government bailing out house losers - good or bad?

StevieJ

dubsey wrote: »

I have given details of my sister's situation lots of times on different threads.

Summary - DMP with the CCCS, consolidation loan with First Plus and had already extended their mortgage before that. Money mainly went on curtains, carpets (different carpets - didn't like the first lot, then wooden flooring) new fittings (old ones were fine), holidays and general crap - nothing that is an asset and could be sold.
Her DH MUST work overtime on each of his days off to keep afloat. Overtime has now dried up completely and needless to say they are now pretty stuffed.

Do I want the government to help them? Nope, because they have not learnt a thing yet from their mistakes, but they do seem to expect someone else to sort it all out for them.

They still do the lottery twice a week and luckily won a few thousand pounds a few weeks ago. They are putting a little aside for christmas pressies for the kids and are considering using the rest for a holiday, because they 'deserve' one.

I know I sound bitter and believe it or not I love my sister more than anything, but we too work very long hours, we don't have a beautiful home yet - ours is literally falling apart so why should they be helped simply because they overspent?

Oh my god, didn't they give you a hand out from the winnings?

MORPH3US

carolt wrote: »

As a parent - and a teacher - most toys (the ones I buy, anyway), are not 'luxuries'

To start off, I should say that I don't have children, who can afford them in this day and age (unless you are on benefits, then you can afford hundreds of the cherubs... thats another thread)

Anyway i'm sorry but you'll never convince me that toys are not a luxury as you do not NEED them to survive, or even for a comfortable life...

Yes they may well be beneficial to your childs education, but i'm sure kids would survive without them.

I can't believe you are trying to tell me toys (even educational ones) are not a luxury - I thought schools educated children, not toys...

carolt

MORPH3US wrote: »

To start off, I should say that I don't have children, who can afford them in this day and age (unless you are on benefits, then you can afford hundreds of the cherubs... thats another thread)

Anyway i'm sorry but you'll never convince me that toys are not a luxury as you do not NEED them to survive, or even for a comfortable life...

Yes they may well be beneficial to your childs education, but i'm sure kids would survive without them.

I can't believe you are trying to tell me toys (even educational ones) are not a luxury - I thought schools educated children, not toys...

Schools don't educate children till they'e 5.

If you ever do have children, I look forward to your experiment in bringing them up and keeping them at home for 5 years without toys!

As an adult, you forget....when you have children, you see how essential toys are to a child.

I'm absolutely positive mine would willingly skip meals if they could have a toy to play with.

Not that I plan to make them skip meals, mind, before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick..... :rolleyes:

airhostess

A bit off topic, but the toy comment got me thinking.
I don't have any children, but since moving out to Morocco I've realised that I haven't seen a single toy here. Children here play together, inventing games, 'drawing' in the ground with a stick, running alongside a tyre with a stick, or playing 'football' with a bundle of rags that they have tied together or something similar. All the children I've spoken to (even very young children of 3/4 years old) are all extremely confident in talking to adults and I've been amazed by the imagination shown by some children I've spent a lot of time with here. It's not unusual for children (boys and girls) as young as six years old to actively help their parents care for their younger siblings.
Needless to say, childhood obesity is non-existent here.
I'm sure a lot of this is due to culture as much as lack of toys, but it's certainly made me think twice about the plastic stuff churned out that fuels the "I want" culture I've seen amongst kids in the UK.

I remember the time in the UK, my ex-boyfriend's little 7 year old daughter arrived at the house on Christmas morning. She barged past us in the doorway without saying hello and I was shocked to find her minutes later, ripping open every present she could lay her hands on under the tree!!

It's certainly made me think twice about toys for when I have children.
I guess the toys kids get depend on where they are brought up. I won't be buying my children lots of plastic and furry toys but I'd still like for them to have books and crayons though.

Cannon_Fodder

carolt wrote: »

If you ever do have children, I look forward to your experiment in bringing them up and keeping them at home for 5 years without toys!
As an adult, you forget....when you have children, you see how essential toys are to a child.
I'm absolutely positive mine would willingly skip meals if they could have a toy to play with.

But most kids enjoy playing with the box more than the expensive gadget that was inside it.

Doesn't that say something about 'imagination' versus 'things'.

PasturesNew

The "toys" kids seem to get these days are over-priced gadgets to keep them quiet. You can get lots of proper toys 2nd hand (often unused) at charity shops, or hand me downs from people you come into contact with (e.g. playschool, school gate, neighbours, family, friends, etc).

When I was a kid I remember we'd save loo roll inserts and egg boxes and glue them into things and paint them. And we had playing cards and dominoes. Cheap things but fun. Anybody remember Jacks? That'd be a whole afternoon, perfecting the technique. And making card houses (stacks of cards).

Go from here to the DFW board or the Families board and there are loads there declaring they're skint, and panicking they're "only" spending £200 on their kid for Xmas. £200???!!!! £20 is enough!

milliemonster

I've got 2 kids and yes they have toys but tbh, as toddlers, they would rather play with a cardboard box than anything we bought them anyway, which encouraged them to use their own imagination turning it into a car/ship or whatever, kids don't need toys to thrive, they need love and time and interaction with their parents and others around them to learn

mr.broderick

PasturesNew wrote: »

The "toys" kids seem to get these days are over-priced gadgets to keep them quiet. You can get lots of proper toys 2nd hand (often unused) at charity shops, or hand me downs from people you come into contact with (e.g. playschool, school gate, neighbours, family, friends, etc).

When I was a kid I remember we'd save loo roll inserts and egg boxes and glue them into things and paint them. And we had playing cards and dominoes. Cheap things but fun. Anybody remember Jacks? That'd be a whole afternoon, perfecting the technique. And making card houses (stacks of cards).

Go from here to the DFW board or the Families board and there are loads there declaring they're skint, and panicking they're "only" spending £200 on their kid for Xmas. £20 a0???!!!! £20 is enough!

Had a feeling you was a spoilt brat

carolt

Absolutely agree that kids often prefer the boxes! - and that toys need not be expensive or new to be enjoyed - many of our best toys come from car boot sales for a few pence.

But it doesn't alter my original opinion that toys - of whatever description - are as important as food to small children.

Whereas I'd rather eat than own a car.

But equally I daresay there are some who'd rather have a flash car than a nice meal.

Different strokes for different folks.

geoffky

I love my toys.......