Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Okay, the ignorance and callousness in this thread is making my head hurt. I've been following this woman's blog for a while. Perhaps I can clear up some misconceptions:

    (Original post by Jam')
    It's not difficult for a person to live on £56.90. Fair enough you might not be able to splash out on fun things to do, but it is not the state's responsibility to entertain you.

    If you're entitled to JSA/Income support chances are you're entitled to housing benefits for rent, and although you will probably have to contribute to your housing benefit, you should still have at least £40 a week at your disposal.
    If you read the Hunger Hurts post linked to in that article, you'll note that the crisis that inspired it was a bureaucratic screw-up that saw her left £100 short of housing benefit one month, with no warning. That might not sound like a lot to you or me, but when you live on a shoestring, with absolutely no cash to spare, any shortfall is a disaster. I don't think you appreciate that this woman had everything, every bill and cost and purchase, pared down to the absolute minimum and was still barely scraping by. Do you actually believe that Daily Mail crap about 'life on benefits' being some sort of easy ride?

    (Original post by thisistheend)
    it was all HER OWN FAULT in the first place for quitting her job!
    She quit her job because they wouldn't give her hours that let her look after her kid. And while it was a decent job for a single professional, it didn't pay enough for her to afford childcare on top of her other costs. What should she have done? Found a better-paid job? In this economy, when she has no qualifications past GCSE?

    (Original post by im so academic)
    I bet her rent is far too expensive and needs to move where she lives.

    Come back to me when she moves to a low-rent area.
    I'd love to know where you think she's going to get the deposit and first month's rent for a new place.

    (Original post by thisistheend)
    Then maybe she should have considered giving it up for adoption to give it a better life.
    Oh I hate this argument. Seriously, you know plenty of people who've had kids. Go and ask them what it would take for them to give those kids up. I bet they all say, without exception, that there's nothing. Even better, if you ever have your own kids, ask yourself the same question.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    more like greed than stupidity. There are food mountains in europe and lots of people around the world are starving. Food distribution is just screwed up at the moment! More needs to be done in respect to this.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    This is beginning to feel like the dawn of the loser forever.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kayleighiow)
    Jesus Christ I can't believe I just had to endure this absolute tripe the OP and his absolute ignoramus buddy have written. Let me guess, fresh out of school, living with your middle class parents, out in the country? Please do not reproduce, you hateful, nasty and totally mis-informed little boys. There's a big world out there, can't wait for you both to meet it!


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Nah, actually none of those apply to me. Doesn't mean I can't see the wood for the trees.

    I'm just being coldly truthful.

    (Original post by SFsucks)
    Wow, I can't tell if some people here are trolls or who really think its ok to force people to eat from bin.

    Wow this forum really does make me sick at times.
    Well you see, no one is forcing them to eat from the bin. They wouldn't be forcibly compelled by anyone. Lets say a feckless mother runs out of money to feed her child. And the govt policies doesn't allow her to have more money. She has no relatives or friends. People on the street don't give a ****. None of this says "go dumpster diving".

    If and when something like that happens, they wanted it to happen. Because it would have been best choice for them. And they would be glad they did it, because they couldn't have done anything else better.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    OP, I hope one day you fall on hard times and go to bed hungry.

    (Original post by im so academic)
    It's a crime if you can't afford it.
    You disgusting eugenicist.

    To everyone with compassion on this thread, don't despair: this vile, small-minded little trend among the young is born only of their narcissism and inexperience. The poor buggers will learn exactly what it's like soon enough when they enter the real world and the swinging dicks start ****ing them.

    Please let's unite against the common enemy, the elites. The middle class is at a crossroads.

    When middle-class people realise their narcissism is unfounded, and their living standards are overwhelmingly closer to the poor than they are to the rich, that is when revolution happens.

    Or you can keep deluding yourselves that your "intelligence", your "upbringing" or your small amount of disposable income make you superior to the poor.

