There is no such thing as a free lunch is an all too common phrase heard around this particular corner of the world that we call home. Nothing ever advertised as “free” is truly without some attached cost, and (directly or not) you will always find yourself paying-up in the end. When the tradition of the free lunch began in the saloons of the United States over a century ago, it was always conditional with the patron committing to the purchase of at least one drink. Freedom certainly was never cheap, the price of a fridge freezer can run into the thousands, and you are even expected to handover cold hard cash, as Ernest Hemingway pointed out, when joining that most morally high-minded of organizations, the freemasons.
It is a peculiar but demonstrable truth that the greatest wealth and plenty in this world is almost always the direct neighbor of the lowest poverty and deprivation. The UK capital is no exception to this rule. According to a 2015 report from the Brookings Institution, London is the fastest growing western city economy in the world. At the same time homelessness in the capital has increased by 23% on last year, despite Mayor Boris Johnson’s promise to eradicate rough sleeping by the end of 2012. Take a look around any borough on a typical weekday and you will easily see the disparity in living conditions for yourself. The Camden Lock Food Market, for example, is a popular lunching destination for tourists and local professionals, with the average lunch meal costing upwards of £10. For the poorer inhabitants of the area who struggle to make ends meet at the best of times, this kind of daily spending is simply beyond comprehension. If you venture across the Regent’s Canal and walk just a few minutes, however, you will find one of the Hare Krishna’s Food for All vans parked outside the Mecca Bingo hall on Arlington Road. These helping hands distribute around 900 free vegetarian meals each day to anyone who wants them and the service is not limited to the local down-and-outs alone.
No person is refused by the Hare Krishna. Even if they turn up in a tailored suit, complete with bowler hat and monocle, they are cared for just the same. Anyone who doesn’t mind eating whatever they are given can save money on their lunch. Show up at the van at 1pm in even the foulest weather and you will see an assorted queue of genuine unfortunates, poor students, and smartly dressed professionals who just want to get something for nothing. It takes some real guts to take of advantage of this kind of generosity and, as you would expect, that is just what some people are doing. After all, one way to hold onto your money is by not spending it, and if there is one thing that defines the wealthy, it is their ability to hold onto cash. Rumor has it that the Prime Minister herself has been spotted in line of an afternoon, waiting patiently for her free plate of pasta casserole, before returning to Westminister to approve further housing benefit cuts. Such claims, however, cannot be confirmed by your correspondent.
I remember hearing “The more one has – the more one has to lose – the more one holds on to it” (author unknown). It was noted in the context of door to door fund raising where it is far more productive to cover a “working class” area, than it is to cover the exclusive neighborhoods! Very sad.
Very sad for sure. That quote is fantastic, a source would be great.
I saw a news story a few years after a world crisis (there have been too many to recall which one), where research had been done on donations compared to income in the US. Instead of only looking at dollar amounts, the study looked into percentage also. It found that while the wealthy gave the larger amount in dollars, they gave the least percentage-wise of their income. Whereas, the poor gave the greatest percentage of their income. (Everyone else fell somewhere in between keeping to the findings. Overall, the more you had, the smaller percent you gave.)
Researchers believed that the reason was two-fold: the poor can better relate to those who are going through troubling times which leads to more compassion. (They help in ways that they would want to be helped.) And, as you’ve pointed out, because they have less to begin with, money doesn’t mean as much to them so there isn’t much to miss when it’s gone. Without attachment, they are able to give freely.
Now, whenever I hear it reported that some wealthy person has donated more than I ever dream of making my entire lifetime, I always wonder what their total worth is and if that amount is nothing but a drop in an excessively large ornate bucket. (They should keep giving it, but why do I have to stand and applaud them? I’d rather praise those who give much out of their little than those who give little out of their much.)
Hi Sharae – Absolutely agree with you. It does become a difficult issue though because the $Multi Million donation is obviously wonderful but, not only was it a tax write-off, it was also easily spared given their overall worth. I have similar problems with businesses who arrange a lot of publicity as they hand over a $5000.00 cheque! They can all dig a bit deeper than that if they really tried!
I’m so with you on the business side of it, too!
Beautifully pressed. The ending got me smiling .
Really well-balanced post. It’s interesting how you discuss that even the wealthy are eager to get a free meal, even though it seems like others could use it more. I do love the idea of the van. It’s a great way to contribute to society, yet, you can’t ignore it’s not exactly the answer to the issues London is dealing with at the moment. Thanks for this post.
Excellent post. Not only do the Hare Krishna followers practice their beliefs openly, but I never encountered one that doesn’t appear joyful. Jus’ sayin’. They set a fitting example of “Faith in action.”
I have to agree, I don’t think I’ve ever met an unpleasant Hare Krishna.
Only in the movies. Hollywood. Sheesh. Great post, though.
A church I used to attend found frequently held music and drama events in aid of charity. Initially we charged a flat rate for half-time refreshments, then somebody proposed asking people to pay what they liked for the food. Either way any profits went to the charity. We made far more from this after the change. Some people gave nothing, but others were very generous.
Great post. Thanks.
Lovely post. Insightful as always.
Your post struck a chord. It is clear how nothing is ever for free. Last year, stunned New Zealanders shook their heads at the obscene amount of money ($26 million) our wealthy Prime Minister and his cronies put towards a campaign to change the NZ flag. Money that could buy school lunches, and generally help children living in poverty. Meanwhile, operating from a humble premise in our city, Hare Krishna cooks locally sourced donated food and provides daily vegetarian school lunches for these children.
Cynical view has it that PM and his mates in 2015, talked up expensive tax-payer funded royal visits, flag change and world rugby victory (photo opportunities with wealthy charismatic sporting heroes) to deflect our attention from serious issues – SERCO-run prison deaths and fight club debacle, taking too few Syrian refugees, housing crisis. Whatever, there seems to be a conflict between political self-interest and social need.
Definitely well done HKs and Food for All, with your absurdly accurate van names. I’m not too proud, I’ll hit the soup kitchen I’ve got my volunteer hours from years previous for a bowl, and a sandwhich, and some colourful company too, usually. Still having difficulty seeing Cameron lining up without journalists’ cameras in his orbit, but maybe that’s cynicism and my problem.
True ? Infact, nobody can deny that George Harrison had embraced the Hare Krishna tradition too.