122 replies to this topic

[Johnoco]

I think the recent claim about the amount of children in poverty is absolute twaddle.

Poverty is less than £17K income? Add on free rent/tax credits/school meals/uniforms etc and that adds up to a decent package.

As someone who grew up in pretty much poverty wearing hand me downs etc (and you really did get some stick for being on free dinners) this sort of garbage makes me fume. There may be *some* kids on genuine poverty today but not the number they are announcing. Not seen anyone interviewed in tv today that didnt have a decent couch, adidas clothes etc.

[Bedford Roughyed]

That's why they call it relative poverty. Provided they use the same method each year it can be used to show trends in low pay/income.

The number they announced going up or down is an indication of how we are doing as a country.

[Wolford6]

Relative Poverty:
This isn't a "young children" issue, but something I was thinking about it the other day.

I would guess that 90% of the people I know have been engaged in a life process where they had a better childhood, career and lifestyle than their parents did. Whilst we feel working class, our lifestyles are what many would consider middle class ... e.g. university education, own home before marriage and/or after divorce, semi-detached / detached house, a car for each partner, non-manual jobs, foreign holidays, retire before 65 on a decent pension, collect things, play golf / tennis / squash / badminton, go for meals out. This has continued through successive generations since the Second World War.

It's now reached the point where our own children can't afford to have the lifestyle we had. Our legacy to them is "relative poverty".

[Johnoco]

I disagree because plenty of the people concerned have no intention of working or passing down a legacy to their kids. They are what they are but in poverty isn't it.

[Johnoco]

That's why they call it relative.

Well I'm in poverty in relation to Mick Jagger or Rod Stewart. Its a pretty meaningless term.

[Phil]

I think the recent claim about the amount of children in poverty is absolute twaddle.

Poverty is less than £17K income? Add on free rent/tax credits/school meals/uniforms etc and that adds up to a decent package.

As someone who grew up in pretty much poverty wearing hand me downs etc (and you really did get some stick for being on free dinners) this sort of garbage makes me fume. There may be *some* kids on genuine poverty today but not the number they are announcing. Not seen anyone interviewed in tv today that didnt have a decent couch, adidas clothes etc.

Poverty is only real if you experience it?

[Bob8]

.

Edited by Bob8, 05 September 2012 - 06:43 PM.

[Johnoco]

Poverty is only real if you experience it?

Which I did growing up.

[Phil]

Which I did growing up.

Likewise but I don't use that as an excuse to deny it still exists.

[Johnoco]

Likewise but I don't use that as an excuse to deny it still exists.

I didn't say it didn't exist.
I'm sure it still does in some cases. But with todays benefit system true poverty is minimal. And using people who seem to have a decent standard of housing etc hardly illustrates this.

[Severus]

For me poverty is when you cannot afford to feed, clothe or shelter yourself or your family.

Edited by Severus, 05 September 2012 - 07:44 PM.

[Johnoco]

For me poverty is when you cannot afford to feed, clothe or shelter yourself or your family.

I would agree. Some people I know who are almost certainly classed as in poverty have all mod cons in their homes.
Part of it I feel is telling people what they want to hear in a survey.

[exxile]

There was a woman on BBC Breakfast this morning who was claiming she went without meals because of poverty. She weighed about 18 stone.

[exxile]

Save The Children is run by Justin Forsyth, an ex-spin doctor for Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

The 'charity', which is mainly funded by taxpayer money, spends almost £80m on salaries. The highest paid employee received emoluments amounting to £162,220 in the year to 31 December 2011 (2010: £133,744).

Eight employees receive emoluments of over £100,000, up from five the previous year. Sixty five employees receive over £50,000.

This is a self-perpetuating, classic 'fake charity'.

[back to the future]

There should'nt be in this day and age be any children starving or struggling to be clothed if parents of any income, be it benefits or minimum wage got their priorites right,I know fathers and mothers who claim to live in dire straights yet they smoke,drink,wear designer clothes and have the largest tv in the street,probably on the never never but thats the parents fault.Unfortunately now we have become a nation of must have now compared to my upbringing were everything had to be saved for if you were lucky.

The same scenario is with old people freezing through the winter months,my late mother(god rest her soul)would get winter fuel payments which were paid to her direct,the only fault with this was some not all would spend this around xmas time on grandkids presents and such instead of heating,this should be paid direct to the pensioners energy supplier so it was used for the purpose it was meant.

[Jerry the Berry]

The blame for any children living in so-called poverty in the UK in current time can be entirely attributed to the behaviour and/ or spending habits of the parents of the children.

The UK benefits system more than pays for all the essential needs for a family (plus arguably a heck of a lot more than just 'essentials').

[gingerjon]

It's now reached the point where our own children can't afford to have the lifestyle we had.

Pretty much guaranteed and will be made worse by the continued offering to the grey block of universal benefits, care and support they could afford themselves that will be denied to those younger.

[chuffer]

It's now reached the point where our own children can't afford to have the lifestyle we had. Our legacy to them is "relative poverty".

yep....I'm one of those "children".....I look at the generation above me and think "you lucky f**kers have had it good for 30yrs......don't start whinging to me about what the interest rates are doing to your "savings".....our generation will never have "savings".....

Holidays/meals out? - yeh they'd be nice......

However, I realise that we're not in "poverty" as such.....we can afford to clothe and feed our kids.......that's about it though...

Edited by chuffer, 06 September 2012 - 08:52 AM.

[gingerjon]

Save The Children is run by Justin Forsyth, an ex-spin doctor for Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

The 'charity', which is mainly funded by taxpayer money, spends almost £80m on salaries. The highest paid employee received emoluments amounting to £162,220 in the year to 31 December 2011 (2010: £133,744).

Eight employees receive emoluments of over £100,000, up from five the previous year. Sixty five employees receive over £50,000.

This is a self-perpetuating, classic 'fake charity'.

Yes, what a ghastly bunch http://www.savethech...port 2011_0.pdf

[JohnM]

With no effective Parliamentary opposition, it is left to organisations such s STC to be challenging. Political?Yes, as it is a matter of policy. However, by getting involved in politics, such organisations have to expect to be challenged, too.

Child poverty in the UK, then yes there is, both absolute and relative.