We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
The BBC's "Growing up poor". Poverty seen up close
Comments
-
Take that one black teenage father, he was just sitting down smoking all day and rapping with his friends also on benefits.
I dont know what they are moaning about they prob have more disposable cash than working couples who pay their own rent out of their own pocket, and have to pay travel to work etc.0 -
They're just stupid.
Soz but they are.
Too stupid to think long-term. Don't think about your education, !!!! about at school, leave with nothing, don't think about your health, so smoke, drink, eat !!!!!, pick up the diseases that go with it, don't think about consequences of your actions, do something stupid, get caught, sit in the cells. And as if by magic, hey!, turns out you've no qualifications, heart disease and a criminal record. Do not get a job. Be poor.
Poverty can be as easily defined as the end result of these people's choices rather than the cause.
Of course I'm open to it being a cyclical thing, but it's up to these people to break out of it.0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »I don't believe any party actively or passively seeks to grow the dependency under the welfare state.
Nevertheless it appears to be happening and needs dealing with, badly and urgently. You are dyed in the wool Labour and will never concede this, but it needs more open-minded and uncommitted voters to see it.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »I never had a decent father figure to look up to.
I have close friends who say I aspired to be like my grandfather.
As a father now, my role in life is to provide for my children what I missed out on and be that role model for them.
My point is that while I understand your stereotype, there is the opportunity to be the exception from the norm.
The point you are making is almost exactly the same point as made in this programme "Return to Forgotten Britain", in which the BBC caught up with the families they interviewed in 2000.
I watched it because I could remember the original programmes; featuring those missing the "party", the rest of the country was enjoying.
Two things really came across to me:
In country areas, most of the ordinary people are "poor" or "deprived" but proud, even when working, so they support each other working or not, and just get on with life.
In the towns it is much more of a money economy and cramped by the number of people - you feel much more "poor" & "deprived", even when actually better off in a town.
In the sink housing estate in Leeds, the pressures of housing demand from the immigrants, has forced the council to clean up the flats that only crack dealer would take, and there is now a community of immigrants on the make, living there.
In Glasgow we were introduced to the son of the original interviewee: 2 years a NEET, shacked up with his girlfriend in a seemingly free desirable flat. He was all front about getting a job BUT even if he does not get into crime like his dad, the danger is that his girl will be "up the duff" before long and the cycle will start again. Child one will lead to child two and if he is not careful she will recognise him for the waste of space he is and do the calculation that she would be financially better off as a single mum.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pbj1c0 -
The problem then is if the claimant did something wrong with their claim and the money has to be taken back from the Landlord which causes repossessions.
Don't understand that. If they have claimed benefits erroneously or fraudulently, nobody would be trying to get money back from the corner shop, or pub, or boolmaker that they've used -- so why from the landlord ?No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
noodle_doodle wrote: »They're just stupid.
Soz but they are.
Too stupid to think long-term. Don't think about your education, !!!! about at school, leave with nothing, don't think about your health, so smoke, drink, eat !!!!!, pick up the diseases that go with it, don't think about consequences of your actions, do something stupid, get caught, sit in the cells. And as if by magic, hey!, turns out you've no qualifications, heart disease and a criminal record. Do not get a job. Be poor.
Poverty can be as easily defined as the end result of these people's choices rather than the cause.
Of course I'm open to it being a cyclical thing, but it's up to these people to break out of it.
This again describes the key political dichotomy that we face. The rigth-leaning believe that those who make these poor decisions have to face the consequences and will be disadvantaged. The left-leaning believe that it's not really their fault, and that society has to bail them out so they are as disadvantaged as little as possible.
Although people keep contradicting it and denying it, I believe that the Conservative Party broadly represents the first view, and the Labour Party the second.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »Don't understand that. If they have claimed benefits erroneously or fraudulently, nobody would be trying to get money back from the corner shop, or pub, or boolmaker that they've used -- so why from the landlord ?
The point is that a landlord cannot get rid of a tenant who stops paying the rent for at least 2 months.
The tenant cannot leave until thrown out by the bailiffs, or he won't be re-housed by the local authority.
Unfortunately there is no such simple system for the land lord to write off 3 months payments with the mortgage provider and a considerable risk that the property will have been damaged and there will be endless hassle with the utilities and the Council Tax.0 -
John_Pierpoint wrote: »The point is that a landlord cannot get rid of a tenant who stops paying the rent for at least 2 months.
The tenant cannot leave until thrown out by the bailiffs, or he won't be re-housed by the local authority.
Unfortunately there is no such simple system for the land lord to write off 3 months payments with the mortgage provider and a considerable risk that the property will have been damaged and there will be endless hassle with the utilities and the Council Tax.
Not sure if we are cross purposes, but I'm struggling to understand how the government paying rent directly to landlords would make it any more difficult. The contract would need to be that until the tenant voluntarily leaves or is legally removed then the rent has to be paid. It's not the landlord's fault if the DSS has screwed it up in some way. Overall surely it's better than them blowing their rent money on indulgences and then the state is still going to end up housing them anyway -- because ultimately we don't make these people face up to the consequences of their actions.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
We are in complete agreement,
Perhaps the council should pay the landlord a 13 month payment for training the tenant in how to budget ?
Why don't schools teach life survival skills to kids ? ie how to survive on a handful of pasta and a spoonful of lentils per day.0 -
The problem then is if the claimant did something wrong with their claim and the money has to be taken back from the Landlord which causes repossessions.GeorgeHowell wrote: »Don't understand that. If they have claimed benefits erroneously or fraudulently, nobody would be trying to get money back from the corner shop, or pub, or boolmaker that they've used -- so why from the landlord ?
Yeah crazy, but this is to encourage landlords not to have housing benefit paid directly to them.
The problem will get far worse when universal credit comes in. These wasters are going to be given a couple of grand at the start of each month, and are supossed to pay their rent council tax and everything before they blow it all.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards