There are no poor people

talexuser

Tell that to David Clapson, ex soldier, 5 years army, also in the troubles in the 70s, found dead in his flat, diagnosis diabetic ketoacidosis (not taken insulin), penniless, coroner said no food in his stomach, with electric cutoff the fridge where he should have had his insulin dead, his ESA stopped due to sanctions, total assets on death £3.44.

bowlhead99

"Don't spend beyond your means" is common sense if you have the luxury of sufficient means but may not be able to replace those means once you've spent them. If you don't have that luxury the advice is rather less useful.

UK is clearly a much wealthier country than some others and the poorest here are not as badly off as the poorest and most disadvantaged elsewhere. A lot more of our disabled people have the chance of being olympians for example. But to suggest nobody is poor, is insulting.

bigfreddiel wrote: »

as Isaac newton said the eight wonder of the world - compound interest.

Isaac_Newton wrote:

I never said that freddie, stop misattributing clever sounding phrases to dead people to make yourself appear well educated

ChesterDog

On a philosophical - but pertinent, I hope - note, you can have lots of money but still be poor when it comes to the really important aspects of life.

richyg

I don't want to stick my head too far above the parapet but I have worked in this sector for a long time and I think the welfare system now isn't fit for purpose.


I think there is often a correlation of being poor - with making poor lifestyle choices.

This is more so in the non-working poor which may be as a result of the benefits system - and possible moral hazard of enabling poor lifestyle choices with money.

The benefit system shouldn't enable poor choices - in this I am sorry but I include the following

Cigarrettes
Alcohol
SkyTV
Lottery tickets.
High end phones on contracts.

Signs of the above whilst understandable in terms of living a miserable existence massively increase people's poverty and don't reduce it.

But so often I see these products/behaviours in the lifestyles of people who I will agree are poor in the UK definition of poor.


If you go anywhere else in the world - poor means poor - often starving and living outside.

It doesn't mean.

Free Property - council or housing association - or god forbid an emergency B&B for a few weeks. Housing of some sort will be there as long as you need.
Free schooling - any amount of children x 18 years.
Free gp/hospital/healthcare - as above - oh and you and partner also.
Free dentistry - as above
Free eyecare - as above
Free prescriptions - as above
Housing benefit /income support. now limitted afaik £25K maybe


!!!!!! people - In the grand scheme of things you are rich and not poor. You may not be materially rich and with only your needs / and not wants taken care of. But this is so important to recognise - need/vs/want. If you think differently - then look at he 9000 people sleeping under tarpaulins on the coast of France - they have trecked halfway round the world to be poor also.

(Well until yesterday that is).


R.

TrustyOven

Gadfium wrote: »

Watch A Swansea Love Story when the young girl describes being forced into prostitute when she was 12. By her Mum. Then come back and tell us that bit again.

What's your point?

Why was the girl forced into prostitution? (why was it not an old man forced into prostitution? why are you trying to elicit people to change logically thought-out truths by using emotionally-charged appeals?)

Because their means didn't cover their expenses, I bet.
If they had increased their means or descreased their expenses, it would be much less likely to have happened.

I think you need to re-read my post. Then come back and say that bit again.

** Edited to add: If anyone cries about me not taking into account events beyond your control, re-read my post and note the caveats footnote.... That post was not edited so the footnote was there from the start.

Broken_Biscuits

richyg wrote: »

I don't want to stick my head too far above the parapet but I have worked in this sector for a long time and I think the welfare system now isn't fit for purpose.


I think there is often a correlation of being poor - with making poor lifestyle choices.

This is more so in the non-working poor which may be as a result of the benefits system - and possible moral hazard of enabling poor lifestyle choices with money.

The benefit system shouldn't enable poor choices - in this I am sorry but I include the following

Cigarrettes
Alcohol
SkyTV
Lottery tickets.
High end phones on contracts.

Signs of the above whilst understandable in terms of living a miserable existence massively increase people's poverty and don't reduce it.

But so often I see these products/behaviours in the lifestyles of people who I will agree are poor in the UK definition of poor.


If you go anywhere else in the world - poor means poor - often starving and living outside.

It doesn't mean.

Free Property - council or housing association - or god forbid an emergency B&B for a few weeks. Housing of some sort will be there as long as you need.
Free schooling - any amount of children x 18 years.
Free gp/hospital/healthcare - as above - oh and you and partner also.
Free dentistry - as above
Free eyecare - as above
Free prescriptions - as above
Housing benefit /income support. now limitted afaik £25K maybe


!!!!!! people - In the grand scheme of things you are rich and not poor. You may not be materially rich and with only your needs / and not wants taken care of. But this is so important to recognise - need/vs/want. If you think differently - then look at he 9000 people sleeping under tarpaulins on the coast of France - they have trecked halfway round the world to be poor also.

(Well until yesterday that is).


R.

It is ok to say some people are poor due to poor life choices.

Martin Lewis has been campaigning for years now to have finance and day to day economics taught in schools.

It's completely ignorant to say all people are poor because they bought too many handbags etc.

richyg

Broken_Biscuits wrote: »

It's completely ignorant to say all people are poor because they bought too many handbags etc.

I never mentioned any handbags whatsoever - my gripe was with expensive contract phones (1) < this will make you poor and then
cigs/booze/skytv < this will ensure you stay poor in the longer term. - and believe me I have seen an awful lot of this when filling out forms at our reception desk

I am sorry but we disagree on the definition of poor. Poor is starving with no means to obtain food or shelter.

I just don't agree what with our welfare state that people are poor by a global definition of poor. I agree within a UK definition but I don't think it is poor in global terms.


I have no doubt that there are individual cases - i.e those that fall through the cracks and where mental health or alcohol/homeless situations are involved.


R.

Superscrooge

Government definition of household poverty...........

'Household income below 60% of median household income'

I have always thought this to be a bizarre definition. If you double everyone's household income, or even increase all household incomes x 10. You still have the same number of households in poverty by this definition.

eskbanker

Superscrooge wrote: »

Government definition of household poverty...........

'Household income below 60% of median household income'

I have always thought this to be a bizarre definition. If you double everyone's household income, or even increase all household incomes x 10. You still have the same number of households in poverty by this definition.

Just out of interest though, how would you define it?

Doubling or x10 of all household incomes would obviously be a pretty extraordinary economic boom (or a long timescale) and I'd have thought that most other cost of living indicators, such as RPI, etc, would usually be rising at much the same pace?

bigadaj

eskbanker wrote: »

Just out of interest though, how would you define it?

Doubling or x10 of all household incomes would obviously be a pretty extraordinary economic boom (or a long timescale) and I'd have thought that most other cost of living indicators, such as RPI, etc, would usually be rising at much the same pace?

The pont is that it is a high bar, and certainly in areas outside the south east.

When you are in suppose poverty you should be concentrating on essentials surely, and the cost of most things, with the notable exception of housing, is far lower now compared to what it was a few decades ago, for example groceries versus income.

Many families with children receive a large proportion of their income through benefits, and the relative benefit of increasing earnings is low, so little incentive to take on more work.

The abive obviously ignores teh prevalence of iPhones in poverty, and the far higher levels of smoking, high alcohol consumption and gambling spend which could be considered tarring everyone with the brush of the minority.