    We are all the same - if you pay a mortgage rather than buying your home outright, if you are paid your wages by PAYE rather than by brown envelope, THEN YOU ARE JUST AS INDENTURED AS THE POOR.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zergonipal)
    She quit her job because they wouldn't give her hours that let her look after her kid. And while it was a decent job for a single professional, it didn't pay enough for her to afford childcare on top of her other costs. What should she have done? Found a better-paid job? In this economy, when she has no qualifications past GCSE?

    She should have built a contraption to ensure the baby would not be at risk. You know, a version of a bubbled lined room for suicidal patients that make it impossible for them to self harm or top themselves.

    Now just apply that principle to a baby.



    Oh I hate this argument. Seriously, you know plenty of people who've had kids. Go and ask them what it would take for them to give those kids up. I bet they all say, without exception, that there's nothing. Even better, if you ever have your own kids, ask yourself the same question.

    People in Greece don't seem to have any trouble giving them up to orphanages now do they? They seem very rational in their outlook on life and how much they can bite off to chew.
    see quote box
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I do think some working class people or children of middle class parents having to support themselves on less than what they were used too spend too much on eating out, branded food and ready meals. My boyfriend doesn't really understand forward meal planning. He doesn't keep constant stock of staples like bread, flour, eggs, milk and butter to make something simple like dumplings. One meal bought at a time then all your shopping is eaten in a day or two. One day he says he has no money to eat, then when he does have money it gets spent on premium food like seafood and fancy cheeses. He never grew up in a council flat in Brixton though.

    I think not enough people know his to cook with limited ingredients. I can make fried bakes, dumplings or roti with just flour and water. I can get a 500g pack of mince and make burgers, meatballs or pelmeni with it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisistheend)
    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...ain-jay-rayner

    ^^^ an article on food banks and poverty

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...modern-poverty

    ^^^ an article on someone feeding themselves so well in "poverty" that invited praise from Fortnum & Mason.

    ------

    Food poverty it seems to me is caused by the stupidity of the poor people who have gotten themselves into the situation. It's not difficult to feed yourself or a family at all, lots of cheap stuff in supermarkets (basics or reduced to clear) or markets. If you're really that desperate, go dumpster diving.

    Lots of takeaways in poor areas still, might I add. It's simply laughable that typically so called "poor people" can't afford food. The woman in the above blog manages to feed herself and a baby for 28p a meal. You can pick up that much off the floor in town centres in less than an hour. No one is too poor to spend less than 30p to feed themselves.

    People who are too stupid to feed themselves is a bit like a fish that forgot to evolve gills.

    Maybe if people learnt to save a bit more, I have very little outgoing and can easily save around 50% of what I get if it wasn't my choice to spend it on nice things I want but not necessary to feed myself. People in much poorer countries manage to save a much higher % of their money. Why can't we?

    Also, even if the mother in the above blog is being clever now with her cheap recipes, she brought it on herself, by quitting a well paid night shift job as an telephone operator for the Emergency services and lumbering herself with a baby and not making much of her posh grammar school education she received.
    I have to agree with you that some people don't spend their money responsibly, and this is caused by a lack of education -many don't eat proper food, instead they waste it on junk food, fizzy drinks and snacks, which costs a hell of a lot more than Aldi pasta and sauce. It is down to a lack of education on how to spend wisely and save, I would say. For instance, people buying single crisp packets for 60p. I mean what a waste of money! Sadly, every programme I have seen on food poverty and food banks I have felt slightly uneasy about, and by the end I have felt very angry. One women said she couldn't afford food for the rest of the week- yet had a fancy set of acrylic nails (probably £35) and was shown with her blackberry smartphone, which are both very expensive luxuries. She also had a MacBook next to her. I just felt so angry that she had received £80 of groceries from a food bank (which she went to weekly), yet had just splashed her cash on luxuries. If you claim you can't afford food then you shouldn't own the latest smartphone, apple product, TV or false nails. I thought she should be so ashamed as someone could have really needed that food. To make it worse, she asked the staff to swap some of the food items for better ones! How cheeky! Many people would have really appreciated the food but no, she wasn't happy with the Victoria sponge cake and demanded chocolate. And the biscuits had to be Oreos. Sadly, all the other people filmed on the programme were very similar, i.e they all spent their money on luxuries so had no money for food left. One family even said they couldn't afford milk, but were filmed for Halloween with fireworks and sparklers! However, TV usually exaggerates/dramatizes things, and they're so many people/families out there who are actually struggle to put food on their plates.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisistheend)
    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...ain-jay-rayner

    ^^^ an article on food banks and poverty

    http://www.theguardian.com/society/2...modern-poverty

    ^^^ an article on someone feeding themselves so well in "poverty" that invited praise from Fortnum & Mason.

