Professor Green, living in poverty.

[sidicks]

desolate said:

I'll accept no criticism from the man who came up with "It's madness to think that someone on £18k p.a. is 'on the breadline' expect by choices of their own making."

So don't fking bother in future.

We've demonstrated above that someone on £18k is doing much more than 'just surviving'.

[sidicks]

SystemParanoia said:

now add a child or 3 to the mix ....

Why should someone on a low unskilled wage expect to be able to support one or more children singlehandedly?

We seem to have rapidly moved from 'someone on £18k is in abject poverty' to 'someone on £18k can't single-handedly afford to fund a large family'...

Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 26th September 16:22

[BoRED S2upid]

I do love a good old poverty thread on PH's! Most of the people on here haven't a clue how people get by on minimum wage the fact is millions do and are happy doing so they even manage to feed and clothe their children somehow. Yes their cars may be £500 bangers and they may go on holiday once every 2 or 3 years but they are probably happier than couples on £100k plus trying to keep up with their peers.

[anonymous-user]

sidicks said:

We've demonstrated above that someone on £18k is doing much more than 'just surviving'.

One bloke living in a flat on his own.

How about two kids becuase his Mrs is dead/fked off to suck the cock of someone richer?

Had to give up his job in accounts and now can only find this or got made redundant as his firm got taken over.

We can add on some benefits but it's not much return for an honest day's work is it?

He's living in Hereford remember so not exactly got a heaving metropolis to look for work in.

[sidicks]

BoRED S2upid said:

I do love a good old poverty thread on PH's! Most of the people on here haven't a clue how people get by on minimum wage the fact is millions do and are happy doing so they even manage to feed and clothe their children somehow. Yes their cars may be £500 bangers and they may go on holiday once every 2 or 3 years but they are probably happier than couples on £100k plus trying to keep up with their peers.

Indeed.

[BigMon]

BoRED S2upid said:

I do love a good old poverty thread on PH's! Most of the people on here haven't a clue how people get by on minimum wage the fact is millions do and are happy doing so they even manage to feed and clothe their children somehow. Yes their cars may be £500 bangers and they may go on holiday once every 2 or 3 years but they are probably happier than couples on £100k plus trying to keep up with their peers.

Indeed.

The point I was making (and that seems, somewhat bizarrely, to have been missed) was that it seems that a lot of people posting here earn far more than £18K a year (given their admittance of detached houses and Porsches) yet are insistent on telling everyone how easy it is to live on that salary!

I wonder what else they don't have experience of that they can tell us about?

[sidicks]

BigMon said:

Indeed.

The point I was making (and that seems, somewhat bizarrely, to have been missed) was that it seems that a lot of people posting here earn far more than £18K a year (given their admittance of detached houses and Porsches) yet are insistent on telling everyone how easy it is to live on that salary!

I wonder what else they don't have experience of that they can tell us about?

Who said it was easy? People said it was doable, and it clearly is.

[SystemParanoia]

sidicks said:

BigMon said:

Indeed.

The point I was making (and that seems, somewhat bizarrely, to have been missed) was that it seems that a lot of people posting here earn far more than £18K a year (given their admittance of detached houses and Porsches) yet are insistent on telling everyone how easy it is to live on that salary!

I wonder what else they don't have experience of that they can tell us about?

Who said it was easy? People said it was doable, and it clearly is.

Those same people also say they should do training and better themselves so they can earn more and be like them.

But with the figures shown on this thread, its not affordable to do that, not by a long shot; At the grunt level, employers wont pay for people to train as they can just get another grunt instead... its cheaper.

that's why its VERY difficult to rise out of being in such a position and you just end up bouncing sideways from job to job not making any progress in life.

[otolith]

SystemParanoia said:

sidicks said:

cqueen said:

Wahey, £50! Oh yeah I forgot, Tv license, Make that £35.

We are splitting hairs here, as you can see, on £18k in a stty 1 bed flat you're still flat out broke.

And yet still doing much more than 'surviving'.

now add a child or 3 to the mix ....

If you want to stop people impoverishing themselves by having children they can't afford to raise, you will need to put some pretty illiberal impositions on them.

[mattnovak]

I'd probably not have a Porsche or a detached house if I was on £18k PA, this is true. Or the Maserati, for that matter.

I did leave school at GCSE age though, and for a while worked manual jobs including a sham bricklaying 'apprenticeship'.. (oh, and trying to get in at ground level Fords, Dagenham where my Dad worked) for a while till the penny dropped and I had some admittedly good fortune / leveraged existing contacts that were doing better than me / took a few chances.

I'm not sure that during my formative years my parents were any better off than someone on £18k PA now.

[sidicks]

SystemParanoia said:

Those same people also say they should do training and better themselves so they can earn more and be like them.

More misrepresentation. I don't believe anyone has said any such thing.

SystemParanoia said:

But with the figures shown on this thread, its not affordable to do that, not by a long shot; At the grunt level, employers wont pay for people to train as they can just get another grunt instead... its cheaper.

that's why its VERY difficult to rise out of being in such a position and you just end up bouncing sideways from job to job not making any progress in life.

Education is freely available before you enter the world of work.

There are also government funded courses / evening classes available to improve your skills.

[BigMon]

sidicks said:

SystemParanoia said:

But with the figures shown on this thread, its not affordable to do that, not by a long shot; At the grunt level, employers wont pay for people to train as they can just get another grunt instead... its cheaper.

that's why its VERY difficult to rise out of being in such a position and you just end up bouncing sideways from job to job not making any progress in life.

Education is freely available before you enter the world of work.

There are also government funded courses / evening classes available to improve your skills.

