We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
What counts as child poverty in the UK? Poll discussion
Comments
-
It is you who do not think people who have no children are not human.
Pardon???You want them (who have three or four thousand pounds) to subsidise households who have thirteen to eighteen thousand pounds.
How would people on three or four thousand pounds subsidise households who have thirteen to eighteen thousand pounds.
And when did I say they should.I genuinely can not fathom out how you can suggest that an unemployed household of four on thirteen thousands (net) or eighteen thousands (single minimum wage net) are RELATIVELY poor. How on earth is that not enough to participate fully in society?
When average income is £20k. Your numbers are relatively less than £20kHow little do you appear to think that families receive in benefits and income? If my figures are completely unreal please explain. AFAIK no family of four has an income less than £1000 per month. And that does NOT include a substantial contribution to housing.
I can't reply to things you think I've said that I haven't, even less to things you think I think.
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein0 -
Paul_Herring wrote: »Depends on why there is a lack of food, clothing or shelter. Poverty is not the only reason, there are lots of others which could be disguised as 'poverty.'
For instance:
1) if mother spends the food/clothing money on fags and father spends the rent on booze, should that constitute poverty?
2 if two identical families have exactly the same income, but one is in debt (for whatever reason) to such an extent that they can't afford food/clothing/rent, are both families in poverty?
If a child lacks food, clothes or shelter does why even matter?
No matter how the situation came about - the situation the child is in, is poverty.Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein0 -
For the topic under consideration, it matters a lot.
If a child lacks food, clothes or shelter does why even matter?Paul_Herring wrote:Paul_Herring View Post
Depends on why there is a lack of food, clothing or shelter. Poverty is not the only reason, there are lots of others which could be disguised as 'poverty.'
For instance:
1) if mother spends the food/clothing money on fags and father spends the rent on booze, should that constitute poverty?
2 if two identical families have exactly the same income, but one is in debt (for whatever reason) to such an extent that they can't afford food/clothing/rent, are both families in poverty?
Take my 1st case for example. Simply giving the family more money will not improve the lot of the child.
Taking the child off them and placing them in foster care/up for adoption isn't entirely a panacea either.
I disagree. The child might be being mistreated/abused, but if there is (otherwise) sufficient money coming into the house to pay for whatever essentials people decide actually are essential (food/roof/Sky TV) the word 'poverty' does not describe their situation.No matter how the situation came about - the situation the child is in, is poverty.Conjugating the verb 'to be":
-o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries0 -
I genuinely can not fathom out how you can suggest that an unemployed household of four on thirteen thousands (net) or eighteen thousands (single minimum wage net) are RELATIVELY poor. How on earth is that not enough to participate fully in society?
How little do you appear to think that families receive in benefits and income? If my figures are completely unreal please explain. AFAIK no family of four has an income less than £1000 per month. And that does NOT include a substantial contribution to housing.
Interesting figures Kim - I've been looking for a way to guage what a typical family on full benefits (housing, unemployment, child, etc) receives, as clearly this would have a major influence on the number of families in *real* poverty in the UK. Where are your figures from, out of interest? Does it include *all* typical benefits?
Approx £1k a month would pay our mortgage (3 storey new build in Cheltenham) and all utilities. It wouldn't cover shopping for food and clothing, but certainly seems to illustrate that ~£13k after tax (as apparently provided by state benefits) is enough to live on (partic in social housing) - and far from any reasonable definition of "poverty".
The End Child Poverty website brazenly states without qualification: "4 million children - one in three - are currently living in poverty in the UK". Absolute BS by any reasonable person's understanding of "poverty". Childrens' charities are deliberately misleading the public with statements like these.
Cheers, Ben0 -
Paul_Herring wrote: »For the topic under consideration, it matters a lot.
Take my 1st case for example. Simply giving the family more money will not improve the lot of the child.
Taking the child off them and placing them in foster care/up for adoption isn't entirely a panacea either.
They cost a heck of a lot more money in care!Paul_Herring wrote: »I disagree. The child might be being mistreated/abused, but if there is (otherwise) sufficient money coming into the house to pay for whatever essentials people decide actually are essential (food/roof/Sky TV) the word 'poverty' does not describe their situation.
I understand what you're saying but the topic at hand is "what counts as child poverty?" - and a lack of food, shelter and clothing is poverty at it's most basic, uncontroversial, easy to understand level.
Having crap parents undoubtedly makes poverty worse for a child, but does it change what child poverty is?
If money comes in, but it all goes straight out again without being used to meet the child's basic needs then that child is living in poverty.
Aren't they?
Like the Americans say "It is what it is."Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein0 -
Yes - it's not poverty - it's having crap parents.Having crap parents undoubtedly makes poverty worse for a child, but does it change what child poverty is?
No - they're being abused. Not at all like poverty. And the 'corrective actions' required are vastly different.If money comes in, but it all goes straight out again without being used to meet the child's basic needs then that child is living in poverty.
For example would you consider Harry Potter when living with the Dursley's as living in poverty?Conjugating the verb 'to be":
-o I am humble -o You are attention seeking -o She is Nadine Dorries0 -
Apparently my children are living in poverty.... goodness, they seem rather well-fed, well-dressed in their Ebay secondhand clothes, and well-nurtured. But, no separate rooms, and a host of other apparently unbearable circumstances. I am so appalled that this is "child poverty" in this country. Choice A is the only one that I can call poverty; the others can be down to personal choice or preferences, like a child not wanting to sleep in his own bed but co-sleeping instead, parents choosing warm cardies instead of cranking up the heating, etc etc etc. But - no parent willingly CHOOSES lack of food or shelter for their child. THAT is poverty.
You are absolutely right. The only one of the answers to tick is "A".
I see too many "Mums" outside Iceland saying they are hard done by but they have their £6 packets of fags, designer shell suits and trainers and of course they have big flat screen tv's.
If you want to see real poverty go to India or Sri Lanka. I think it is pathetic what people class as poverty in this country. In the words of a recent politition " You have never had it so good."
Now let the tirade of the lilly livered liberals begin!:T0 -
Paul_Herring wrote: »Yes - it's not poverty - it's having crap parents.
No - they're being abused. Not at all like poverty. And the 'corrective actions' required are vastly different.
For example would you consider Harry Potter when living with the Dursley's as living in poverty?
Does Harry Potter have a lack of food clothing or shelter while at the Dursleys?Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein0 -
The market created the concept of social housing, the government merely expanded it.
The government did it for economic reasons. Workers need somewhere to live, and low paid workers need somewhere to live near where they work.
Your knowledge of history seems as flawed as your ability to manage on a low income. UK social housing has it's origins in the alms houses and amongst the Victorian philanthropists during the industrial revolution. Viz it was based on charity not market forces.0 -
Hastobe_Katt wrote: »Your knowledge of history seems as flawed as your ability to manage on a low income. UK social housing has it's origins in the alms houses and amongst the Victorian philanthropists during the industrial revolution. Viz it was based on charity not market forces.
What do you know about my income or ability to manage?
Nothing.
Philanthropy is part of the market.Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. Einstein0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards