Food banks donating to the picket line

[Daemon]

I'm just trying to figure things out, stop yelling.

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

This is what GIMH said earlier, which means both of you are against aid discrimination based on political belief (as is everyone who's not a dickhead).

If it was a known fact that the people at the strike were all well-fed then I assume you have no problem with cutting off the food bank supply. So the only issue is with knowing whether the people in the picket line are in need of food or not.

How would a food bank approach this though? I suppose it's true that plenty of people at a strike will be in crisis, in which case you're right. But then in every large enough group of random people there's also going to be people in need of food. How do they pick and choose the places they need to set up? idk

 

[Ausage]

I mean the assumption was (at least from me) that these weren't starving people. Strikes don't tend to be taken past the point of an individual starving themselves and their families. If that assumption was incorrect then (along with the individuals concerned being irresponsible morons) it's a different story.

 

[Burgey]

I'm just trying to figure things out, stop yelling.



This is what GIMH said earlier, which means both of you are against aid discrimination based on political belief (as is everyone who's not a dickhead).

If it was a known fact that the people at the strike were all well-fed then I assume you have no problem with cutting off the food bank supply. So the only issue is with knowing whether the people in the picket line are in need of food or not.

How would a food bank approach this though? I suppose it's true that plenty of people at a strike will be in crisis, in which case you're right. But then in every large enough group of random people there's also going to be people in need of food. How do they pick and choose the places they need to set up? idk

Well why don't you ask old custard nuts who posted the thread ffs? Have you even read the OP?

 

[Burgey]

I mean the assumption was (at least from me) that these weren't starving people. Strikes don't tend to be taken past the point of an individual starving themselves and their families. If that assumption was incorrect then (along with the individuals concerned being irresponsible morons) it's a different story.

That's a bold assumption.

Strikes have and are taken to the point where the people on picket lines and their families are struggling to pay for food. It does happen. Whether it has in this case I dunno. But the Inner Mongolian Communist Party FC supporter launched the thread on the basis that people on a picket line don't deserve the charity of a food bank.

I mean, I think anyone who's a libertarian should basically be sent to set up their version of Utopia on North Sentinel Island because they're a cancer on society, but they should be sent there with a few tins of food at least.

 

[Athlai]

I mean the assumption was (at least from me) that these weren't starving people. Strikes don't tend to be taken past the point of an individual starving themselves and their families. If that assumption was incorrect then (along with the individuals concerned being irresponsible morons) it's a different story.

If it affects a payday then it absolutely could right?

 

[Burgey]

They ain’t chained to the picket line

I mean, get this for an insight ffs. The whole point of a picket line is you stay there and don't move.

 

[Bahnz]

If it affects a payday then it absolutely could right?

This was a strike that literally began yesterday though. Would seem a bit odd that people would be in a state of crisis already. Furthermore, you'd expect that on the first day basic needs like food is the kind of thing their union should be helping them out with, rather than an independent food bank.

 

[Ausage]

If it affects a payday then it absolutely could right?

Sure. Depends on the specifics I suppose.

I mean its hard to say much more without getting into whether you think taking industrial action that will see you/your family go hungry is a good idea. My thoughts on the matter will surprise nobody. I don't think it's the same kind of decision as someone with gambling/drug problems but that said, drawing largely arbitrary lines on which hungry person gets food isn't without its own problems.

Again though, it's up to the charity to make the case as to why the picketing workers need their support. As long as no one was forced into any of their actions, I don't care anywhere near as much as it may appear.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Burgey gets all irate about British politics, doesn't he?

 

[Burgey]

It’s hardly about British politics.

 

[S.Kennedy]

It’s hardly about British politics.

It's just I have seen you rant and rave about Tories also.

 

[Burgey]

That’s because Tories are ****s. It doesn’t matter that Pommy ones have the added disadvantage of being English. No one likes a Tory, wherever they are in the world, or wherever they’re from.

