I know i am kinda naive and i live in 'Bonnies World' half the time, but i truly didnt think that poverty existed in this country to the extent that it does.

I know there are many people who live on the streets - and they need help, but i thought that people who lived in houses did alright (do you see what im saying ?).

I knew there were many on allowances and i know some cant work but would sign on and collect their weekly money - but i really thought they were OK and could survive on their budget and have a half decent life.

But this morning i was watching TV and they were talking about a family who have 2 kiddies and they have to live on £220 a week. Out of this money came food, rent, utility bills etc .. and they simply couldnt survive. I dont blame them. Thats less that £1k a month to live on and feed / clothe themselves and their children.

I dont know what their circumstances were. I dont know if they work for this money or whether it was from the state - but that seem so low.

I have been reading Yahoo and one paragragh on there says:-

The Department for Work and Pensions statistics showed that 3.4 million children live in families that are poor after housing costsBritain defines poverty as earning less than 60 percent of the median income, which for a couple with no children was 180 pounds per week last year after housing costs.

Are you shocked by these figures, or were you aware this was such a big problem ?

The Department for Work and Pensions statistics showed that 3.4 million children live in families that are poor after housing costsBritain defines poverty as earning less than 60 percent of the median income, which for a couple with no children was 180 pounds per week last year after housing costs.
That way of calculating poverty is a tricky one. Basically any society has a spread of wealth, with some aerning a lot, some a little, a some in between. If "poverty" is defined as earning 60% or less of the average then there'll always be millions of people in "poverty". The only way to end this "poverty" is to ensure that everyone gets paid pretty much the same. That might be true in say North Korea. But even if North Korea has statistically less "poverty" than the UK no-one would say that people's lives are better there than here.

(Did that make any sense whatsoever??) :laugh:

I think the true measure of poverty is whether people have enough income for the basics of life - food, shelter, clothes, education and health. I think that £1k a month is just about surviveable (depending where you live) but I feel sorry for the kids who'll probably have their futures blighted by this disadvantaged start in life.

I think that £1k a month is just about surviveable (depending where you live) but I feel sorry for the kids who'll probably have their futures blighted by this disadvantaged start in life.

You see, i dont think it is enough. For example, i live in a small house in a cheap area. But I pay £500 a month mortgage. That would be half of that small income gone - and my house wouldnt be big enough for a family of 4.

So they would then have just £125 a week for the food and bills. I think thats appauling.

Hello Bonsai,

Yes poverty does exist in Britain. But how do we measure it and to what extent is poverty a problem? What can we do about it and should we try to do something about it?

All of us live to a certain extent in our own little worlds and we can hardly be held accountable for the mass numbers of people living on the breadline. But are they really on the breadline? Homeless people who do spend time on the streets or hostels don't always want to live in a house, some do select to live on the street. The benefit system though requires an individual to have a forwarding address so that they can have a daily allowance, so at some point a hostel or other such establishment must offer residence as an option.

With reference to the family you mentioned living on £220 per week, this figure sounds like benefits plus a small part time wage for someone perfoming a non skilled job,(2 or 3 mornings of office cleaning) otherwise the figure would be less than that. I don't believe rent and poll tax reductions have been taken into account on this figure, or indeed child benefit which is not means tested.

Is the poverty absolute, in other words no coping systems or welfare state exists to allow a family to survive in a basic household without any of the indices of wealth as in third world countries.

Poverty is a serious political issue, we all have different views about what poverty actually is, and sometimes they can distance us from another's reality. It is my opionion that the poverty which exists in Britain is relative to social circumstances and the lack of employment for the majority or the inability for some to work.

Maureen
A tired Northern angel.

You see, i dont think it is enough. For example, i live in a small house in a cheap area. But I pay £500 a month mortgage. That would be half of that small income gone - and my house wouldnt be big enough for a family of 4.

So they would then have just £125 a week for the food and bills. I think thats appauling.

But if you lived in Sub-Saharan ASfrica, you could live like a king on a grand a month.

I think you need to look at a United Nations or IMF definition of poverty.

Somebody living on £1000 per month in the UK is below average for the UK, but hardly poor on a global stage.

