The re-emergence of absolute poverty in Britain

[joe_bloggs*]

Something terrible is slowly happening across the face of Britain.   We are seeing the return of absolute levels of poverty which have not existed on this scale since the Victorial age over a century ago.   Relative poverty is when people can’t afford the comforts and enjoyments which most people have, but absolute poverty is when people haven’t the money to pay for even their most basic needs.

The evidence is all around us.   There are now over 300 food-banks in Britain, and the number is rising every week.  

The Red Cross is setting up centres to help the destitute, just as they do in developing countries.   A new study published this week shows that even in prosperous area of the country like London, more than a quarter of the population are now living in poverty.   And a new scary fact is steadily emerging: an increasing number of these poverty households are not dependent on benefits, but where someone is at work.

In the north the first of the Northern Housing Consortium’s surveys just published presents a devastating picture.   It is based on 74 househoolds, a small sample but one which broadly reflects all households living in the social rented sector.   It reveals that two-thirds, after paying for rent and food and other essential bills, end up each week with less than £10 left, whilst more than a third end up with nothing at all.   A quarter can only afford £20 or less on food per week – how many of the rest of us could survive on that?  

http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/2013/10/the-re-emergence-of-absolute-poverty-in-britain/

[bankhaunter]

The bit about the chap with the three days work, illustrates the problem unemployed have if they are honest and do do any odd bits of work when and where they can.

The system actually seves as an incentive to do little more than keep your nose clean where the job centre is concerned.

[tommy.irene]

I thing if you went to some of their houses ,,you would find them smoking and watching TV..

[papko]

Exactly Tommy

 they are wasters for a reason

 They do "less " work , they "have no time " , and through various deficienceis associated with i

 n-breeding , they are quite unable to move to a place where there is more work , or start some kind of business where they are ?

 i wish our resident "Saints "

 Joe Bloggs and Banks , would actually live on a council estate , and see for themselves what the British working people have become . 

[joe_bloggs*]

They're now rounding the poorest up for council tax charges

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/oct/18/thousands-court-council-tax

If they don't pay-Baliffs turn up,then next eviction,what a horrible nasty country the UK has become,of course it only happens to the scroungers doesn't it?

Good old tories,true to form

[ginap.123]

In this country we have welfare for those that need it (& those that abuse it).
Family A can get £x in benefit etc & survive. Family B can get the same amount and struggle. It's all down to sorting priorities and money management.
One woman on TV last week using the food bank had several (very young) kids, said she had struggled for years but managed to afford
clothes which were not cheap, a recently done hair-do that was not cheap & enough make-up & false eyelashes to sink a battleship. Also had long manicured & painted nails that looked as if they had never done a days work, adorned with plenty of bling & enough gold chains round her neck to rattle. Buggy her kid was in wasn't cheap either.

[blackburn_stevie]

Here is something that I don't understand.

A woman turns up at a Benefits Office in one of the most expensive areas of London saying that she has no job, no family apart from her 3 kids and has just arrived here from (insert any country between Morocco and Taiwan). After a while, she gets to move into a house, apartment or flat sufficient to her needs. She pays, no rent, no Council tax and gets cash to buy the necessities for her and her kids.

My question is this. If she has no family living in Britain and no job, why does she have to live in the most expensive areas of Britain? Why can she not be given a coach ticket to an area where the cost of living, and subsequently the cost to the tax payer, is less. Can anybody explain why that doesn't happen?

And before you all jump on me, I know that the scenario described is a Daily Mail view of life but it DOES happen now and then.

[tommy.irene]

---

@blackburn_stevie wrote:

Here is something that I don't understand.

A woman turns up at a Benefits Office in one of the most expensive areas of London saying that she has no job, no family apart from her 3 kids and has just arrived here from (insert any country between Morocco and Taiwan). After a while, she gets to move into a house, apartment or flat sufficient to her needs. She pays, no rent, no Council tax and gets cash to buy the necessities for her and her kids.