    ------

    Food poverty it seems to me is caused by the stupidity of the poor people who have gotten themselves into the situation. It's not difficult to feed yourself or a family at all, lots of cheap stuff in supermarkets (basics or reduced to clear) or markets. If you're really that desperate, go dumpster diving.

    Lots of takeaways in poor areas still, might I add. It's simply laughable that typically so called "poor people" can't afford food. The woman in the above blog manages to feed herself and a baby for 28p a meal. You can pick up that much off the floor in town centres in less than an hour. No one is too poor to spend less than 30p to feed themselves.

    People who are too stupid to feed themselves is a bit like a fish that forgot to evolve gills.

    Maybe if people learnt to save a bit more, I have very little outgoing and can easily save around 50% of what I get if it wasn't my choice to spend it on nice things I want but not necessary to feed myself. People in much poorer countries manage to save a much higher % of their money. Why can't we?

    Also, even if the mother in the above blog is being clever now with her cheap recipes, she brought it on herself, by quitting a well paid night shift job as an telephone operator for the Emergency services and lumbering herself with a baby and not making much of her posh grammar school education she received.
    I can only speak from personal experince, my mum is on benefits and she is an alcoholic we used a food bank once, if she didnt spend so much on booze we wouldnt of had to go. but idk what we would of done without the help
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zergonipal)
    Okay, the ignorance and callousness in this thread is making my head hurt. I've been following this woman's blog for a while. Perhaps I can clear up some misconceptions:



    If you read the Hunger Hurts post linked to in that article, you'll note that the crisis that inspired it was a bureaucratic screw-up that saw her left £100 short of housing benefit one month, with no warning. That might not sound like a lot to you or me, but when you live on a shoestring, with absolutely no cash to spare, any shortfall is a disaster. I don't think you appreciate that this woman had everything, every bill and cost and purchase, pared down to the absolute minimum and was still barely scraping by. Do you actually believe that Daily Mail crap about 'life on benefits' being some sort of easy ride?



    She quit her job because they wouldn't give her hours that let her look after her kid. And while it was a decent job for a single professional, it didn't pay enough for her to afford childcare on top of her other costs. What should she have done? Found a better-paid job? In this economy, when she has no qualifications past GCSE?



    I'd love to know where you think she's going to get the deposit and first month's rent for a new place.



    Oh I hate this argument. Seriously, you know plenty of people who've had kids. Go and ask them what it would take for them to give those kids up. I bet they all say, without exception, that there's nothing. Even better, if you ever have your own kids, ask yourself the same question.
    My parents have scrounged off the system all my life so I know it like the back of my hand.

    A landlord accepting Housing Benefits will not just kick you out. For one thing, it's illegal and another - it is common for a systematic review to force a person's benefits eligibility to be reconsidered and their payments suspended. Not a bureaucratic screw up - more a means to prevent people from abusing the system.

    You've cleared up no misconceptions but basically said that it's the state's responsibility in every case to nurture and maintain people.

    Whose fault is it that this woman has no qualifications past GCSE? It's not mine. It's not the government's - in fact FREE level 3 study is available. Lets stop making excuses and wake up and smell the coffee. Some people are lazy and don't want to work - they're going to complain and push for higher benefits all the time as they know this will be their only source of income for the rest of their lives.