It is my opionion that the poverty which exists in Britain is relative to social circumstances and the lack of employment for the majority or the inability for some to work.



What else would it be due to Mo? Whether they kept fish or not?

You see, i dont think it is enough. For example, i live in a small house in a cheap area. But I pay £500 a month mortgage. That would be half of that small income gone - and my house wouldnt be big enough for a family of 4.

So they would then have just £125 a week for the food and bills. I think thats appauling.

What you will find is that those who are under the poverty line will probably not have a mortgage to pay and will be living in council accomodation or private landlord with them receiving housing benefits. This by no means stating that everyone who lives in council accomodation are poor or living below the poverty line. There are some very wealthy council/private rental tennants! They would also more than likely get a discount on their council tax.

I think the main problem is that the divide between well-off families and poorer families is increasing. When I was a child we weren't exactly well-off but did manage the basics, we had a car, went on a summer holiday but we didn't have a phone until I was about 8 and we rented a black & white TV. I do remember the day my parents decided to trade in the black & white one (that had a dial to change stations) for a new colour one with push buttons. I ran all the way home that day, it was so exciting.

I am probably going to get shot for this but in some cases people who live below the poverty line are there because they are too lazy to get off their back-side to do anything about it!

In some ways it does make me angry that this sort of thing gets branded about. What should the Government do about it - hand out more money so that it makes people even more unlikely to go out and get a job?!

People who have the luxuries, the cars, holidays etc have put time & effort into their job to bring home the bacon to spend.

I can appreciate that it looks sad when you see a family like the one that was shown on GMTV but the woman was on invalidity benefit and the guy wasn't working. Now I don't know what his skills were but to me there are jobs out there, but some people just don't want them. Maybe they are low-paid but in some respects you can hardly expect to walk into a well-paid jb if you are not prepared to put in the effort. I don't know what she got invalidity benefit for but again, in some of these cases they are given this benefit and they automatically think that they can never work!

Some people just resign themselves to being poor and expect everyone else around them to give them hand-outs.

I am sorry if this sound harsh and I am aware that not every person who is poor falls into this catergory but a lot do!

Hello Mikado,

It is difficult isn't it calculating or measuring poverty and if we were to end it by the creation of fixed wage levels so that everyone earned the same, we'd kill the incentive for people to apsire out of the social group from which they originate.

The true measure of poverty is whether you have enough food, clothes, access to a good quality and clean water supply, warmth, and a roof over your head. This is true, but we all class other needs as essential to this in modern day living, as we do not live in accordance to a third world economy.
There are some who would consider themselves impoverished if they didn't have a telephone, a motor car, a holiday every year.

In addition to this are the benefits which are calculated according to income. Housing benefit can still be credited to a rent account should an individual earn £160 per week or less and have less than £16.000 in the bank. I should note here that the amount credited will be significantly less than someone earning say £80 per week in a part time job. For a discount on community charge I think the savings aspect is taken into consideration once past £3,000 pounds.

Unemployment benefit can only be received by claimants with less than £8.000 in the bank and they must be out of work and have enough National insurance credits to entitle them to unemployment benefit. Claimants who have done seasonal work for the same employer for three years running will not be entitled to claim.

Benefit rules in my view need changing, a) the interest payments made on small savings accounts or investments should not be considered income unless the said accounts have a substantive capital figure with interest payments equitable to a part time income, according to a low pay threshold.

The ruling which allows a single person to earn £5.00 in a part time job needs raising to that of the benefit level and should only be considered income when it surpasses benefit level/or the tax threshold for a single person.

The ruling which allows one half of a couple to earn £15.00 in a part time job also needs raising to that of the benefit level of a single person, and should only be considered income when it surpasses benefit level/or the tax threshold for a couple.

This route would solve an awful lot of financial issues for people who are not well off.

Maureen
A tired Northern angel.

I am probably going to get shot for this but in some cases people who live below the poverty line are there because they are too lazy to get off their back-side to do anything about it!

Actually, if you get shot so will i as im sure there are many many people around like this. And if they are on the poverty line and doing nothing about it, then fine. Suffer. Its the people who are willing to work, but cant get a well enough paid job to stop claiming benefits that i feel sorry for.

