11 ms·

I’m not sure how political HN is allowed to get - but since this post is here, I’ll bite… So it was found that an extra £20 payment to state benefit claimants

by _fzslm 3y ago

I’m not sure how political HN is allowed to get - but since this post is here, I’ll bite… So it was found that an extra £20 payment to state benefit claimants sharply reduced the usage of food banks. Yet, the UK government has invested £600,000 in curbing the rise of these organised food thieves. This move feels like treating the symptom, not the problem. It feels like blatant disregard for a starving population.

BiteCode_dev 3y ago
[flagged]
qubex 3y ago
I thought the exact same thing.
fao_ 3y ago
Along the same lines, it turns out to be drastically cheaper to not means-test welfare payments and just hand out money without regard to the financial status of the claimant. That is to say, if the amount of money invested in means-testing and the current welfare system were withdrawn and put instead into a universal basic income, it would be drastically cheaper. On top of that, but we have a well-grown mound of evidence now that universal basic income isn't just cheaper but also leads to improved socioeconomic status of the lower classes and improved health and decreased stress in communities, pretty much across the board. But instead of actually implementing that, our government instead focuses on putting out propaganda against "welfare cheats", implementing progressively more punitive means-testing measures, and the argument around UBIs is held in a permastate of "the evidence isn't there yet, we need one more study-" (likely with the hope that the study contradicts the current body of evidence and swings against UBI, no doubt). The conservative (and the new labour) approach is always to push towards the punitive option, to the point where I wonder if it's a pathology among people who have attended public schooling (if you're reading from the US, I mean private school). See also: "Basic income could cut poverty to lowest for 60 years at no net cost, according to new research " [University of York] - https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/research/basic-income-could-cut-poverty/ https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/research/ba... Estimated cost around 6bn in Wales - https://www.futuregenerations.wales/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Nov-2021-Summary-v2.pdf https://www.futuregenerations.wales/wp-content/uploads/2021/...
- lolinder 3y ago
  Can you link to some of the studies that form this mound of evidence? I tried a search on Google Scholar, but new information seems to dry up around 2021. After that I see a lot of people talking about it but no new evidence. This 2020 summary [0] found that much the research to that point was lacking—we've studied various components of UBI, but never all together (for example, many pilots were apparently means tested). The biggest theoretical concern I have is inflation. The papers I can find (like this one [1]) agree that inflation will most likely occur, the question is how much. With a limited understanding of economics, I have a hard time imagining how giving everyone $1000/mo could do anything but raise prices on basic things until they are once again out of reach of our poorest people. We can't study that directly without a full scale test, but are you aware of attempts to address the question? [0] https://basicincome.stanford.edu/uploads/Umbrella%20Review%20BI_final.pdf https://basicincome.stanford.edu/uploads/Umbrella%20Review%2... [1] https://socialprotection.org/sites/default/files/publications_files/SSRN-id3920748.pdf https://socialprotection.org/sites/default/files/publication...
  - thomastjeffery 3y ago
    It's not as if 2021 was that long ago. The answer to the inflation problem is to basically ignore it. The result is that poor people have enough to live, and rich people have less buying power. That's not a bug: it's the entire point. Wealth concentration is the problem. Here in the US, the wealth owned by half of the population totals up to less than the total wealth of 50 people. Wealth concentration is beyond out of hand. It's destroying every facet of society.
    - lolinder 3y ago
      > It's not as if 2021 was that long ago. I didn't say it was, I meant that too communicate "so this 2020 summary probably isn't missing much". Inflation in the last few years has been far worse for poor people than for the rich. Homes and rent are unaffordable. Groceries are coming in smaller and smaller (and emptier and emptier) packages for the same price. Wages at the lowest levels are stagnant, while CEO salaries continue to go up. Yachts do not inflate beyond the capabilities of the top 50, but inflation has put real pressure on the bottom X% of the population. Do we have reason to believe that UBI-caused inflation will be better targeted at the ultra-rich?
meragrin_ 3y ago
I don't see how this is relevant to people stealing to sell on the black market. Reducing usage of food banks has nothing to do with stealing to sell on the black market.
doix 3y ago
I just can't see it making a difference. If they somehow catch the thieves, will they arrest them? What will happen afterwards? Will anyone sit in jail? Will it actually make a difference? My experience with living in the UK is that new laws/regulations/whatever come into effect but in reality there is very little enforcement. The rules only worked because people generally just followed them. If people don't follow them, I don't believe the system is equipped to handle it. There courts are overloaded, the police are overworked and I don't know the state of the prisons, but my gut tells me it's not great.
- mobiuscog 3y ago
  This is UK government at its finest - create regulations that are unenforceable, and espouse metrics that are meaningless. It's going to get more crazy in the run up to the election, as all the new promises appear, despite never finishing those from the last decade.
michaelt 3y ago
To be fair, the article says that universal credit claimants were given a £20 uplift in their payments during the pandemic, and food bank usage and shoplifting fell. Seems to me it's hard to visit a food bank when you're not allowed to leave the house, and hard to shoplift when all the shops are shut. And of course nobody was spending money on commuting, workwear, eating out, parties, holidays, haircuts, sports etc so a lot of people had more money during the pandemic (albeit with a far worse quality of life) So it's far from clear that the drop in shoplifting was caused by the £20 uplift.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  A lot of people had less money, too. Not everyone got to keep their income stream.
- PontifexMinimus 3y ago
  > hard to shoplift when all the shops are shut Food shops weren't shut in the UK during the pandemic. Non-food shops were only shut for a small amount of time, about 1 month or so (from memory).
ramesh31 3y ago
>It feels like blatant disregard for a starving population. Seems we in the US get our attitude toward the homeless from the brits as well. People like to say we have a problem with it, but there is something unique going on in the UK. Some mind boggling numbers I recently noticed: UK: 67m population, 300k homeless US: 330m population, 600k homeless I guess it could come down to reporting who is "homeless", but still mindblowing that the UK is in such a dire state.
- Fluorescence 3y ago
  You are comparing different definitions of homelessness. The US figure is more like the UK's definition of "rough sleeper" which was around 2-3000 in 2020.
slibhb 3y ago
As I understand it, the underlying problem here is inflation. The idea that you can address inflation by "giving people money" seems dubious. And is the UK really a "starving population"? Come on.
- PontifexMinimus 3y ago
  > And is the UK really a "starving population"? Come on. I think it is fair to say there is more food insecurity now than 14 years ago. Five year olds in Britain today are shorter than they were in 2010, amnd shorter than in other European countries -- https://www.itv.com/news/2023-06-21/british-children-shorter-than-other-five-year-olds-in-europe https://www.itv.com/news/2023-06-21/british-children-shorter... There's also been a rise in the number of people in hospital with nutrient deficiencies -- https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/21/surge-in-number-of-people-in-hospital-with-nutrient-deficiencies-nhs-figures-show https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/21/surge-in-num... This shouldn't be happening in what is still a rich country.
  - jjgreen 3y ago
    As Thatcher said in 1975, "Let our children grow tall", in the 1980s it became clear that she meant "Let our children grow tall".
robocat 3y ago
> starving That's a strange spin when the article clearly mentions stolen confectionery. I would be confident to say that the problem isn't actual starvation. The poor I know consider cheese a restricted luxury. It is unclear in the article whether meat is luxury meat (say scotch fillet) or cheap meat (say beef mince). Of course if you're gonna do something illegal, might as well get the best stuff! "Let them take cake".
test6554 3y ago
I just love the UK's penchant for turning a phrase: "alternative ways of sourcing items" as a euphemism for theft.

by _fzslm 3y ago

BiteCode_dev 3y ago

[flagged]

qubex 3y ago

I thought the exact same thing.

fao_ 3y ago

Along the same lines, it turns out to be drastically cheaper to not means-test welfare payments and just hand out money without regard to the financial status of the claimant. That is to say, if the amount of money invested in means-testing and the current welfare system were withdrawn and put instead into a universal basic income, it would be drastically cheaper. On top of that, but we have a well-grown mound of evidence now that universal basic income isn't just cheaper but also leads to improved socioeconomic status of the lower classes and improved health and decreased stress in communities, pretty much across the board. But instead of actually implementing that, our government instead focuses on putting out propaganda against "welfare cheats", implementing progressively more punitive means-testing measures, and the argument around UBIs is held in a permastate of "the evidence isn't there yet, we need one more study-" (likely with the hope that the study contradicts the current body of evidence and swings against UBI, no doubt). The conservative (and the new labour) approach is always to push towards the punitive option, to the point where I wonder if it's a pathology among people who have attended public schooling (if you're reading from the US, I mean private school). See also: "Basic income could cut poverty to lowest for 60 years at no net cost, according to new research " [University of York] - https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/research/basic-income-could-cut-poverty/ https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2022/research/ba... Estimated cost around 6bn in Wales - https://www.futuregenerations.wales/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Nov-2021-Summary-v2.pdf https://www.futuregenerations.wales/wp-content/uploads/2021/...

lolinder 3y ago
Can you link to some of the studies that form this mound of evidence? I tried a search on Google Scholar, but new information seems to dry up around 2021. After that I see a lot of people talking about it but no new evidence. This 2020 summary [0] found that much the research to that point was lacking—we've studied various components of UBI, but never all together (for example, many pilots were apparently means tested). The biggest theoretical concern I have is inflation. The papers I can find (like this one [1]) agree that inflation will most likely occur, the question is how much. With a limited understanding of economics, I have a hard time imagining how giving everyone $1000/mo could do anything but raise prices on basic things until they are once again out of reach of our poorest people. We can't study that directly without a full scale test, but are you aware of attempts to address the question? [0] https://basicincome.stanford.edu/uploads/Umbrella%20Review%20BI_final.pdf https://basicincome.stanford.edu/uploads/Umbrella%20Review%2... [1] https://socialprotection.org/sites/default/files/publications_files/SSRN-id3920748.pdf https://socialprotection.org/sites/default/files/publication...
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  It's not as if 2021 was that long ago. The answer to the inflation problem is to basically ignore it. The result is that poor people have enough to live, and rich people have less buying power. That's not a bug: it's the entire point. Wealth concentration is the problem. Here in the US, the wealth owned by half of the population totals up to less than the total wealth of 50 people. Wealth concentration is beyond out of hand. It's destroying every facet of society.
  - lolinder 3y ago
    > It's not as if 2021 was that long ago. I didn't say it was, I meant that too communicate "so this 2020 summary probably isn't missing much". Inflation in the last few years has been far worse for poor people than for the rich. Homes and rent are unaffordable. Groceries are coming in smaller and smaller (and emptier and emptier) packages for the same price. Wages at the lowest levels are stagnant, while CEO salaries continue to go up. Yachts do not inflate beyond the capabilities of the top 50, but inflation has put real pressure on the bottom X% of the population. Do we have reason to believe that UBI-caused inflation will be better targeted at the ultra-rich?

meragrin_ 3y ago

I don't see how this is relevant to people stealing to sell on the black market. Reducing usage of food banks has nothing to do with stealing to sell on the black market.

doix 3y ago

I just can't see it making a difference. If they somehow catch the thieves, will they arrest them? What will happen afterwards? Will anyone sit in jail? Will it actually make a difference? My experience with living in the UK is that new laws/regulations/whatever come into effect but in reality there is very little enforcement. The rules only worked because people generally just followed them. If people don't follow them, I don't believe the system is equipped to handle it. There courts are overloaded, the police are overworked and I don't know the state of the prisons, but my gut tells me it's not great.

mobiuscog 3y ago
This is UK government at its finest - create regulations that are unenforceable, and espouse metrics that are meaningless. It's going to get more crazy in the run up to the election, as all the new promises appear, despite never finishing those from the last decade.

michaelt 3y ago

To be fair, the article says that universal credit claimants were given a £20 uplift in their payments during the pandemic, and food bank usage and shoplifting fell. Seems to me it's hard to visit a food bank when you're not allowed to leave the house, and hard to shoplift when all the shops are shut. And of course nobody was spending money on commuting, workwear, eating out, parties, holidays, haircuts, sports etc so a lot of people had more money during the pandemic (albeit with a far worse quality of life) So it's far from clear that the drop in shoplifting was caused by the £20 uplift.

thomastjeffery 3y ago
A lot of people had less money, too. Not everyone got to keep their income stream.
PontifexMinimus 3y ago
> hard to shoplift when all the shops are shut Food shops weren't shut in the UK during the pandemic. Non-food shops were only shut for a small amount of time, about 1 month or so (from memory).

ramesh31 3y ago

>It feels like blatant disregard for a starving population. Seems we in the US get our attitude toward the homeless from the brits as well. People like to say we have a problem with it, but there is something unique going on in the UK. Some mind boggling numbers I recently noticed: UK: 67m population, 300k homeless US: 330m population, 600k homeless I guess it could come down to reporting who is "homeless", but still mindblowing that the UK is in such a dire state.

Fluorescence 3y ago
You are comparing different definitions of homelessness. The US figure is more like the UK's definition of "rough sleeper" which was around 2-3000 in 2020.

slibhb 3y ago

As I understand it, the underlying problem here is inflation. The idea that you can address inflation by "giving people money" seems dubious. And is the UK really a "starving population"? Come on.

PontifexMinimus 3y ago
> And is the UK really a "starving population"? Come on. I think it is fair to say there is more food insecurity now than 14 years ago. Five year olds in Britain today are shorter than they were in 2010, amnd shorter than in other European countries -- https://www.itv.com/news/2023-06-21/british-children-shorter-than-other-five-year-olds-in-europe https://www.itv.com/news/2023-06-21/british-children-shorter... There's also been a rise in the number of people in hospital with nutrient deficiencies -- https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/21/surge-in-number-of-people-in-hospital-with-nutrient-deficiencies-nhs-figures-show https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/21/surge-in-num... This shouldn't be happening in what is still a rich country.
- jjgreen 3y ago
  As Thatcher said in 1975, "Let our children grow tall", in the 1980s it became clear that she meant "Let our children grow tall".

robocat 3y ago

> starving That's a strange spin when the article clearly mentions stolen confectionery. I would be confident to say that the problem isn't actual starvation. The poor I know consider cheese a restricted luxury. It is unclear in the article whether meat is luxury meat (say scotch fillet) or cheap meat (say beef mince). Of course if you're gonna do something illegal, might as well get the best stuff! "Let them take cake".

test6554 3y ago

I just love the UK's penchant for turning a phrase: "alternative ways of sourcing items" as a euphemism for theft.