UN to investigate extreme poverty in the UK
Discussion
kurt535 said:
Some genuinely sad responses on here mocking the real poverty that exists in our country. Shame on you. It’s amazing how certain threads on PH draw scum in who revel in their assumed superiority over others.
Do you know anyone in real poverty? Do they have access to food, water, shelter, education? Do they have a mobile phone.There are definitely people going through hardship, however nobody is denied the basics.
Some people mock, because others try to liken being poor in the UK to genuine poverty. If you want to see real poverty you will need to travel abroad.
Speak to one of those people and tell them that in the UK you can just arrive at your local council office saying you are homeless and they will provide you with accomodation. You will be given money even if you choose not to work. You will be educated at no cost, and any hospital in the country will give you treatment at no cost. They would rightly be amazed that such generosity exists.
andy_s said:
I didn't realise the report was already written; https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/nov/16/uk...
Lol it is an excerpt from the Guardian, so will be as accurate and factual as an article from Viz. Prof Phillip Alston said:
...He told a press conference in London:
So no irony at all when he initially described the situation as "austerity policies driven by a political desire to undertake social re-engineering rather than economic necessity."- 'Austerity' Britain was in breach of four UN human rights agreements relating to women, children, disabled people and economic and social rights. “If you got a group of misogynists in a room and said how can we make this system work for men and not for women they would not have come up with too many ideas that are not already in place,” he said.
- The limit on benefits payments to only the first two children in a family was “in the same ballpark” as China’s one-child policy because it punished people who had a third child.
- Cuts of 50% to council budgets were slashing at Britain’s “culture of local concern” and “damaging the fabric” of society.
- The middle classes would “find themselves living in an increasingly hostile and unwelcoming society because community roots are being broken”.
Edited by andy_s on Friday 16th November 20:40
Sorry Viz.
I knew there would be one or two on here bringing up the 'mocking poverty' thing. What we need to do is firstly differentiate between extreme poverty, poverty, or perceived poverty.
In most cases, as I witness on the local news. There are certain tick boxes these people in poverty always seem to fulfill.
Obese - yes
Claiming they can't feed their kids - yes
Tattoo's - yes
iPhone or smart phone on contract - most probably
Latest trainers - most probably
Nails done - yes
Hair dyed - yes
Piercings - yes
In one case. A child was running around in a collab pair of Nike Air Max. RRP £165, but resale value, near to £400.
Why is it that, from what I can see, don't these social workers or others involved say "How can you afford x, y or z if you're so poor or why can't you feed your kids properly when you're so obese?"
We need to get much tougher on people and ask these 'difficult' questions to free up money for those in genuine extreme poverty.
In most cases, as I witness on the local news. There are certain tick boxes these people in poverty always seem to fulfill.
Obese - yes
Claiming they can't feed their kids - yes
Tattoo's - yes
iPhone or smart phone on contract - most probably
Latest trainers - most probably
Nails done - yes
Hair dyed - yes
Piercings - yes
In one case. A child was running around in a collab pair of Nike Air Max. RRP £165, but resale value, near to £400.
Why is it that, from what I can see, don't these social workers or others involved say "How can you afford x, y or z if you're so poor or why can't you feed your kids properly when you're so obese?"
We need to get much tougher on people and ask these 'difficult' questions to free up money for those in genuine extreme poverty.
TaylotS2K said:
I knew there would be one or two on here bringing up the 'mocking poverty' thing. What we need to do is firstly differentiate between extreme poverty, poverty, or perceived poverty.
In most cases, as I witness on the local news. There are certain tick boxes these people in poverty always seem to fulfill.
Obese - yes
Claiming they can't feed their kids - yes
Tattoo's - yes
iPhone or smart phone on contract - most probably
Latest trainers - most probably
Nails done - yes
Hair dyed - yes
Piercings - yes
In one case. A child was running around in a collab pair of Nike Air Max. RRP £165, but resale value, near to £400.
Why is it that, from what I can see, don't these social workers or others involved say "How can you afford x, y or z if you're so poor or why can't you feed your kids properly when you're so obese?"
We need to get much tougher on people and ask these 'difficult' questions to free up money for those in genuine extreme poverty.
I agree there's an obvious distinction between poverty and bad parenting and lack of responsibility.In most cases, as I witness on the local news. There are certain tick boxes these people in poverty always seem to fulfill.
