Millions have saving of less than £100
Discussion
Audemars said:
People with no savings should definitely not have a car, an iphone nor eat out. They shouldn't even be getting a bus to places but walking 100% of the distance.
Absolutely shocking how some people live (especially those that work).
Absolutely shocking how some people live (especially those that work).
Almost as shocking as unsubstantiated sarcy hype, but not quite.
It's for every individual to choose their preferred way of living ideally within the law and preferably in a manner that causes others no harm in any way. That's the problem though; it would be entirely their business as well, undeserving of comment, if folks took responsibility for their actions and others weren't forced to pick up the tab via taxes when it all goes titten nach oben in an avoidable manner.
turbobloke said:
Audemars said:
People with no savings should definitely not have a car, an iphone nor eat out. They shouldn't even be getting a bus to places but walking 100% of the distance.
Absolutely shocking how some people live (especially those that work).
Absolutely shocking how some people live (especially those that work).
Almost as shocking as unsubstantiated sarcy hype, but not quite.
It's for every individual to choose their preferred way of living ideally within the law and preferably in a manner that causes others no harm in any way. That's the problem though; it would be entirely their business as well, undeserving of comment, if folks took responsibility for their actions and others weren't forced to pick up the tab via taxes when it all goes titten nach oben in an avoidable manner.
sparks_E39 said:
Ari said:
RYH64E said:
Take home pay on £100k is only £65k, less rent, travel and other costs, doesn't leave a huge amount when rents are London rents.
I love Pistonheads! 
TheLordJohn said:
Is there anything worse than the idiot who wants to pay for a £1.80 steak bake in Greggs on a debit card!?
No. That boils my blood as well because it makes the queue four times slower than it need be; esp. given there is a pair ATMs right along-side the front door Greggs I've been using recently.They also always seem to kick off when it doesn't work or they are subject to a charge or minimum spend to cover the card fees.
Dr Jekyll said:
sparks_E39 said:
Ari said:
RYH64E said:
Take home pay on £100k is only £65k, less rent, travel and other costs, doesn't leave a huge amount when rents are London rents.
I love Pistonheads! GT03ROB said:
4x4Tyke said:
[quote]... From 1998 to 2010, approximately 800,000 children in the UK were lifted above that poverty line, largely because of policies designed to do so. But progress is fragile. Over the past five years 500,000 have slumped back in. The Institute of Fiscal Studies forecasts that by the end of this parliament the number will have climbed back to its late-1990s peak, despite legally binding targets to reduce child poverty.
That is a shameful statistic. Politicians paying lip service to the goal while spectacularly failing to deliver it might be jolted into action by the fact that their abject performance is costing the taxpayer huge sums of money. According to one recent analysis, dealing with the consequences of child poverty directly costs the UK government £15 billion a year, £3 billion more than in 2008.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23230933-40...
That is a shameful statistic. Politicians paying lip service to the goal while spectacularly failing to deliver it might be jolted into action by the fact that their abject performance is costing the taxpayer huge sums of money. According to one recent analysis, dealing with the consequences of child poverty directly costs the UK government £15 billion a year, £3 billion more than in 2008.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23230933-40...
........ aside from which poverty is defined as a percentage of median income, which mean there will always be the same number in poverty.
Edited by GT03ROB on Sunday 2nd October 09:12
Which is a shame, because I agree with the sentiment, very much so. A bad metric does no one any favours, at least no one honest. But that has to be called out as bulls
t and basic statistical ignorance.paranoid airbag said:
GT03ROB said:
4x4Tyke said:
[quote]... From 1998 to 2010, approximately 800,000 children in the UK were lifted above that poverty line, largely because of policies designed to do so. But progress is fragile. Over the past five years 500,000 have slumped back in. The Institute of Fiscal Studies forecasts that by the end of this parliament the number will have climbed back to its late-1990s peak, despite legally binding targets to reduce child poverty.
That is a shameful statistic. Politicians paying lip service to the goal while spectacularly failing to deliver it might be jolted into action by the fact that their abject performance is costing the taxpayer huge sums of money. According to one recent analysis, dealing with the consequences of child poverty directly costs the UK government £15 billion a year, £3 billion more than in 2008.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23230933-40...
That is a shameful statistic. Politicians paying lip service to the goal while spectacularly failing to deliver it might be jolted into action by the fact that their abject performance is costing the taxpayer huge sums of money. According to one recent analysis, dealing with the consequences of child poverty directly costs the UK government £15 billion a year, £3 billion more than in 2008.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23230933-40...
....... and the relevance is???
........ aside from which poverty is defined as a percentage of median income, which mean there will always be the same number in poverty.
Edited by GT03ROB on Sunday 2nd October 09:12
Which is a shame, because I agree with the sentiment, very much so. A bad metric does no one any favours, at least no one honest. But that has to be called out as bulls
t and basic statistical ignorance.GT03ROB said:
You may well be right regarding my maths! However anything that is expressed relative to an average has got to be iffy. Using this definition all I need to do to take people out of poverty is reduce the income of the rest of the population! This definition of poverty is one that is based in envy & politics not reality.
... whilst the Gini coefficient is interesting it again is a relative index, whereby you can seemingly achieve good results (reducing disparities) by reducing income of the bulk, with no change at the bottom. It is interesting that in the article you link to it states this particular coefficient gives the same result for Holland & Bangladesh which kind of demonstrates whilst my grasp of statistics may not be great, my grasp of realities might be better. 
