Mobile phones--luxury or necessity?

MrTricky

batg wrote: »

as title says
are mobiles a luxury or necessity?
If for example a person says they are struggling with debt, and spends say, £50+ per month on internet access, is that access deemed to be a luxury or necessity?

I say luxury, what say ou?

Most do not spend £50 you can get it for less plus it is good value, the cost of news paper, it can help you find bargains and shop cheaply. Save on postage bus trips, conserve energy, get money saving tips

It is up to the individual to decide how they spend their money, it is about £1.50 a day and
it can help reduce others costs, find cheap entertainment, save on travel etc... so more a necessity.

Ames

parking_question_chap wrote: »

Another reason benefits should be in part given in food vouchers.

I'm having a dim moment - how does the DWP insisting on a phone and internet connection provide a reason for food vouchers?

MrTricky

parking_question_chap wrote: »

Another reason benefits should be in part given in food vouchers.

No because it limits choice and having the internet maybe the best way to avoid starvation ie getting sanctioned.

parking_question_chap

Prinzessilein wrote: »

And the guy that sells cheap, local grown fruit and veg on the market...will he use this card-scanner???

If they cant be bothered getting a job, I highly doubt they can be bothered sourcing local produce from markets.


But anyhow, needing to get a card scanner might encorage cash traders to report their taxes better then im all for that too.

Mista_C

My phone is a necessity, having internet availability on it is a luxury.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Again, you're talking about internet access, not mobile phones per se.

But, again, a mobile phone with internet access is cheaper than coming up with a lump sum payment for installation/connection and line rental plus the cost of purchasing a computer.

When I moved into my house, BT wanted over £200 to switch on the line, despite having a perfectly good credit score and previous contracts with them, suggesting their first available date for connection, when it was purely a case of them switching it on remotely, not running a line or installing boxes, was seven weeks later. My phone, in contrast, cost £7.50 up front - the delivery charge - was delivered the next day and I was online as soon as I switched it on.



I'd also find it quite surprising if a UC advisor accepted somebody not having a mobile phone as reasonable when they conduct a lot of their appointments via calls during the working day (as I'm sure you know, UC is also claimed by people in fulltime employment, so they have to be able to speak to claimants during their working hours) as well as it being quite unlikely that they would think anybody was making enough effort to be contactable for work if they don't have a mobile phone). Back in the late 90s I was told quite clearly by the agencies I had registered with that if I didn't provide a mobile number, they wouldn't consider me for bookings - I can't see the situation improving now so many people have the things.

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

parking_question_chap wrote: »

Another reason benefits should be in part given in food vouchers.

How does that work?

If they don't have a mobile to run their claim, speak to advisors, potentially get calls about work or query why there is no money in the bank this month (because the claim queries are handled by call centres, not the local benefits agency office as they've been closed down), they don't receive benefit at all, whether in cash or by vouchers.

trigger_fish

Having a mobile phone and having possible internet connectivity I see as two different things.



But within a few years every mobile will have the internet possibility.



At the moment mine doesn't but as the second hand ones in the charity shop filter down I soon will.

parking_question_chap

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

How does that work?

If they don't have a mobile to run their claim, speak to advisors, potentially get calls about work or query why there is no money in the bank this month (because the claim queries are handled by call centres, not the local benefits agency office as they've been closed down), they don't receive benefit at all, whether in cash or by vouchers.

Or they could get a job.

Just saying.

Ames

parking_question_chap wrote: »

If they cant be bothered getting a job, I highly doubt they can be bothered sourcing local produce from markets.


But anyhow, needing to get a card scanner might encorage cash traders to report their taxes better then im all for that too.

The couple this thread is about are on ESA - it's not that they 'can't be bothered getting a job' it's that they're unable to work.

Prinzessilein, who you were replying to, is also disabled and on benefits because she can't work, rather than won't work.