Obese - yes
Claiming they can't feed their kids - yes
Tattoo's - yes
iPhone or smart phone on contract - most probably
Latest trainers - most probably
Nails done - yes
Hair dyed - yes
Piercings - yes
In one case. A child was running around in a collab pair of Nike Air Max. RRP £165, but resale value, near to £400.
Why is it that, from what I can see, don't these social workers or others involved say "How can you afford x, y or z if you're so poor or why can't you feed your kids properly when you're so obese?"
We need to get much tougher on people and ask these 'difficult' questions to free up money for those in genuine extreme poverty.
I think all people are saying is that whilst what you've described above happens a lot, there is also genuine poverty in the UK and yes, it's relative, but it's relative anywhere you live.
It's a bit like telling someone on minimum wage "Well you make more than someone in Vietnam", it's irrelevent if you live in the UK because the bar isn't what happens in Vietnam.
Riley Blue said:
Poverty, especially child poverty, is no laughing matter. My O/H has dealt with it in the past and it can be heartbreaking; one boy of seven or eight was asked what would make a big change to his life. His reply, "An alarm clock because then I wouldn't be late for school and not get in to trouble." She discovered his parents were alcoholics who stayed in bed most of the time and didn't have money to feed him, it all went on booze.
So scoff away, it's a real problem even in the UK and probably not far from where you live.
Couldn't he just set the alarm on his iPhone?So scoff away, it's a real problem even in the UK and probably not far from where you live.
Coolbanana said:
and loan sharks who prey upon the poor need to educate themselves in the difference between poverty in the UK and "extreme poverty" in a worldwide context, the alleviation of which is part of the mission of the UN . Coolbanana said:
That's on the smug side. Your post content applies to your post - neat irony.The uselessness of relative poverty as a metric, which is what's at the link (Wiki, a non-source in any case) has been explained several times.
From observation, lacking three items doesn't include a smartphone, trainers or a pet dog.
Your last journey through an area of actual poverty e.g. rural N Thailand was when exactly?
After that revelation, a reminder of which part of the UK is equivalent would be welcome.
Coolbanana said:
If you define poverty as anyone below the 60%, then 'poverty' will always exist; it's a meaningless metric. Much of what is written (one of the most poorly written, one-sided pages I've seen on Wiki) has little to do with finance and a lot to do with how dumb some people are. When you see 'A doctor claims it is not unusual for up to seven people to live in a one bedroom flat.' you know you've been hyperbolised.I certainly wouldn't "mock" those that are destitute (see UN definition). I reserve the right to mock the incompetent fools that are today's Labour leaders.
Meanwhile, poverty crusaders should reflect on the distinction between self inflicted poverty ("I spent my benefits on fags and scratch cards, now I have to use a food bank") and poverty caused by the badly implemented Universal Credit scheme. Even the latter is nowhere near "destitute".
Philip Alston seems unable to tell the difference, or the true meaning of destitute.. He's an imbecile.
Meanwhile, poverty crusaders should reflect on the distinction between self inflicted poverty ("I spent my benefits on fags and scratch cards, now I have to use a food bank") and poverty caused by the badly implemented Universal Credit scheme. Even the latter is nowhere near "destitute".
Philip Alston seems unable to tell the difference, or the true meaning of destitute.. He's an imbecile.
andy_s said:
Coolbanana said:
If you define poverty as anyone below the 60%, then 'poverty' will always exist; it's a meaningless metric. Much of what is written (one of the most poorly written, one-sided pages I've seen on Wiki) has little to do with finance and a lot to do with how dumb some people are. When you see 'A doctor claims it is not unusual for up to seven people to live in a one bedroom flat.' you know you've been hyperbolised.There are a lot of complex issues that have lead us to the current state of affairs, not agreeing with the UN chap at all but to pretend this country doesn't have big problems is pretty deluded.
I grew up on a council estate through the late 80s. Honestly out of the 800 houses there was only perhaps 3 families that fit into the benefit scrounger mould (and they were real nightmare families). Most people were decent hard working families and I guess many would have been receiving some kind of benefit over the past 3 decades. However some important points I was aware of then have only got much worse over the past 3 decades.
Housing for one, the social housing trap is an insanity this country has inflicted in itself. Why don't they get on their bikes and go where the work is? With unaffordable private housing and no social housing to move to its an insane trap no government has had the will to tackle. Successive governments were content to just right off millions of their own people, just leave them in the sink towns/estates where they are, any honest person can see it for what it is, out of site out of mind.
Secondly the right wing press in this country has never let up in its attack on working class people, their filth has run so deep into our culture and discourse that even that idiot Labour MP Emily Thornberry joined in:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-em...
The result is endless nonsense repeated on here sadly at the drop of the hat, there all benefit scroungers etc. etc. I bet many of you now looking at that man will instantly think football hooligan, thug etc. etc. for no other reason than the van and how he looks.
Thirdly and this criticism is aimed at both parties, politicians have this incredible delusion that they can fix things by reorganising how benefits and services are delivered. New Labour did it with their tax credit system that ended up subsidising profit rich retailers, Tories are doing it now with their Universal Credit panacea. All politicians fail to ask themselves basic questions such as, if the current system is badly managed, why would one expect a different system managed by the same people to result in better management? History seems to be providing pretty solid evidence that reorganisation just results in burning the money on the reorganisation and practically no net benefit.
I grew up on a council estate through the late 80s. Honestly out of the 800 houses there was only perhaps 3 families that fit into the benefit scrounger mould (and they were real nightmare families). Most people were decent hard working families and I guess many would have been receiving some kind of benefit over the past 3 decades. However some important points I was aware of then have only got much worse over the past 3 decades.
Housing for one, the social housing trap is an insanity this country has inflicted in itself. Why don't they get on their bikes and go where the work is? With unaffordable private housing and no social housing to move to its an insane trap no government has had the will to tackle. Successive governments were content to just right off millions of their own people, just leave them in the sink towns/estates where they are, any honest person can see it for what it is, out of site out of mind.
Secondly the right wing press in this country has never let up in its attack on working class people, their filth has run so deep into our culture and discourse that even that idiot Labour MP Emily Thornberry joined in:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-em...
The result is endless nonsense repeated on here sadly at the drop of the hat, there all benefit scroungers etc. etc. I bet many of you now looking at that man will instantly think football hooligan, thug etc. etc. for no other reason than the van and how he looks.
Thirdly and this criticism is aimed at both parties, politicians have this incredible delusion that they can fix things by reorganising how benefits and services are delivered. New Labour did it with their tax credit system that ended up subsidising profit rich retailers, Tories are doing it now with their Universal Credit panacea. All politicians fail to ask themselves basic questions such as, if the current system is badly managed, why would one expect a different system managed by the same people to result in better management? History seems to be providing pretty solid evidence that reorganisation just results in burning the money on the reorganisation and practically no net benefit.
NJH said:
There are a lot of complex issues that have lead us to the current state of affairs, not agreeing with the UN chap at all but to pretend this country doesn't have big problems is pretty deluded.
Problems exist and always will. You were brought up in the 80s. I can remember sitting on the loo at the bottom of the garden! The problem here is saying the words 'extreme poverty in the UK'. That is f
king laughable. Half the world that can get up on its feet head in one direction, to this tiny island. Why?THIS is the result of extreme poverty. It doesn't happen here.
NJH said:
Secondly the right wing press in this country has never let up in its attack on working class people, their filth has run so deep into our culture and discourse that even that idiot Labour MP Emily Thornberry joined in:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-em...
The result is endless nonsense repeated on here sadly at the drop of the hat, there all benefit scroungers etc. etc. I bet many of you now looking at that man will instantly think football hooligan, thug etc. etc. for no other reason than the van and how he looks.
Thirdly and this criticism is aimed at both parties, politicians have this incredible delusion that they can fix things by reorganising how benefits and services are delivered. New Labour did it with their tax credit system that ended up subsidising profit rich retailers, Tories are doing it now with their Universal Credit panacea. All politicians fail to ask themselves basic questions such as, if the current system is badly managed, why would one expect a different system managed by the same people to result in better management? History seems to be providing pretty solid evidence that reorganisation just results in burning the money on the reorganisation and practically no net benefit.
I think the right wing press is fairly well balanced with the left wing press, and as you allude to in your 3rd point, both are as bad as one another. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-em...
The result is endless nonsense repeated on here sadly at the drop of the hat, there all benefit scroungers etc. etc. I bet many of you now looking at that man will instantly think football hooligan, thug etc. etc. for no other reason than the van and how he looks.
Thirdly and this criticism is aimed at both parties, politicians have this incredible delusion that they can fix things by reorganising how benefits and services are delivered. New Labour did it with their tax credit system that ended up subsidising profit rich retailers, Tories are doing it now with their Universal Credit panacea. All politicians fail to ask themselves basic questions such as, if the current system is badly managed, why would one expect a different system managed by the same people to result in better management? History seems to be providing pretty solid evidence that reorganisation just results in burning the money on the reorganisation and practically no net benefit.