My question is this. If she has no family living in Britain and no job, why does she have to live in the most expensive areas of Britain? Why can she not be given a coach ticket to an area where the cost of living, and subsequently the cost to the tax payer, is less. Can anybody explain why that doesn't happen?

And before you all jump on me, I know that the scenario described is a Daily Mail view of life but it DOES happen now and then.

---

It happens all the time..

[Anonymous]

Welcome to camorons britain. somebody voted them in, thank god i did not.

[tommy.irene]

Buy now and you'll really pay later: The 'on tick' chain of stores making millions selling £3,400 TVs to Britain's poorest families - at eyewatering interest rates

The baying of Jeremy Kyle’s studio audience almost drowns out the voice of the BrightHouse sales assistant, suddenly perky at the sight of my interest in an LG 47in Smart 3D TV on full volume.

‘Can I help you?’ she yells. But the information I need is on a small placard carefully placed at the foot of the set.

I can buy this TV now for £1,788.15, it says, or pay £22 a week for 156 weeks at 64.7 per cent interest. That’s a total cost of £3,432; almost double.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2466755/Buy-youll-really-pay-later-The-tick-chain-stores-mak... 

[captainbovine]

everyone seems to forget the couples like us who have never had children but still feel the pinch. We cannot claim for anything because we don't have kids, we even both work but are just £2 over the limit for tax credits.

We have had to work hard for everything we have, we've never smoked, or gone on expensive holidays but still find it a struggle.

[cee-dee]

People are MAD paying that much for a TV.

A widescreen TV went unsold at auction so I offered them a tenner for it.

[bankhaunter]

The article doesn't say that poor people were buying expensive TVs, only that it was possible for them to do so.

Many people are probably able to easily buy things on credit they could not afford to actually pay for, I certainly could but that doesn't mean I do.

[blackburn_stevie]

Personally, I think that the best thing we ever did, apart from getting married, was the day that we won just over £2,000 on the Lottery. We paid off our 3 credit cards and one store card and then cut the cards up. We now have a Debit card with zero overdraft and we have never been better off. Giving up smoking and not going to the Bingo also helped. 

We now have cash in the bank, slowly building up, and we are quite happy to think that if we want something, we can have it only if we have the money to buy it outright. 

[bankhaunter]

I finding almost funny that I now have probably the highest credit rating I have ever had and the least need for it.

[Anonymous]

Well now that we all have had a taste of camorons britain, i just wonder who will vote for him next time around?:

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Well now that we all have had a taste of camorons britain, i just wonder who will vote for him next time around?:

---

33,973 voted for him at the last election - I suspect that he will get a similar number of votes at the nect election.

[tommy.irene]

'We we want a bigger home for our TEN kids (and pet python)': Couple on £32,000 a year in benefits demand larger council home for their growing family

• Father-of-nine Lee Miller has worked for just nine months of his adult life
• He had his benefits cut because he does not apply for enough jobs
• His family want to swap three-bed home for a five-bedroom property
• Their squalid three-bedroom property is filled with damp
• Five children share one bedroom and they suffer from respiratory problems because of the mould
• Family have three televisions, Sky Plus HD, a Playstation 3 and an Nintendo Wii in their cramped property
  

An unemployed couple with nine children who claim £32,000 a year in benefits are demanding a bigger council house - because they are expecting their 10th child.

Jobless Lee Miller and Natalie Cann - who have a pet python - want their local authority to swap their three-bedroom property for a five-bedroom home before their latest child arrives.

The couple currently live in ‘cramped and appalling’ conditions in Bournemouth, Dorset, with their five sons and four daughters.

Their 10th child is due in five months and they are suggesting they withhold £253 of taxpayers’ money they contribute to their monthly rent if they are not rehoused.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2471453/Couple-32-000-year-benefits-demand-bigger-council-ho... 

[bankhaunter]

And that is a good example of what exactly?

Are they typical of the average family?

[tommy.irene]

It shows that people wont starve in the UK.