trousers

I think this best articulates the point I've been trying to put across. People see a headline saying that "1,459,000 more people are now using food banks" and automatically assume that overall 'poverty' has risen proportionally. As an aside, does anyone have any stats on the reasons why people use food banks and for how long they use them for? I know someone who had to use a food bank for a few days a couple of years ago because he lost his job and there was a cock up by his local benefits office which meant that his job seekers allowance was delayed. IIRC it was leading up to a bank holiday weekend so they gave him some food bank vouchers to tide him over until the Tuesday when it was all sorted. So, for him, the food bank served as a means to an end for a few days because he didn't have any savings to dip into and had a temporary gap in income. If food banks hadn't existed then friends or family would have chipped in to help him out but he went down the food bank route because it was convenient to do so at the time. Now, I'm not saying this is a typical case and, of course, there are people out there who are in poverty on a more long term basis, but it would be interesting to understand how much of the "1,500,000" that have used food banks are using them due to a glitch in the benefits system (for example) vs those who are in a more continual state of poverty. (And, no, I'm not trying to justify the existence of poverty itself - I'm simply analysing the current situation and trying to understand it better)

What did people who couldn't afford to eat do before food banks existed? You're using food banks as a direct measure of food poverty. How many people were in 'food poverty' in 1982 compared to today (for example)?

Hush ye! Don't cha know that the Saintsweb thought police don't allow comparisons with other countries?

I keep seeing adverts for Bill Murray DVDs. Beats me.

Probably best to direct that at the people who oversaw the introduction of food banks in the first place...

If someone knocked on your door today and said they were hungry, would you give them money to go and buy food or invite them in to eat with you? (And, to answer your next question....no, I haven't thought that analogy through one jot)

The reason for seeking to place the UK situation into some kind of wider context is to ascertain whether or not the Tory bashing that food banks inevitably gives rise to is totally justified, or whether what we're actually witnessing is a wider phenomena that doesn't necessarily have its roots in 'nasty UK Tory party' policy. As a fellow IT man I thought you might approve of such root cause analysis and thinking outside of the box. Going back to your map, are you saying that food banks are an accurate measure of 'food poverty'? If you are, then, by logical extrapolation, you're also saying that there were no people in food poverty in the decades before Labour introduced food banks in the noughties, which of course is nonsense. For as long as 'food poverty' exists, I see two solutions to getting food onto people's plates: give them money to go and buy food or give them food. It could be argued that the latter of those two options is the most efficient, and likely to succeed, of the two. And yes, of course, the ultimate solution is to eradicate food poverty altogether but I don't see mankind sorting that one out any time soon. Successive Labour and Tory governments certainly haven't in living memory (and beyond)

Just answering "no" would have sufficed p.s. probably best to leave the 'putting words into other people's mouths' to verbal as he's much better at it than your good self. He even gets it right every now and then

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/10517718/Food-banks-the-unpalatable-truth.html Have you got any more of those maps pap? Would be interesting to compare the UK with other 'developed world' countries

The lowest paid graduates (c.30% of all graduates) will pay less under the new system, so, in part, they kept their pledge. And the majority pay less per month so its arguably a fairer system. OK, so it doesn't match their pledge but, IMO, they came up with a pretty decent compromise given the constraints that a coalition places on the minority party getting their policies included.

Done

Sounds like there might be a happy medium somewhere between the two extremes though, maybe?

Which page? You seem to have got hold of a copy before me

Shaw on his first season at Man Utd... http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11667/9806110/luke-shaw-admits-to-frustrating-first-season-at-manchester-united Not a lot of admiration for Master Shaw in the comments section.

Takes one to know one I suppose... http://order-order.com/2015/04/15/eton-ukulele-loon-was-privately-educated/

Is that from a newspaper headline or via in-depth analysis of an 80 page document?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/arsenal/11537367/Jurgen-Klopp-quits-Borussia-Dortmund-live.html Well, made me chuckle anyway

Like you, I have always respected the thinking of the CBI.... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11533909/Quick-fix-Labour-plans-a-cause-for-concern-experts-warn.html http://www.reward-guide.co.uk/hubs/payandbonuses/business-groups-slam-labour-s-plans-for-zero-hours-contracts http://www.wsandb.co.uk/wsb/news/2371387/labours-gbp8-minimum-wage-pledge-attacked-by-cbi

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/graphic-dashcam-footage-shows-arizona-police-car-ramming-into-suspect-to-detain-him-10177145.html

Just saying what....? (sorry, I'm usually slow on the up-take on this kinda thing.... )

Tinpot post-match interview alert... http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/waddock-praises-pompey-performance-despite-stevenage-loss-1-6689693

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/holloway-flattered-by-pompey-link-1-6689500 Allen headline: "Holloway flattered by Pompey link" What Holloway actually said: "It is always very flattering and very nice whenever fans link you to jobs" So, he wasn't flattered by being linked with Pompey, per se, he's flattered when linked to any club.