 

[S.Kennedy]

That’s because Tories are ****s. It doesn’t matter that Pommy ones have the added disadvantage of being English. No one likes a Tory, wherever they are in the world, or wherever they’re from.

Oh, you also have Tories in Australia?

 

[Burgey]

Tory just means conservative. Sadly we have conservatives here too. Far too many of them, sadly. We need a Tory mixametosis to knock back the population. Though they’re doing their best to kill themselves off atm over here.

 

[harsh.ag]

Those on strike shouldn't be given food at all. Only when a couple of them die of starvation will the management be forced to pay any attention.

 

[cpr]

I'm vaguely with GIMH on this one, and its down to how a food bank should be operating IMO.

The idea of the food bank is that its a resource to be used by those in need. It's not a nice thing to have to do, and I'm sure many people feel all kinds of emotions before they go. Hopefully the food bank is doing what it can to strip any preconceptions of class, politics, race etc from claiming, just providing to the most needy.

The problem for me stems from the food bank going out to find people to donate to - in this case the strikers - and that opens up a whole avenue of impartiality questions. How are the food bank deciding who to go to? How are they assessing their actual need for food? Is publicity a factor (in that its good publicity for the food bank, and in that its the publicity of the strike that brings it to the food banks attention)? Are there others who require the food bank to come to them, but find they aren't?

The fact that its the food bank going to the strikers, not the other way round, shows an active attempt at caring for individuals on the bank's behalf, and that opens them up to accusations of not showing the same levels of caring for others - do they go out to homeless people in the same way, or people who are housebound? It could be argued that those categories might need the active support of the bank more, but don't get it, and that can lead to resentment and accusations of politically weighted bias.

The politics of the strike muddies things for the food bank, it heavily weights a decent action with an ideological spin, and those who don't subscribe to that ideology might be perturbed from using the food bank as its 'not for them' (I imagine taking yourself to a food bank requires a huge effort to conquer those disdainful voices in your head, so giving one of those voices credence could keep people away). Given how utterly vital food bank resources are to those desperately in need, the idea that people could be driven away by the food banks actions is too great a risk to take IMO.

I've plenty of sympathy for those striking - you don't be a civil servant without learning the art of downing tools on the reg - and it will be that many will genuinely need the banks resources, even losing 2 days wage can cripple a persons finances for the month. However I'd be surprised if they need that help now - they should still have the last pay packet to feed on. Come next pay day post strike when they've been heavily docked, thats when the food bank will be needed.

By all means those on the picket who need the help now must go and get it (and do it with no shame), and supporters of the strike are right to work with the food bank to provide help in the background for those who need it. However I don't think the food bank should be actively going out of its normal operations to offer itself to what is a political cause (all strikes are in their own way, even if those striking don't intend it) unless there is no other way to keep those on the picket fed.

 

[Athlai]

It’s a good man that posts a six paragraph opinion on a subject no one is going to even remember next week

 

[GIMH]

Been a good discussion really if you ignore Captain Statist's posts

 

[cpr]

It’s a good man that posts a six paragraph opinion on a subject no one is going to even remember next week

What's even better is when someone tries to argue with me, I won't care enough to bother responding.

But you've gotta do something whilst waiting for the car to defrost. Clearly had more time on my hands and more neighbours watching than I'd like...

 

[StephenZA]

The implicit assumptions here being that the food bank (and operators) has not thought through why/how or who should get food? Along with the assumption that the strikers don't need it. I don't know the charity, I don't know how they operate, I barely know the circumstances under which the strikers are striking. But I will make judgment call and say it is wrong because nobody in the charity knows what they are doing.

I say this with all the sarcasm I possess, because having worked a lot in charity I know that most people have no idea what it takes to run, work in and contribute to a charity (god the arguments I've had); but everybody has an opinion on what should be done with their charitable donations because the people who run it must be numpties and get given everything for free.