I mean, i see lots of jobs in windows, but they tend to be for cleaner, shelf stackers, takeaway delivery people ... which would be ideal for people who havent got any qualifications. But sometimes it isnt worth the persons time applying as they would get their benefits slashed and working would mean they are worse off.

What you will find is that those who are under the poverty line will probably not have a mortgage to pay and will be living in council accomodation or private landlord with them receiving housing benefits. This by no means stating that everyone who lives in council accomodation are poor or living below the poverty line. There are some very wealthy council/private rental tennants! They would also more than likely get a discount on their council tax.

I think the main problem is that the divide between well-off families and poorer families is increasing. When I was a child we weren't exactly well-off but did manage the basics, we had a car, went on a summer holiday but we didn't have a phone until I was about 8 and we rented a black & white TV. I do remember the day my parents decided to trade in the black & white one (that had a dial to change stations) for a new colour one with push buttons. I ran all the way home that day, it was so exciting.

Hello Bella,

The definition of poverty is not always cut and dry, likewise the evidence that poverty exists. I will tell you that I am 100% certain poverty does exist in Britain. However it is not absolute poverty.

Absolute poverty exists in third world countries with a poor economic standard in terms of industrial development, a poorly educated workforce, (if educated at all) and tend to be lacking in political democracy and are governed instead by autonomic rule. Martin Seymour Lispet Jones is the Author of an excellent read on this subject..POLITICAL MAN, is the title of his book.

The IMF international monetary fund defines poverty in terms of economy and the matrices of wealth.

Within these definitions the car, the phone, renting or buying a TV, hire purchase for the old washing machine or more than a suitcase of clothes per person, and a holiday, well they would simply be luxuries - not the basics at all. My Students were shocked recently when I asked them to attend a class at a museum on essential needs for a level one social policy exercise, I think they thought I was some kind of ogre. Because I'd asked them to compare the simple moving ability of a 1900-1940's, mining family - with a modern findus foods family worker. Horse and Cart compared to lorry full of household furnishings etc.

When you refer to the growing divide between those who appear well off and those who are not. Are you really looking at the increasing development of a fourth social class. I know some of us don't like to think in terms of class today, its not the done thing. Aristocracy, middle classes and the working classes. That's only three. The fourth class in sociological terms is an underclass, who also in sociological speak through no fault of there own are conveniently poor and some will always be poor.

The underclass that I am referring to here, are the unemployed not temporarily but long term or permanently. I also refer to the continual rise in claimants of sickness and incapacity benefits who are also long term unemployed or permanently unemployed. I am not a non sympathetic person there are genuine claimants in both these groups, but its the issue of permanence that rattles my cage.

Maureen
Still a tired Northern angel.

Actually, if you get shot so will i as im sure there are many many people around like this. And if they are on the poverty line and doing nothing about it, then fine. Suffer. Its the people who are willing to work, but cant get a well enough paid job to stop claiming benefits that i feel sorry for.

I mean, i see lots of jobs in windows, but they tend to be for cleaner, shelf stackers, takeaway delivery people ... which would be ideal for people who havent got any qualifications. But sometimes it isnt worth the persons time applying as they would get their benefits slashed and working would mean they are worse off.


Hello Bonsai,

One day my inner mischievious self asked a year 2 social policy group what they expect to earn when they left university. After the class was over I thought how naive of them to assume they will be high income earners as at least half of these students would end up clip board carrying social workers, benefit claimant officers or adjucators, a few nurses in special needs environments, a few teachers. The conceptions we have of ourselves are astounding.

But these are important questions..

1) How much would you like to work for in a week?
I know the answer to this but it is different to what I do in fact earn.

2) Do you know how to value the hourly rate for the job you want?
You know I couldn't honestly tell you. All I can say here is that its variable according to area.

3) Would you ever sell yourself short if the job was important enough for you to want it?
In a variable hourly rated job, how would I know if I'd sold myself short. I have worked and still work in some cases for a lower hourly rate, because it is important enough for to me to do the job and to do the job I like, well.

4) Have you worked out what the lowest figure is you can live comfortably by?
Yes.

5) Do you feel proud of yourself when working? Yes.

6) Could you be happy not working? No.

7) If you lost your job is there any job you would definitely not consider doing? My persona is such a proud one, that I would do the cleaners work and make sure I did it well.

Would you?

A few interesting details about the welfare reform green paper under 'Notice to partner organisations' and 'working neighbourhoods' can be found here.

www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk

Maureen
A tired Northern angel.

Hello Bella,

The definition of poverty is not always cut and dry, likewise the evidence that poverty exists.
Maureen
Still a tired Northern angel.

I can see that poverty is whatever definition you put on it, and that there are many definitions. But I can't follow your second point about evidence. Could you explain?

I can see that poverty is whatever definition you put on it, and that there are many definitions. But I can't follow your second point about evidence. Could you explain?


Hello survivorfan,

I'm sorry I use rather odd balancing arguments. (Thank god, I'm sober.)
I have a feeling I owe you an apology.

The evidence of poverty existing. Oooh a bit of sticky wicket, this one. A few Brits are in denial or ignorance to the existence of poverty, because they do not see very much out of there restricted life shell or zone of living.

Sometimes there views on such matters can be very hard hitting, matter of fact i,e no room for a grey area. I'm alright Jack in my little corner, but I'll be buggered - if I'm going to finance, via my taxes any more lazy layabouts and yobs.

On the subject of poverty then they see the welfare state as fulfilling the gap left by not having an income from a source of work, or from a private pension scheme or from an insurance policy.

In relation to poverty it is seen as either Absolute, abstract or self caused.

Absolute poverty is poverty that is a normal condition of the environment in which you live and work. Poverty is also your means of survival. Brazilian coffee bean collectors or quarry workers in a Brazillian economy come to mind here.

Abstract poverty is accidental and unexpected, you could still end up with a dire state of poverty and be living on the street and someone would term it absolute poverty. But they do this failing to see where you have been. I can remember a film in which Robin Williams played a role of a down and out, who had been a respectable and highly paid excecutive, who for events beyond his control lost everything. He became a hobo and accepted the hobo way's of life - hand to mouth existence, the story was real, but highlighted his own personal state of poverty in relation to his psycological well being.

Self caused, someone who may or may not have worked for a living and is now dependent on the state. Seriously long term unemployed or those who have grown up in a state dependent household who know no other norm, who then at the coming of age feel they too should claim unemployment to follow in the family footsteps. Dependency upon the nanny state for its source of survival and sadly moral fibre.

Maureen
Northern angel.

Mo, you do realise that when we are born God grants us a finite number of words to use throughout the course of our lives, dont you?

When we have used up our allocation, either spoken or written we lose the ability to speak or write any longer.

Now, for most people we have enough words to last us a lifetime.

I'm just a little concerned that you're running out!

:wink2:

Mo, you do realise that when we are born God grants us a finite number of words to use throughout the course of our lives, dont you?

When we have used up our allocation, either spoken or written we lose the ability to speak or write any longer. Tell me we don't lose the ability to gasp in shock, or excitement. ???

Now, for most people we have enough words to last us a lifetime.

I'm just a little concerned that you're running out!

:wink2:

Hello Groucho,

I hope these two don't get deleted in the purge on OFF TOPIC POSTS, but I have worked out the solution to that... cyber sex. :naughty: :devil: .

Maureen
Northern angel.

Hello Groucho,

I have worked out the solution to that... cyber sex. :naughty: :devil: .

Maureen
Northern angel.

Groucho - please sacrifice yourself for the greater good.

Take one for the team, eh SF?

Can I get back to you? :unsure:

I am probably going to get shot for this but in some cases people who live below the poverty line are there because they are too lazy to get off their back-side to do anything about it!

I am sorry if this sound harsh and I am aware that not every person who is poor falls into this catergory but a lot do!

In most cases I think it boils down to low aspirations and in some cases "too lazy to get off their backsides"

The town I live in there is a large area that is in the top 20% of deprived areas in England and just down the road, a mile and a half away, is an area which is in the top 5% most affluent areas in Hampshire.

There has and always will be rich and poor. Don't worry about it and concentrate on your own life and being a better person. if we all do that then things will change for the better.