    The children argument is nothing. A lot of women in these benefits lockdown positions have children purely for the benefits ... The accommodation etc. don't go about telling me these kids are their pride and joy.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ripper-Roo)
    :erm: With what money if they're just getting £56 to spend on the bare necessities? Suits are more expensive than that...
    No one mentioned suits - a shirt and tie would suffice. Besides there are grants that people on benefits have access to if they get an interview to cover both travel and clothing for that interview.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SFsucks)
    London?
    The majority of website jobs are "located" somewhere, but in fact are based somewhere else, so there's not a chance there are 371 jobs available.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    And she still can't afford to feed her child?

    Something is not right. I bet her rent is far too expensive and needs to move where she lives.

    Come back to me when she moves to a low-rent area.
    oh just go
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jam')
    My parents have scrounged off the system all my life so I know it like the back of my hand.

    A landlord accepting Housing Benefits will not just kick you out. For one thing, it's illegal and another - it is common for a systematic review to force a person's benefits eligibility to be reconsidered and their payments suspended. Not a bureaucratic screw up - more a means to prevent people from abusing the system.
    'Scrounged'. What a lovely word. So evocative. My mother 'scrounges off the system' too, and every time they have one of their 'systematic reviews' it's weeks of stress and uncertainty and trying to stretch her already-meagre budget even further. If that's how the system is designed to work, and not a screw-up, it's completely unfit for purpose.

    (Original post by Jam')
    You've cleared up no misconceptions but basically said that it's the state's responsibility in every case to nurture and maintain people.
    I believe the state has a duty to ensure a minimum standard of living, yes, and I'm willing to pay higher taxes if that's what it takes to pay for it. Seriously, what do you low-tax no-benefits people want? Destitute homeless people living in the streets 'because it's their own fault'? How can you earn decent money, live in comfort, yet begrudge others a roof over their heads?

    (Original post by Jam')
    Some people are lazy and don't want to work - they're going to complain and push for higher benefits all the time as they know this will be their only source of income for the rest of their lives.
    That some people on benefits are lazy I have no doubt. But why do you want to punish all of them for the excesses of a few?

    (Original post by Jam')
    The children argument is nothing. A lot of women in these benefits lockdown positions have children purely for the benefits ... The accommodation etc. don't go about telling me these kids are their pride and joy.
    Wow. Did you even read that before you posted it? You've actually just argued that 'the poor' don't love or value their kids, that they just have them 'for the benefits'. I hope I don't have to explain to you how offensive that is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's so easy to say what you are saying now. I think you would be saying completely different things if you were the one going through what this poor woman has had to endure.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jam')
    No one mentioned suits - a shirt and tie would suffice. Besides there are grants that people on benefits have access to if they get an interview to cover both travel and clothing for that interview.
    The jacket combination looks more professional, also shoes as well, so the cost adds up. The grants for suits and travel is a bit like big brother looking after you! If I was on benefits, I'd manage the money I get well, but I'd want to have the choice to be able to buy the suitable attire for job interviews, as suits are investments.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The thing is, one definition of poverty is lacking the financial means to make sensible financial decisions. It's the poverty trap, whereby you cant save money because as soon as you get it it goes out on bills. You can't buy in bulk because the immediate outlay is too steep, you can't take advantage of economies of scale and you actually end up wasting more money.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Don't think we can do much to change their opinions to be honest. What's the old saying? 'Haters gonna hate'.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by felixb)
    The thing is, one definition of poverty is lacking the financial means to make sensible financial decisions. It's the poverty trap, whereby you cant save money because as soon as you get it it goes out on bills. You can't buy in bulk because the immediate outlay is too steep, you can't take advantage of economies of scale and you actually end up wasting more money.
    They are often also too stupid to see it coming over the hill.

    that's the thing :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisistheend)
    see quote box
    Leaving a child without supervision is not only illegal in many circumstances (like oh, a young child) but dangerous. https://www.gov.uk/law-on-leaving-your-child-home-alone

    Making an ordinary house that safety-proof against childhood accidents would be incredibly expensive, and would not deal with any of the child's other needs for the eight to nine hours every working day. Food, toileting, emotional needs, etc.

    You can't leave a small child on their own for eight to nine hours each day! Not even at night. Suppose there was a fire! If she used to work for the fire service, I expect she's more aware than most of that.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 23, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.