Your last point is spot on, 'tis all 'change to give the illusion of progress'.
NJH said:
There are a lot of complex issues that have led us to the current state of affairs . . .
Nothing to see here. We can rejoice that a problem that has been with our society for hundreds of years has been solved at a time of austerity. It’s a miracle.
Derek Smith said:
NJH said:
There are a lot of complex issues that have led us to the current state of affairs . . .
Nothing to see here. We can rejoice that a problem that has been with our society for hundreds of years has been solved at a time of austerity. It’s a miracle.
The 'problem' has been with our society for as long as there has been society. This should tell you something about the condition itself, the inappropriate metric being used in this instance and the fundamentalness of the economic distribution curve.
Rather like third wave feminism and societal postmodernism, these sorts of hyped up reports do nothing for anyone, and certainly not those that need help - why not? Because first of all the government ignores/denies (as they have done, and correctly in my view), secondly the hyperbolic statements are easy prey to those who want to obfuscate the true situation, thirdly it doesn't actually offer anything constructive except 'pie in the sky' theoretical social modelling which has little bearing on the real world.
This report in particular struck me as being highly political and critical of things outside its remit - when he advances the argument that 'not having child support for more than 2 kids means those choosing to have 3 kids will be sent into poverty... and ...that's the governments fault' it's easy to dissemble this nonsense.
Seems to me the good professor has little real concern and is just concerned about advancing his political viewpoint/agenda. Shame on him for standing on the downtrodden for his own gains... or am I getting too cynical?
There are certainly problems, but as a fellow beat-treader you've seen most sides I'd have thought Derek - that 5% of the population that are beyond salvage as useful members of society, feckless, feral and as apt to steal from your plate as they are quick to moan about their own half full one. The 5% who try to do the best they can despite shortcomings in intelligence, education or viable immediate opportunity but who genuinely just want a good life for their kids and the 5% that get all the benefit of the state and promptly spend it on a Playstation for their 5th kid.
Within those percentiles (illustrative purposes) there is a group that you can not only help, but who will both appreciate the help and furthermore lever it to their advantage, equally there is a group that neither help themselves nor others and any direct investment would be money down the drain.
So no, no rejoicing Derek, but no being mugged either...
andy_s said:
No one has said anything like that Derek,
Various, but not exhaustive, quotes that seem to suggest there is no problem because someone is going hungry in another county and that, it seems, it is all their own fault.Yes, its very sad. Some people i know have children who dont have the latest mobile iPhones.
Terrible.
But is that poverty, or a failure of social services/care?
Arguably the parents would have the money but because they are s choose to neglect their child.
It shows what a sham the relative poverty definition is: a household is in relative poverty if its income is below 60% of the median household income.
I can tell you without any hesitation or doubt, poverty does not exist in the UK.
Worthe repeating: I can tell you without any hesitation or doubt, poverty does not exist in the UK.
Meanwhile to answer your point directly, sure - I can tell you that the small number of individuals I see begging in the town centre here are not living in extreme poverty.
it's not poverty in the sense that you see in places like Sierra Leone and others
there are always going to be people who impoverish themselves and their children through bad decisions.
There are definitely people going through hardship, however nobody is denied the basics.
- - - -
It's the Victorian attitude that the poor are poor because they are feckless. The comparison with the situation in third-world countries is quite obscene. I wonder if such posters would agree that, in comparison to the situation in these countries, they are unseemly rich. Or rather, I don't.
I've seen poor people. Poverty exists. Many don't agree with the definition. That seems to them to solve the problem.
Not sarcasm. Just a reasonable comment on what some of the posters on here are saying.
Riley Blue said:
Poverty, especially child poverty, is no laughing matter. My O/H has dealt with it in the past and it can be heartbreaking; one boy of seven or eight was asked what would make a big change to his life. His reply, "An alarm clock because then I wouldn't be late for school and not get in to trouble." She discovered his parents were alcoholics who stayed in bed most of the time and didn't have money to feed him, it all went on booze.
So scoff away, it's a real problem even in the UK and probably not far from where you live.
Yes, it’s a real problem but people scoff as too many will blame it on the state / government / society, not the parents.So scoff away, it's a real problem even in the UK and probably not far from where you live.
There is no easy answer of course. We won’t ever countenance stopping people having children, we are (rightly) loath to take children into care, so no matter what the state provides there will be awful people having children and bringing them up in poverty.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff