14 million in poverty

[Retsdon]

4 hours ago, Bazooka Joe said:

...rich get richer, poorer get poorer is now becoming/is a Tory policy,

That trend isn't just in the UK though. It's a global phenomenon.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

9 hours ago, Mungler said:

But that’s not a test of poverty.

Come on, 14,000,000 people, a whole quarter of the population of the UK in actual ‘poverty’. 

 

In that case we should be expecting lots of aid from the rest of the world!

[Whatmuff]

9 hours ago, Yellow Bear said:

So your answer is to take more from those that have been prudent (I dislike the term since Brown degraded it when last the socialists were in power) and give it to the "entitled" so they can remain "entitled" whilst the "prudent" are made poor.??

I haven't given an answer or a solution as I don't think it's that easy. Im not the chancellor, but I do think something can be done to make society a little fairer. CEOs can take home several millions in bonuses at 10987899766% over the median wage yet others have to deal with 55% below median wage. That's not fair regardless of how you look at it. Or would you rather we just teach these people a lesson and leave them to fight for themselves?

[Hamster]

6 hours ago, Bazooka Joe said:

I do hope that NONE of the high rollers on PW fall EVER foul in their circumstances in the future & get a real taste in life what benefits/poverty is all about, some of the comments on this forum are disgraceful at best.

All seem to be mesmerized with the figure 14,000,000, that may not be right, who knows, but you must be blind or prefer not to see that there is poverty in the UK, & for the UN to be involved says something......rich get richer, poorer get poorer is now becoming/is a Tory policy, & I don't give flying **** whether you agree with me or not, save the essay's.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6374647/Foodbanks-forced-pick-pieces-Universal-Credit-delays.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=1490

Not interested in the daily mail comments either, save your breath, first google search, & this is nation wide, people who are working are using food banks, (wonder what size TV they have) absolutely disgraceful for the 5th biggest economy.

But lets face it, the Torys always have had to have someone to kick & it's always them at the bottom of the pile that get kicked, biggest laugh is the PW massive is caught hook, line, & sinker believing that rhetoric.

There will be a Labour Government before long..... Corbyn's promise of a better life will/& is looking a lot better than life under the Tory's, Universal Credit is going to be the crux of the matter, the same as the poll tax was for the Only Cow That Didn't Give Milk....for them who cannot fathom that out (Thatcher).

 

Excellent points hope I'm forgiven for fixing the start. 

This phenomenon of denial is not unique to poverty as I have noticed it around a ton of other subjects, basically anything that shows us getting closer and closer to the sheet whole brigade (as Trump would callously describe) is simply ignored and placed in the back of the mind, our very humanity and compassion has been eroded by the msm who have taught us that we can't possibly be the bad guys and anyone who is struggling is just not working hard enough, check out the increases in billionaires wealth in the last 10 years, like they need more to live any better than they did. 

I have said for a long time now that far from "terrorism", the biggest threat to our societies around the world (apart from the obvious war mongers, regime changers and land grabbers) is the growing disparity between rich and poor. Capitalism as has been allowed to rule and decapitate all opposition will and can only continue to grab and store money, (devastating the environment and polluting as it does) this is not going to get better in a cyclical self balancing sort of way, in 10-20 years it will be much worse and pitchforks will eventually surface. There are billionaires who say so. 

10 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

I haven't given an answer or a solution as I don't think it's that easy. Im not the chancellor, but I do think something can be done to make society a little fairer. CEOs can take home several millions in bonuses at 10987899766% over the median wage yet others have to deal with 55% below median wage. That's not fair regardless of how you look at it. Or would you rather we just teach these people a lesson and leave them to fight for themselves?

👍

 

1 hour ago, Retsdon said:

That trend isn't just in the UK though. It's a global phenomenon.

Like the Australian Professor said on BBC last night : that's like telling someone they're lucky to be receiving only 30 lashes because it'd be 50 if they lived in XYZ.

[Prospero]

47 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

 That's not fair regardless of how you look at it. 

This is the crux of the matter. Who told you life was fair pal? I heard some numpty on the television recently moaning that someone else at his university had wealthy parents so he didn't need to have a student loan. He said it's not fair I need to get into debt when he doesn't lol 🤣🤣

Edited November 17, 2018 by Prospero

[Mungler]

This has moved away from ‘what is poverty’ and are there 14,000,000 in poverty in the UK?

