Famous Rich and Hungry

Georgiegirl256

missprice wrote: »

Well in my very untechnical method of looking at the people I know who are on benefits, I have seen that most times when they don't have enough money to feed the family, its because some unexpected bill came in.

Then you often get the choice of pay it now or get charged more for paying it late. Or a direct debit came out at the wrong time and one default payment to the bank if between £6 and £35 for that direct debit bouncing then has a knock on effect.

Here I will tell you that once upon a time, I was so good with the pittance I got on benefits, it took me 3 weeks to realise I had not been paid. By the time I did realize I was in only £120 of debt to the bank. Sounds like not much but it took me a bit over a year to recover. Then of course you are in a panic and complete tailspin wondering if your benefits will suddenly be stopped again for no reason and with no warning.plus every month your getting charged an unauthorized overdraft fee. It made me want to quit life at the time.

People need help sometimes, and when your unlucky enough to have to use benefits it doesn't help that even now 20 years after my experience people are still not paid on time. Bad times happen to us all and we don't all have the nous needed to fight for stuff or the willingness to go up against this vicious machine called the benefits agency.

I'm really sorry to hear about the hard times you went through.

I totally get how unexpected bills etc come in, but that has nothing to do with the point that was being talked about....those things can't be helped, and yes, people can get into proper hardship....but alcohol and cigarettes are totally different, they are a lifestyle choice, you do not need to buy them. An emergency bill for whatever can't be helped.

paulineb_2

I live in a so called sink estate. I dont do drugs, I dont have a massive telly, in fact I dont have a telly at all. Id say a lot of people in the area I live in dont have rent arrears (unless they are paying for the spare bedroom and dont pay it), or unless they have got into rent arrears when they were working, because many will get their entire rent covered.

What I spoke about elsewhere was social exclusion. Many of the kids I see around here come from families who have unemployed parents, some dont really care what their kids get up to, they wont be encouraged to get an education.

The neighbour of mine with 6 kids, the eldest two boys are 18 and 16. Both have massive anger issues, both have partners and kids. The 16 year old already has social services involvement because he and his partner arent coping. His mum (who is younger than me by about 10 years, she'll be about 35, she doesnt cope with the kids they have either)

Its not just about poverty, its about lack of opportunity and encouragement. I didnt grow up here, I grew up around 2 miles away but Ive always lived in council housing, Im from a very working class family, however my mum had an education, was encouraged to do so by her parents and she encouraged myself and my brother to do the same. Other people aren't so encouraging.

I'll also say, there are teens I see around here from families that are chaotic and its no surprise when you hear they are in a young offenders institution, because how you are parented has a knock on effect. My next door neighbour is a recovering heroin addict, she has several criminal convictions, she left the tenancy a few years ago having run up thousands in fuel bills, shes bought and sold stolen goods, her teenage sons have also been in trouble with the law.

I think parenting has a massive knock on effect to how the next generation turn out, poor or not. I dont need to walk around with the latest gadget to feel valued. I can buy my clothes from charity shops and be happy.

I do think some people also get absolutely stuck in the benefits trap. The girl with the 6 kids will be able to claim income support and not need to job seek for another few years, by that time she'll probably have worked a few weeks in around 25 years, she may struggle to find work. Some people are better off on benefit than in work, its no surprise to me that they stay there. In 20 years time when her kids are grown and shes not getting as much benefit as she does now, I wonder what she'll end up doing with her life.

I do agree from the amount of abuse someone like Jack Monroe has had, having come off benefits and making a career for herself, that there are sections of society that dont want to see people who are single mums, who have been poor, who dont just accept their lot and try to change things, make a good life for themselves.

I responded to a Tory MP on twitter a few months back because he referred to unemployed people as bottom feeding scum. There are people who really do think that way about people who are jobless.

The way people react to me when Ive been in work and out of work has been like night and day, absolutely.

missprice

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

I'm really sorry to hear about the hard times you went through.

I totally get how unexpected bills etc come in, but that has nothing to do with the point that was being talked about....those things can't be helped, and yes, people can get into proper hardship....but alcohol and cigarettes are totally different, they are a lifestyle choice, you do not need to buy them. An emergency bill for whatever can't be helped.

But as far as I can see its the debt that people are in that makes living on benefits so difficult. Its not the smokes or the beer. Because smokes are cheap, I don't mean the supermarket or real proper smokes, I mean the cheap knock off stuff. Tobacco for £4 does some people a week. Its even worse health wise than the real stuff but its ten times cheaper. Same with beer, am sure tesco were selling some lager for a ridiculous 20p a can. It is probably awful to drink ( I don't like lager so will never know) but at that price someone can afford 10 cans a week. Oh and I know where 20 smokes can be bought for 3 quid.

And OK let's relegate the emergency bill, but somehow it has to be taken into account. It still has to be paid and the tobacco at 4 quid and the 10 cans of cheap lager won't make much of a dent in your 100 quid emergency bill. At least not for one week.

