7 million people face money woes(7 working million)

The_White_Horse

no solution will be found until the majority of people do not believe they are entitled to an ipad.

The_White_Horse

actually it all stems from the benefit brigade. the fact that dirt bags in council flats have iphones etc means that those that work feel they are definitely entitled to them.

people on benefits should have NOTHING other than a roof over their head a meagre food to eat.

nomoreboomandbust

Mr._Pricklepants wrote: »

Oh cry me a river.
If your income is insufficient, there are 2 options. Spend less or earn more. Or both.
I remember my early twenties, juggling two jobs and working most weekends for many years, while my wife, newborn son and myself were living in a 1 bed terraced.
Said it before and I'll say it again : The pampered generation has come of age and it clearly is a shock for many of them.

I am sure there are a lot of people who would love to have two jobs, you make it sound so easy when nowadays keeping just one job is becoming a struggle for many.

Mr._Pricklepants

nomoreboomandbust wrote: »

you make it sound so easy when nowadays keeping just one job is becoming a struggle for many.

Easy??
It wasn't easy, it's early to mid 80's I was talking about. Unemployment over 3 million, remember?
Where's a will, there's a way.

wymondham

Mr._Pricklepants wrote: »

Got a colleague who is moaning about not being able to get on the housing ladder, but yet she spends £60 a month on some iPhone contract ("but I get the latest model whenever they release one!"), groceries delivered by Tesco van ("can't be bothered to go food shopping!") and whenever the car valet is around at work, she's first in line for a £40 wash, wax and interior clean ("they do it so much better than I can!")

Unbelievable.

Not sure I agree with the Tesco bit. We use home delivery and it saves us money as when you come to checkout if it's too high just remove stuff - very few people would do that in store.....

bankhater_1965

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Err - to survive. That is what there is to life. We are the only animals on thios planet that have luxuries. OK thats going a little far BUT you work to support you and your NEEDS. There is no right to luxuries just because you work full time. If you DO have money left after essentials fine - spend it on what you like BUT expecting some of lifes luxuries just because you work 37.5 hours a week - give me a break.

paul , its a fact people or families CANNOT live on certain saleries that are paid for basic living requirements !

paulmapp8306

I guess, in certain parts of the country where rent is excessive.

Min wage is what - £6.06/hour? (or is it £6.12?). ANYway - taking the lower, thats £224.22 per week for a standard 37 hour full time week. Thats £11659.44/year. Tax free eliment (currently) is £8100 - so that leaves £3559.44 to be taxed at around 1/3 (for easy - combined NI and IT), so that gives £10472.96/year after tax - or £872/month.

With no benefits, for a single person (which is what its based on) that is fine for a lot of the UK. Where rent is REALLY high its not - hence why a NATIONAL min wage doesnt really work. It also assumes for a couple two people would be working - which isnt always the case.

i agree a FAMILY cant survive with a single income at minimum wage, but that isnt the point of a minimum wage. If it was set at a level where a family COULD manage (so pretty much doubling the min wage) then companies would go out of buisiness, and single workers would live the life of Riley. That is why benefits to top up min wage are necessary for single income families.

If both partners of a couple worked full time at min wage, it would result in a family income of £1744/month. That is enough for a family to live on - so theres the issue. Its not that min wage isnt high enough for a single person to live on - nor that a couple who both work at min wage cant support a family, its that in a family - both partners DONT always work - and if they done they dont necessarily both work full time.

Dont get me wrong - Im struggling by with no benefits bar CB and CTC at present, and as Im an owner not a renter I get no help there either - but I do have a pension which pays just under the minimum wage. If it wasnt for CB and CTC we wouldnt be able to afford to live with the mortgage, so would be forces to sell and rent in order to qual for HB - but should my wife find work at min wage we wouldnt need benefits at all - even If I am still not working and were paying a mortgage.

Norfolk_Jim

I like to watch old episodes of on the buses and see how regular people lived when I was a kid.

Things really started to change in the 70's when Visa came along with their "take the waiting out of wanting" slogan and we've been on the slide ever since.

Graham_Devon

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Indeed. You only have to Go back to the 60s (which isnt that far back really). Outside toilets, tin baths, black/white TV if you were lucky. No fast food, no take aways - appart form a chippy/cafe once in every few months maybe, hand-me-down clothes, Working 12 hour shifts probably 6 days a week etc. Maybe a night at the pub once a week if the money was left after housekeeping.

How far our expectations have come - now life isnt worth living, and its certainly not worth working - without hobbies, gagets, luxuries etc.

No holidays? So why did Butlins etc do quite so well?

One night a week in the pub? Give over.

Why did the Beetles do so well with crowds following them around the country to hear them play?

You've made this thread a little silly with your eagerness to concntrate on the minimum wage worker with an iphone or another gadget. yes of course someone should get rid of an iphone if they are struggling.

But the majority are not like that. The majority are families trying to get by. Families who dread MOT time. Families who can't buy a new washing machine if theirs dies etc.

Yes people go on holiday. Yes people go out. Yes people have iphones. But it doesnt neccesarily correlate that the majority struggling all have or do those things.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Yes people go on holiday. Yes people go out. Yes people have iphones. But it doesnt neccesarily correlate that the majority struggling all have or do those things.

Aren't all these surveys the same though?

They aren't meant to show, or otherwise, a correlation between anything - generally they are intended to push a VI point.

It would seem to me that if more than 10% of the population are claiming to be going hungry then a couple of follow-up questions like "how much do you spend on food each week?", "how much do you weigh?" might be worth asking or, god forbid, "do you have an iphone?".

"what car do you own?"

"where/ when did you last go on holiday?"

"do you have a maths GCSE?"

Then we'd have an idea not just that this group of people are skint but why.

It won't happen and instead we'll continue with questions like "would you struggle if a large and unexpected bill arrived".