3 ms·
If the goal of the food bank is "ensure there's food for people who can't afford it," then turning away one person is a failure. As long as you're not running o
by purpleflame1257 4y ago
If the goal of the food bank is "ensure there's food for people who can't afford it," then turning away one person is a failure. As long as you're not running out of food, it would seem to me that means-testing for a food bank is unnecessary.
- Ekaros 4y agoAnd means testing at food bank is bound to fail. As there are sufficient number of scenarios where technically person there should have means, but for one or other reason they do not at that specific moment. Like maybe home fire or something. Or they were fired and things are processing.
- tremon 4y agoOr to use a newly-minted term: people in energy poverty. Heating costs have quadrupled in many places, and it's generally the rich that have the best isolated homes. So many people who used to be self-sufficient with their income are now having to choose between food and warmth. Officially, they are not allowed to use the food bank because the means testing does not take into account the size of their energy bill, but in practice they may have no other option.
- throwaway8689 4y agoIn the UK food banks are indeed finding themselves short of food as demand increases and donations drop. Means testing process varies but certainly exists in the UK.
- MichaelZuo 4y agoThis line of reasoning implies that a food bank with a 99.99% success rate is a 'failure'. Which doesn't seem sensible.