Opportunities are there but the government has drastically reduced adult education funding so the likelihood is you would have to pay for your training (and possibly quite a bit too, not easy if you don't have much spare money or are having to work more than one job).

With regards to your first statement that is a bit 'black and white'. Someone may not do well at school for a whole raft of reasons (not just because they're a lazy little st, though that may be true as well of course).

I agree there is no easy solution to any of this and I'm not advocating hand outs for all, but as SystemParanoia points out above, the obstacles shouldn't be underestimated if you're 'stuck in a rut' earning a low salary.

[johnwilliams77]

So are we all agreeing that these people should never have had kids in the first place? Why would you bring kids into poverty/misery? It's just a vicious cycle of breeding poor people.

[anonymous-user]

otolith said:

If you want to stop people impoverishing themselves by having children they can't afford to raise, you will need to put some pretty illiberal impositions on them.

If the kids came before the poverty, is that OK or not?

[sidicks]

BigMon said:

Opportunities are there but the government has drastically reduced adult education funding so the likelihood is you would have to pay for your training (and possibly quite a bit too, not easy if you don't have much spare money or are having to work more than one job).

With regards to your first statement that is a bit 'black and white'. Someone may not do well at school for a whole raft of reasons (not just because they're a lazy little st, though that may be true as well of course).

Agreed. There will always be exceptions. But budgets and support need to focus on the majority of cases, not the minority.

BigMon said:

I agree there is no easy solution to any of this and I'm not advocating hand outs for all, but as SystemParanoia points out above, the obstacles shouldn't be underestimated if you're 'stuck in a rut' earning a low salary.

Of course, but the starting point is to avoid getting into the situation in the first place.

[Zoon]

I know a couple who don't work out of choice, they have four kids.

One has a minor mental disability, they live in a large 6 bedroom rented house that the government/benefits pay for.

They have two cars, top of the range phones and full sky package in most rooms of the house.

They usually get at least one all inclusive holiday abroad in a year.

Are they surviving?

[johnwilliams77]

Zoon said:

I know a couple who don't work out of choice, they have four kids.

One has a minor mental disability, they live in a large 6 bedroom rented house that the government/benefits pay for.

They have two cars, top of the range phones and full sky package in most rooms of the house.

They usually get at least one all inclusive holiday abroad in a year.

Are they surviving?

No, it appears, like thousands of others - they're playing the system and extracting the urine.

[otolith]

desolate said:

otolith said:

If you want to stop people impoverishing themselves by having children they can't afford to raise, you will need to put some pretty illiberal impositions on them.

If the kids came before the poverty, is that OK or not?

It's not a matter of OK or not OK, it's simply that whatever you do, some people will put having more kids in front of having a decent standard of living. If you ensure that the minimum income is enough to raise a couple, some people will have four. Unless you get into a situation where you just keep upping their income for more kids (in which case they'll have six) there are some people who will make those choices and you can't easily stop them.

[johnwilliams77]

otolith said:

It's not a matter of OK or not OK, it's simply that whatever you do, some people will put having more kids in front of having a decent standard of living. If you ensure that the minimum income is enough to raise a couple, some people will have four. Unless you get into a situation where you just keep upping their income for more kids (in which case they'll have six) there are some people who will make those choices and you can't easily stop them.

Jesus christ - 36mins in. Angering. Poor little girl (10 yr old) in a mess (has to pinch herself to handle how she feels) because their parents put 'having kids' first.

[anonymous-user]

PistonBroker said:

It was a very distressing programme.

My wife was happily shouting at the TV, but I couldn't help but take a step back and wonder how we fix it.

I was shocked when Tyler whipped an iPhone out. It was sad to see that his mother wasn't making any attempt to keep the place clean. I guess depression? I had a paper round at his age which would be something more than nothing. But then I was born middle-class and lived in the country so I can't even understand their struggles.

What really hit me was the 10yo girl. She reminded me of my own 10yo daughter and it was sad to see how she seemed just as intelligent and well-mannered. But what's going to become of her? We can blame the parents, but that doesn't fix the problem.

All very sad and rooted in our education system I think. I'm sure school attempted to teach those mothers algebra when all they really needed was basic money management skills etc.

The top bits were my first thoughts and I don't know how we fix it, it was harsh on that poor 10yo kid being moved from house to house and not knowing where she will be and having no stability and using a shared 'stinking' kitchen,
I grew up in a council house after being moved out in the late 60's slum clearances, also being left 'dumped' on the dss counter once as my parents both working couldn't afford to feed me and my sister over the weekend, I also started paper rounds at the age of 11 etc and am doing OK at the moment but it seems a bit desperate in a country of this standing that there were parents in tears on the programme that were worried they would lose their children due to poverty.

SystemParanoia said:

sidicks said:

BigMon said:

Indeed.
The point I was making (and that seems, somewhat bizarrely, to have been missed) was that it seems that a lot of people posting here earn far more than £18K a year (given their admittance of detached houses and Porsches) yet are insistent on telling everyone how easy it is to live on that salary!

I wonder what else they don't have experience of that they can tell us about?

Who said it was easy? People said it was doable, and it clearly is.

Those same people also say they should do training and better themselves so they can earn more and be like them.

But with the figures shown on this thread, its not affordable to do that, not by a long shot; At the grunt level, employers wont pay for people to train as they can just get another grunt instead... its cheaper.

that's why its VERY difficult to rise out of being in such a position and you just end up bouncing sideways from job to job not making any progress in life.

There's not much to say really some people get it how harsh and difficult it must be, especially for the children who have no control over their parents choices and those on here who seem to think '"i'm all right jack, fook everyone else" telling them what to do from their ivory tower.