you make a donation for earthquake relief in NZ, will you be ok if it's redirected to sponsor a lunch spread for an anti-abortion rally?

 

[Athlai]

Burgey, if you make a donation for earthquake relief in NZ, will you be ok if it's redirected to sponsor a lunch spread for an anti-abortion rally?

You should've asked if he was okay with the earthquake relief find helping rebuild a neo-nazi building

 

[Burgey]

Burgey, if you make a donation for earthquake relief in NZ, will you be ok if it's redirected to sponsor a lunch spread for an anti-abortion rally?

FMD.

If I make a donation for earthquake relief, I'd expect it to be used for earthquake relief. If I make a donation of food, I expect it to be used for people who need food. If you'd asked whether I'd be comfortable with it going to an anti-abortion group who had been hit by the earthquake, then you'd have a better point, and my answer would be yes.

As for Athlai's point, how am I and other right-thinking people meant to be able to punch Nazis if they aren't sufficiently fed so they can stand up and cop the flogging they richly deserve?

 

[Athlai]

FMD.

If I make a donation for earthquake relief, I'd expect it to be used for earthquake relief. If I make a donation of food, I expect it to be used for people who need food. If you'd asked whether I'd be comfortable with it going to an anti-abortion group who had been hit by the earthquake, then you'd have a better point, and my answer would be yes.

As for Athlai's point, how am I and other right-thinking people meant to be able to punch Nazis if they aren't sufficiently fed so they can stand up and cop the flogging they richly deserve?

 

[Daemon]

Burgey, if you make a donation to a foodbank, will you be ok if it's redirected to sponsor a lunch spread for an anti-abortion rally?

 

[Burgey]

Not for a lunch spread, no. However, if the anti-abortionists were in need of food, then why shouldn't they get it?

I mean, I realize the right to strike, along with a lot of other things, is pretty heavily prescribed in Singapore, but do you not see the point that if people are in need of food then they should get it? How do you or anyone else for that matter know whether the people on the picket line are in genuine need of food or not?

As for abortion, quite frankly this thread is once again demonstrating to me that in the case of a number of people, it should be retrospective.