July 2024

Are Britain’s “poor” really poor?

(Weekend blog – I’m afraid this one may be ‘politically incorrect) Since 2010, the amount of British taxpayers’ money ladled out in welfare to the supposed “deserving poor” has risen from £111bn a year in 2010 to £113bn in 2016. It is expected to remain at around £113bn this year.

This is extraordinary. Why? Because the British economy has grown (albeit slowly) every year since 2010. Moreover, there are so many jobs available in Britain that around four million EU citizens have moved here to work – around half from Eastern Europe and the other half from the Club Med countries ruined by Adolf Merkel’s (sorry, Freudian slip, of course I meant “Angela Merkel”) ‘Germany First’ (Deutschland über alles) policies which have led to 50% youth unemployment in countries like Greece, Spain and Italy.

The British Government has tried to halt the relentless rise in welfare payments. There were howls of outrage from the usual lefty libtards in Labour, the Guardian, the BBC and Channel 4 when the Government introduced a ‘household benefits cap’ supposedly limiting the amount any single household could claim in benefits to £26,000 tax-free a year. Endless ‘suffering families’ were paraded in the press and on TV telling us how they and their (usually many) children would be unable to afford food, heating, clothing and schoolbooks on a ‘mere’ £26,000 tax-free a year.

Then there was even more outraged howling from the same idiots when the household benefits cap was further reduced in 2016 to £23,000 in London and £20,000 outside London.

I don’t know about you, but I’d be more than happy if someone from the DWP turned up at my home and told me I could have £20,000 a year tax-free for the rest of my life thanks to the enforced generosity those who can be bothered to get up in the morning and go out and do some work.

Anyway, a couple of days ago I had some indirect contact with the poor oppressed families who are apparently struggling to survive on just £20,000 tax-free a year in welfare.

I wanted to give four dining-room chairs and a sideboard to charity. Here’s one of the chairs and the sideboard:


The chairs are I believe what’s called ‘Brown Furniture’ which pretty much every home had in the 1950s and 1960s.

OK, I admit the chairs aren’t too beautiful. But they’re in excellent condition and will last at least another ten years or more.

First I rang a couple of charity furniture shops. But Health and Safety rules meant they were not allowed to sell the chairs as the chairs had some fabric on them but didn’t have labels stating that the fabric was ‘flame resistant’ or ‘flame retardant’ or something like that. I suspect the chairs were made before the relevant Health and Safety rules were implemented. Anyway, the charity shops couldn’t sell the items.

But the charity shops told me about a local charity organisation that accepted furniture donations which they then gave out free to families in need. As the chairs weren’t being ‘sold’, this organisation could accept them. So I emailed a copy of the above photo to that organisation telling them I had four matching dining-room chairs, plus the sideboard if they wanted it.

A couple of hours later I got a reply. ‘No’ the local charity organisation couldn’t use the four chairs (or the sideboard) as they “aren’t in a style that is popular with our clients”. Apparently their ‘clients’ (who get everything free) prefer furniture “that is more modern”.

We’re constantly being lectured by the lefties about how the poor are suffering under the brutal rule of a Tory Government which only serves the rich and how the number of people dependent for their very survival on food banks keeps increasing:

But what struck me as strange was that these supposedly ‘poverty-stricken’ families saved from certain starvation by food banks are so particular about the style of furniture in their homes – furniture they could get for free – that they turned their noses up in disgust at Brown Furniture items like my chairs and sideboard.

That made me wonder how ‘starving’ Britain’s supposedly ‘deserving’ poor actually are.

And as for the Government’s supposed benefits cap per household – when our friends from the Religion of Benefits-R-Us (in which each man can have four wives and therefore four households) that gives each male up to £80,000 a year tax-free in benefits without ever having to work.

Yippeee! Maybe that’s why the welfare bill keeps rising even as more jobs are created and maybe that’s why around 200,000 of these good people pour into our country each and every year!

(If you click on the title, you’ll see from the comments that other people have also found that Britain’s “poor” are very fussy about what they’ll accept for free in their taxpayer-funded homes)

10 comments to Are Britain’s “poor” really poor?

  • NoMore

    I had a similar experience with Frade when I offered them a pine bed in excellent condition that needed self-assembly. “Oh no our clients don’t want furniture they have to put together themselves”. You kind of see why their clients are unemployed with that level of get up and go.

  • Eddie John

    Had the same problem. When we moved the previous occupants of the house we bought left some very expensive top condition wardrobes in two rooms, too big to move without taking them apart. Our own wardrobes were pretty new but we decided to give them to charity. Same story as yourself so in the end I had to take a saw to them as they were in the garage doing nothing, virtually brand new furniture, and saw them down and take them to the local tip. Other items went as well, heart breaking and totally wasteful.
    Maybe we should go back to the old means testing days whereby if you had the very basics of life you got nothing.

  • Nathalie

    Try Freegle or Freecycle to give stuff away.
    Even Gumtree has a Freebie section and people will come and happily disamtle things and take them away to reuse.

  • Nathalie

    dismantle… oops!

  • Paul

    There are genuine poor. But there are a lot of “poor” who have new iPhones, Sky TV, and a 50″ TV with the latest games consoles.

  • Baroness Bonkers

    It’s all a bit of a mess isn’t it?
    However I do wonder why they would want four dining chairs and sideboard without a table.

  • NoMore

    The deserving “poor” would aspire to a table; the undeserving “poor” would demand one.

  • Twi5ted

    I managed to get rid of two free sofas via ebay and was grateful just to have them collected. Our society is awash with old furniture and so the few charities that deal with it can afford to be fussy. Otherwise they have to pay the landfill fees to dispose of it when nobody wants it or it breaks when young children jump on it for the first time in years.

    On benefits the limits are hugely generous without doubt. But when we have open borders why would any rationale unskilled brit who has little education work in a minimum wage job when this is on offer. Its twice the minimum wage and the other point that is never mentioned is they can still work cash In hand.

  • onthefence

    Reply to Twi5ted. You are damn right – the 16 hours and keep your dole rule should be scrapped.

  • The rules about charities and upholstered furniture are somewhat vague. The law says you can only sell furniture – new or secondhand – that carries the correct flammability label. The guidance to the law says that it’s probably okay for a charity to give away furniture (without the labels) if it’s for free – but not if they’re selling it by way of business. In practice most charities won’t even give away sofas without labels, mainly because they’re scared of being sued if there’s a fire. If you want to find out how the government is helping to keep the chemical industry rich at our safety risk by refusing to update these furniture flammability regulations, check out my website:

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>