Edited by GT03ROB on Wednesday 5th October 05:53
Edited by GT03ROB on Wednesday 5th October 06:37
4x4Tyke said:
TheLordJohn said:
Is there anything worse than the idiot who wants to pay for a £1.80 steak bake in Greggs on a debit card!?
No. That boils my blood as well because it makes the queue four times slower than it need be; esp. given there is a pair ATMs right along-side the front door Greggs I've been using recently.They also always seem to kick off when it doesn't work or they are subject to a charge or minimum spend to cover the card fees.
contactless means that the debit card transaction takes virtually no time at all.
has gone from...
Cashier presses button for correct purchase, fish around for the money, hand it over, wait for cashier to be able to work out what you have given them, check the notes aren't counterfeit, type in the cash given, take the money out of the till, return it and wait for you to restash it in your purse/wallet.
to...
cashier presses button for correct purchase, I touch my card on the reader. I put the card back in my wallet/pocket.
and where has minimum spend anymore? are you living in the 90s?
55palfers said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37504449
That is a genuinely scary statistic.
No wonder Wonga and the like seem to be so busy.
I had £100 stolen from my house recently. I left it in an envelope in the bureau in my study. I strongly suspect my new sommelier who I only appointed 3 weeks ago.That is a genuinely scary statistic.
No wonder Wonga and the like seem to be so busy.
TheLordJohn said:
Oakey said:
The idiot that wants to pay for his steak bake with a £20?
Personally, i'd use two 1 pound coins...Where do you get the two pound coins from?
In the past you'd have got them from spending a note, but for lots of people anything over a few quid goes on the card, so you've got to spend cash on larger things to have the £2 in change in the first place.
If you tend to favour cards, when you go to Greggs you either have to spend a note, which is too big, too flash, whatever, or use your card, which appears to annoy people too.
Personally I would take my cue from the retailers. Who was one of the first chains to install contactless in all their stores? Greggs.
Cash is a pain for retailers, it costs as much for them to deal with as card payments, it creates more risk as it can be diverted before it hits the banks and it requires more work to audit and account for. Contactless is quicker that cash too, requires no messing around with change and the potential for mistakes there.
Similarly, if you track your finances using software, getting as many transactions onto your bank statement as possible, rather than undocumented cash, makes that much easier and more accurate.
Years ago when I was still at school I worked for a guy who owned a Mitsubishi dealer, this was back when the Shogun was a popular car and about when the 3000GT came out. He'd started from almost nothing, he liked to make out he earned his first million in the '60s before he was 21 by gambling on the horses. I always took that to mean he'd been a gangster of some sort as its not easy to turn a legitimate, long term profit from gambling without some sort of cheating going on.
I worked at the garage and later at his rather large home to help look after his horses. I remember his wife always wanted a Mercedes, wasn't too fussed which one, just fancied one. He wouldn't buy her a Merc, instead made her work in his accounts department and save up for it herself. She ended up buying a rather nice second hand E Class in doom blue. Meanwhile he had a nearly new S Class every few years and sold a rather large horse RV thing (which I had to clean) to Noel Edmonds (who came in his helicopter) because it was too slow on the autobahn.
When he retired he sold the dealership and it was converted into an swanky Audi dealership, but what stuck with me was that he gave all the long standing staff a big payout, far bigger than the redundancy that they were entitled to. Up to that point everybody thought he was a tight as anything.
Anyway, he taught me a lot about money, far more than my feckless spendaholic father. Money is a wonderful tool but make sure you know how to use it, otherwise it'll use you.
I worked at the garage and later at his rather large home to help look after his horses. I remember his wife always wanted a Mercedes, wasn't too fussed which one, just fancied one. He wouldn't buy her a Merc, instead made her work in his accounts department and save up for it herself. She ended up buying a rather nice second hand E Class in doom blue. Meanwhile he had a nearly new S Class every few years and sold a rather large horse RV thing (which I had to clean) to Noel Edmonds (who came in his helicopter) because it was too slow on the autobahn.
When he retired he sold the dealership and it was converted into an swanky Audi dealership, but what stuck with me was that he gave all the long standing staff a big payout, far bigger than the redundancy that they were entitled to. Up to that point everybody thought he was a tight as anything.
Anyway, he taught me a lot about money, far more than my feckless spendaholic father. Money is a wonderful tool but make sure you know how to use it, otherwise it'll use you.
S10GTA said:
But you have a house which you own a good percentage of. Same as me.
I own a very small percentage of it, and if anything went wrong with it, I'd be up st creek. Not having savings isn't a choice I've made, it's just the way it is.What I could do is flog some cars quick sharp, if s
t hit the fan.paulrockliffe said:
Similarly, if you track your finances using software, getting as many transactions onto your bank statement as possible, rather than undocumented cash, makes that much easier and more accurate.
Are you on crack? When I withdraw £100, my account shows £100 less than it used to...As oppose to when my mrs spends £150 on my debit card and it takes 3 days to show up on my online banking.
TheLordJohn said:
paulrockliffe said:
Similarly, if you track your finances using software, getting as many transactions onto your bank statement as possible, rather than undocumented cash, makes that much easier and more accurate.
Are you on crack? When I withdraw £100, my account shows £100 less than it used to...As oppose to when my mrs spends £150 on my debit card and it takes 3 days to show up on my online banking.
Kitchski said:
S10GTA said:
But you have a house which you own a good percentage of. Same as me.
I own a very small percentage of it, and if anything went wrong with it, I'd be up st creek. Not having savings isn't a choice I've made, it's just the way it is.What I could do is flog some cars quick sharp, if s
t hit the fan.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff