The Left argues that there are people starving in
Britain and it is for this reason that we need foodbanks. I have attempted to
argue otherwise by pointing out that many ingredients are very cheap. The
result is vast amounts of abuse and a Twitter storm that distorts the argument.
When I point out that it is possible to buy a kilo of
oatmeal for 70 pence, no reasonable person would conclude that I am suggesting
you only eat porridge. That is obviously a strawman argument. It is based on
not reading the article which the tweet links to. With the money saved from
eating porridge for breakfast, it would be possible to buy other cheap ingredients
to make other meals.
I am used to Twitter storms. I have had them for years
from Scottish nationalists. But I am not going to be shouted down or intimidated
by anyone. This I am afraid is what the Left has been trying to do with a whole
range of issues.
No, I will continue to tell the truth as I see it. I
will use reason and argument and I will refrain from personal insult. Your
response to this says more about you than about me.
There is a real prospect of Labour winning a majority
at the next election, so I assume the top priority of this government will be
to deal with starvation in the UK. After years of wicked Tories refusing Oliver
Twist some more at the work house, Keir Starmer will ask the international
community for famine relief. After that he will do everything, he can to
abolish the scourge of foodbanks so never again will they be necessary in
Britain. But what practically will he do?
The Left’s argument must be that someone on benefits
must be starving because he does not receive enough money every week. So how
much should Labour raise benefits? If we doubled all benefits would that be
enough to end starvation in Britain? Apparently, it would not because many on
the Left want us to have a universal basic income instead of benefits. Would a
universal basic income be enough to end starvation? After introducing it we can
assume that all the foodbanks would be banished from the land. But we have a
problem?
In Britain it is poverty that causes starvation and
makes people need foodbanks. But poverty is defined as 60% of median income. So
even increasing benefits or providing a universal basic income would not end
poverty unless it closes the gap between median income and those who are poor.
Theoretically if average income was one million pounds a week, those on £600,000
would be poor and one assumes starving even if they could stay in top class
hotels and eat caviar for breakfast. Too much salt, bad for nutrition.
But it is not just those on benefits who are starving.
I have been told by my friends on the Left that nurses finish their shifts and
go straight to the foodbank in order not to starve. But if nurses are starving,
then we can assume that everyone who earns less than nurses must be starving
too. This means that Labour would have to raise wages for everyone who earns
less than nurses and those on benefits too.
If the lowest paid nurse earns £20,000 pounds per year
and is starving then it is obvious that everyone ought to be paid a minimum of £20,000
whether they happen to work in a shop, or even if they don’t work at all. How
else is Labour to remove the need for foodbanks.
People on the Left keep telling me that those on the
minimum wage are starving and need to go to foodbanks. But the UK already has
the 7th highest minimum wage in the world. So, we can assume that everyone in
the world except the top six are starving and reliant on foodbanks.
So how high will Labour have to raise the minimum wage
before the Left decides no one is starving anymore in Britain and we can
disband the foodbanks? But unfortunately raising the minimum wage will be no
good unless it is at the level of the highest paid person who has ever gone to
a foodbank because he is starving.
State spending as a percentage of GDP has increased
under the wicked Tories from 2019 onwards peaking at 51.6%. These cruel Dickensians
paid our wages during lockdown and are spending billions subsidising our fuel
now. But obviously this is not enough according to the Left because huge
numbers of British people are starving and reliant on foodbanks. So how much
higher should public spending go?
If we were to increase benefits to such an extent that
no one starved, would we need to add 10% to public spending or 20%. How much
would that add to income tax. The Left needs to tell us. If we were to
introduce a universal basic income or make sure that everyone whether they worked
or not earned as much as nurses what if anything would need to be cut? Labour
really needs to publish these figures. Those on the Left who see starvation
everywhere and think it is impossible to live on benefits or the minimum wage need
to tell us how much they want to spend and how to balance their budget
The truth is that there is almost no starvation in
Britain. Around 2% of people are underweight. The majority will be very old people
who can’t absorb nutrition. Britain has a problem with obesity rather than
starvation. One of the best ways to help people be less obese is if they were encouraged
to buy ingredients and make meals from scratch. There is no need for anyone to
be suffering from malnutrition let alone scurvy when you can buy a bag of pears
for 60 pence at Tesco. The ingredients necessary for a balanced diet are cheap.
It is ready meals that are expensive.
I have never seen a starving person in Britain. I have
hardly even seen someone who is obviously underweight. But the Left requires
the myth of the starving Briton, because it is a useful tool to bash the Tories
with.
It’s all very well shouting and swearing at me for wondering why people come to Britain in rubber dinghies only to starve. But let’s say you vote Labour with the expectation of finally getting your socialist paradise. How do you pay for it if everyone needs to earn £20,000 pounds not to starve? If you pay me that much I would be delighted not to work nor pay any tax at all and I won’t need to live on porridge.