Georgiegirl256

missprice wrote: »

But as far as I can see its the debt that people are in that makes living on benefits so difficult. Its not the smokes or the beer. Because smokes are cheap, I don't mean the supermarket or real proper smokes, I mean the cheap knock off stuff. Tobacco for £4 does some people a week. Its even worse health wise than the real stuff but its ten times cheaper. Same with beer, am sure tesco were selling some lager for a ridiculous 20p a can. It is probably awful to drink ( I don't like lager so will never know) but at that price someone can afford 10 cans a week. Oh and I know where 20 smokes can be bought for 3 quid.

Yes they can afford to buy them because they are cheap, fair enough, that's their choice, but people shouldn't then come bleating that they can't afford food, because, yes you can, give up the fags and booze...then you can afford food! I have no problems with anyone smoking or drinking, I used to smoke myself, but it's when they then rely on other people to bail them out because they can't afford to put a meal on the table because of 'their' lifestyle choices.

paulineb_2

missprice wrote: »

But as far as I can see its the debt that people are in that makes living on benefits so difficult. Its not the smokes or the beer. Because smokes are cheap, I don't mean the supermarket or real proper smokes, I mean the cheap knock off stuff. Tobacco for £4 does some people a week. Its even worse health wise than the real stuff but its ten times cheaper. Same with beer, am sure tesco were selling some lager for a ridiculous 20p a can. It is probably awful to drink ( I don't like lager so will never know) but at that price someone can afford 10 cans a week. Oh and I know where 20 smokes can be bought for 3 quid.

And OK let's relegate the emergency bill, but somehow it has to be taken into account. It still has to be paid and the tobacco at 4 quid and the 10 cans of cheap lager won't make much of a dent in your 100 quid emergency bill. At least not for one week.

Its actually a good point that some alcohol is really cheap. Im in Scotland and the government has been fighting to get a minimum price per unit of alcohol brought in for a few years now, I believe its been appealed and thats why its not happened yet, but in some shops you can but stuff like frosty jack for £1.99 for 3 litres if they have one of these offers on, 50 per cent extra free.

I wouldnt drink it if my life depended on it, but some people do.

Actually the drink of choice in my part of the world is buckfast tonic wine, horrible but expensive as well, around £5 a bottle. I would estimate that my local NISA shop sells far more in alcohol than it does in food.

I dont have an issue with people on benefits having an occasional drink, Ive done it myself, theres obviously a sliding scale from someone who spends all of their benefit money on alcohol, cigarettes and whatever else and someone who has an occasional alcoholic drink.

The fact that so many more people are accessing food banks since the welfare cuts made by the Tory Govt, personally I dont think its because all of a sudden thousands of people on benefit dont know how to budget, times are tough for a lot of people, thats fact.

And if they get back in next year, going to get a lot tougher yet.

missprice

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Yes they can afford to buy them because they are cheap, fair enough, that's their choice, but people shouldn't then come bleating that they can't afford food, because, yes you can, give up the fags and booze...then you can afford food! I have no problems with anyone smoking or drinking, I used to smoke myself, but it's when they then rely on other people to bail them out because they can't afford to put a meal on the table because of 'their' lifestyle choices.

I think we actually agree mostly. And yes if the 4 quid or so means you don't eat then give up whatever it is.
I don't see many people drinking and/or smoking also asking for extra money though.
I think what they do is give up the habit and still not have enough to live on.

Maybe some do not give up the habit and then ask for more money, but they need help. But help for those few then costs more money, and then taxpayers bleat on about how much more it costs. I really believe that those that ask for more money but don't give up their habit are few and far between.
Oh and I live on a sink estate once known as a DMZ. Now just known as a UN estate.

They can't win it seems.

Principia_2

This is not aimed at anyone in particular, just a few observations.

Cigarettes and alcohol and large screen tvs or Sky are often used to beat the poor as so called evidence of their reckless natures, they not illegal and are often used as coping mechanisms by people from all walks of life. If it was easy to give up nice things, no one would overspend, no one would overeat and no one would drink to excess. For a lot of poor people, these things are their nice things - no cinema, meals out, maybe a takeaway, no holidays, days out. Give up the tv and what entertainment is acceptable - a pack of cards?

If anybody thinks living a subsistence lifestyle is any kind of life then why not set up a thread where you allow us to dictate what you eat and do, you allow us to judge you on what you spend your money on and you allow us to decide when the experiment ends.

How do you think you would feel during that kind of experiment? And if, like most people, you admit you would feel pretty low and rubbish about life, what difference do you think a small luxury like a cigarette or bar of chocolate would make? Do you think it would be more or less important than someone leading a more privileged lifestyle.

If you think the poor are poor because they are lazy then why aren't you a multi-millionaire? Is it because you are lazy or is it because you are not as smart as some people and/or you do not work as hard as some people and/or you have not had the luck of some people and/or you are not as well connected as some people. Whatever the reason, I can't imagine that you ever feel that people richer than you are somehow better than you and thus have the right to dictate what you do with your money so why do we, as a society, have this blame culture when it comes to people poorer than us?

We live in an extremely rich society, no one should be starving, not even people who have made stupid decisions in the past, present or future.

People who are worn down by poverty need to have their confidence boosted, their skills boosted and yes they need to get a bit angry. Life doesn't have to be like this, but they have to see this first. Angry people can make changes, depressed and ground down people just trudge through life trying to cope.

Loz01

This programme was good but half of the people on it got more in benefits than I do for working, and they revealed "and they recieve £290 a week benefits" as though it was a bad thing!!

Mr_F_Dorsetty

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

I totally get how unexpected bills etc come in, but that has nothing to do with the point that was being talked about....those things can't be helped, and yes, people can get into proper hardship....but alcohol and cigarettes are totally different, they are a lifestyle choice, you do not need to buy them.

Are you 100% debt free? I am so, do you for example get your hair cut?

You don't need to, stop doing that pay your debts instead.

You make a choice. Why are you allowed to make a choice but other people are not? If you do not have your hair cut then I'm sure I could soon find something you do but don't need to but you choose to do.

Now I'm not being 'funny' but to me you're really missing the point and are back at pointing the finger... they are like that because it is their fault. Poor people shouldn't have any life choices or any pleasurable moments they should in fact just be poor and grateful.

Personally I also have an issue with people saying "Well, you're given money and I have an issue with how they spend it"

You tell me what you earn and what you do with your money, I am sure I can find things I do not like with what you do.

Benefit payments are not charity, 70% ALL benefit payments go to working people for a start off. Most people who are on now benefits have worked and paid NI, so they have paid for their insurance pay out i.e benefits.

Those who have never paid are the responsibility of society, that is why we also no longer throw people into bogs as human sacrifices. We're supposed to have moved on as human beings, though unfortunately the veneer of society is the thinnest veneer known to man.

Look at societies such as the Masai. They of course have both old and unfit people in their society. They do not just let them die, but neither do they stick them in a corner and tell them to be quiet and grateful.

The people who are busily getting 'Othered' would be just as useful to society as anyone else, it is simply that society is set up so these people have no hope of taking part. Then when, God forbid, they try to do something they're effectively told... You are but horrid little poor people, do as we say, not as we do. Know your place.

Let's all remember that the UK is at the very bottom of the table for social mobility in developed countries. Labour threw £Billions at the problem, for it is a very serious social and financial issue. All they achieved in 13 years was to drop the UK down to the bottom, from nearly bottom! This is not a comment on Labour in anyway. Instead it is a comment on the problem; the problem is not money, the problem is UK society's attitudes.

In the nicest possible way, your comments smack wholly of someone who has never been there, seen it and done it. Do 'they' as you have it, smoke and drink? Yes they do. Though if you had the stress of being dirt poor and being seen as 'scum' with little control of your life, then you just might smoke and drink heavily as well.

You see I very was fortunate, I became only momentarily poor in comparison to my life span and because I "Think rich" I was soon enough rich again.

Meaning that when I have a bright idea a bank manager or investor will look at my lovely clothes, my impeccable manner and hear my RP accent; I am immediately 'worthy'. I am therefore instantly one of them, not one of those 'Others'.

But if I turned up turn up in a track suit and said 'sarrf' instead of south and refused to announciate the letter "H" when speaking then no matter how good my idea, I'd be shown the door. This is an everyday reality.

Ultimately then poverty in a developed country, it is wholly reasonable to conclude, is very much a mixture of social impositions and a created mental state.

paulineb_2

Loz01 wrote: »

This programme was good but half of the people on it got more in benefits than I do for working, and they revealed "and they recieve £290 a week benefits" as though it was a bad thing!!

Sometimes housing benefit is counted in what people receive.

For example when the daily mail do a piece on someone, they include the HB in the figure.

When I was unemployed I got 71 pounds a week JSA, plus my rent of 55 pounds a week paid, plus my council tax of 50 pounds a month paid, I paid the water charge, thats what we pay in scotland, thats about 20 pounds a month

Technically, I was getting about £130 a week in benefits, but what I had in my hand was 71 pounds a week

When papers are doing their demolition job on people who get a lot of benefits, oddly enough they dont go for single people like me, because, someone who gets 71 a week, well, its not really very much is it?

Ive never been well off when I was on benefit, I scraped by

Id always rather be in work, my background is working with addicts, the most I earned was around 26 grand as a manager but I did a lot of jobs that werent much above minimum wage, I worked for a year in the same line of work nightshift for around 12 grand a year. My rent is low so Im lucky in that respect but even on a wage of 750-800 a month, Id still be better off than I would be on benefit

My issue is that the people who do earn a lot and go to the daily mail saying I only get the equivalent of 25 grand a year boo hoo, how will I survive, arent representative of a lot of people who actually sign on and struggle.

But again, thats not good headlines or good telly is it?