If we’re going political, can anyone point to an example in history where socialism has worked?

[Whatmuff]

47 minutes ago, Prospero said:

This is the crux of the matter. Who told you life was fair pal? I heard some numpty on the television recently moaning that someone else at his university had wealthy parents so he didn't need to have a student loan. He said it's not fair I need to get into debt when he doesn't lol 🤣🤣

Better hope you don't need help from others in future then and you end up on the streets. As my response will be, hey life isn't fair, we just have to work minimum wage while these superior individuals profit from our taxes and eventually own every house in the world. I'm planning to take on the UKs water supply and sell it back to the public for 10 X it's value. Hey life isn't fair, can't afford my water then you better go find somewhere to die.

19 minutes ago, Mungler said:

This has moved away from ‘what is poverty’ and are there 14,000,000 in poverty in the UK?

If we’re going political, can anyone point to an example in history where socialism has worked?

Agreed, however extreme forms of socialism and capitalism doesn't work either way. I think we should be down the middle. Those who have genuinely earned it then fine those who have misfortune should be helped to give them the best possible chance in life. I have friends that have been extremely unlucky and suffered through the last 5 years through no fault of their own and I have another who happens to be one of the richest people in the world and since birth has had everything you can imagine, but he was born into wealth and since then just pays people to make him money. Easy.

Not helping others just doesn't sit right with me and I think everyone should be treated equally regardless of wealth, it comes down to respect and how to treat one another. If you can't agree with that then maybe you should be looking on how to profit from the poorer people in society and how their bad financial decisions could make you rich.

Edited November 17, 2018 by Whatmuff

[Mungler]

7 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

Not helping others just doesn't sit right with me and I think everyone should be treated equally regardless of wealth, it comes down to respect and how to treat one another. 

There is a safety net in state benefits and there’s a national health service.

Back to the definition of poverty, to my mind poverty is something you are at great risk of dying from and unless I am truly mistaken, that is something which we are fortunate enough in this country not to have to face.

Anyone who is not doing as well as they had hoped, who aren’t doing as well as others, or who are on hard times and who want the governent to give them more, that’s not poverty that’s socialism.

[12gauge82]

3 minutes ago, Mungler said:

.

Anyone who is not doing as well as they had hoped, who aren’t doing as well as others, or who are on hard times and who want the governent to give them more, that’s not poverty that’s socialism.

I don't think it's about people who haven't done as well as they hoped, it's about the very wealthy being supported by the system taking almost all the reward for others hard work, leaving the working classes without enough to live a decent life.

[Whatmuff]

2 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I don't think it's about people who haven't done as well as they hoped, it's about the very wealthy being supported by the system taking almost all the reward for others hard work, leaving the working classes without enough to live a decent life.

Absolutely on the money

[Whatmuff]

17 minutes ago, Mungler said:

There is a safety net in state benefits and there’s a national health service.

Back to the definition of poverty, to my mind poverty is something you are at great risk of dying from and unless I am truly mistaken, that is something which we are fortunate enough in this country not to have to face.

Anyone who is not doing as well as they had hoped, who aren’t doing as well as others, or who are on hard times and who want the governent to give them more, that’s not poverty that’s socialism.

I think your definition of poverty would be my definition of extreme poverty. As stated in the news article "poverty is defined by 55% below the median wage"

[Yellow Bear]

1 hour ago, Whatmuff said:

I haven't given an answer or a solution as I don't think it's that easy. Im not the chancellor, but I do think something can be done to make society a little fairer. CEOs can take home several millions in bonuses at 10987899766% over the median wage yet others have to deal with 55% below median wage. That's not fair regardless of how you look at it. Or would you rather we just teach these people a lesson and leave them to fight for themselves?

No I don't, however, income levels are pyramidal and by taking the median value you are slewing the data greatly, particularly when among the high "earners" you count the silly money paid to the likes of footballers and "so called" celebrities which vastly outnumber the number of CEOs on that sort of silly money, 

As yet I have failed to find over what range the median was quoted but it is not a true median of all incomes as it is far too low so it must be a band.  Doing this it is easy to slew outcome to suit a pre set agenda.

I fully agree that there are less well off people that need help but 20-25% of the population in poverty, no I can't take that.

That there needs to be a method to calculate poverty is undeniable, but it needs to be one that is difficult for either side of the political establishment to bend  for there own advantage.

[yod dropper]

 

On 12/11/2018 at 23:03, yod dropper said:

Hamster uses the measures of poverty that meant when net incomes fell after the financial crash poverty fell. Now net incomes are rising, poverty rises as well. This is just perverse leftist economic 'logic'.

 

43 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

I think your definition of poverty would be my definition of extreme poverty. As stated in the news article "poverty is defined by 55% below the median wage"

So you also subscribe to this strange leftist logic which isn't about how much money people have to spend but how much they have relative to somebody else. Look at my post I quoted, this is what happened yet it would satisfy you. How poor I am is not about what Richard Branson can spend but about what I can spend. If you want to benchmark your definition of extreme poverty I suggest you travel the world.

[Newbie to this]

[Whatmuff]

14 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

 

 

So you also subscribe to this strange leftist logic which isn't about how much money people have to spend but how much they have relative to somebody else. Look at my post I quoted, this is what happened yet it would satisfy you. How poor I am is not about what Richard Branson can spend but about what I can spend. If you want to benchmark your definition of extreme poverty I suggest you travel the world.

We many thanks but I've travelled the world and fought in some of the most dangerous places so please try not to question my ability to analyse the meaning of poor. And it's not leftist logic its fact. How do you come up with the fact that wages have risen? Government sector workers have been on a pay freeze for the last 8 years. I have had my pension cut 3 times and had a pay freeze for 8 years with inflation through the roof I am far worse off, yet houses are 40% more expensive where I would like to live? Most of my family work in the NHS would you like to analyse their pay rises too? You are generalising once again and have your predefined visions of what poor is and clearly it's the left that are the problem. I suggest you travel the country and see what poor is. 

[Whatmuff]

Ok so let's here your wonderful right wing logic with this scenario.

A girl leaves school and wants to be a nurse. She lives in Bromley and is now qualified and takes home £22000 a year, she has got married and is now looking for somewhere to live. What are her options as a 2 bed flat in Bromley costs in excess of £200 000. On her wage she can only borrow just over £90000.... A nurse. So what's your plan for this? Just kick every other member of society to the kerb as they aren't fortunate enough to be earning the 100k a year needed to live in the South East? 

Before long you won't have any Nurses, Policemen, Fireman, Soldiers, Cleaners, Teachers. And it's attitudes like yours and blaming the left for an inequality problem that's been brewing. But I guess your ok so crack on and blame the left and the poor. 

[Mungler]

44 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

 

 

So you also subscribe to this strange leftist logic which isn't about how much money people have to spend but how much they have relative to somebody else. Look at my post I quoted, this is what happened yet it would satisfy you. How poor I am is not about what Richard Branson can spend but about what I can spend. 

That’s the nub of it - if you put 99 people earning £200,000 pa into a group of 100 people where the 100th person is the Sultan of Brunai, then using the poverty formula suggested those 99 will all be living in poverty 🤪

 

[islandgun]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

I don't think it's about people who haven't done as well as they hoped, it's about the very wealthy being supported by the system taking almost all the reward for others hard work, leaving the working classes without enough to live a decent life.

Now that is the correct answer...

[bostonmick]

How many of those in so called poverty are on benefits as their sole income  few million I would guess. Are we supposed to keep them in the lap of luxury because most choose not to work. How many single parents through choice do as to get a house and an income again keep these in luxury. There is help out there for people as long as they play their part and if they did then there could be more money to go between the genuine hardship cases along with our pensioners. At present there are around 180k unfilled jobs. No they don't pay vast amounts but most will attract credits of some kind from the system. 

[amateur]

48 minutes ago, Whatmuff said:

……….. She lives in Bromley and is now qualified and takes home £22000 a year, she has got married and is now looking for somewhere to live. What are her options as a 2 bed flat in Bromley costs in excess of £200 000. On her wage she can only borrow just over £90000....  crack on and blame the left and the poor. 

Bromley has always been an expensive place to live. However, were she to look a few miles away, within very easy commuting distance to Bromley, then there may well be other affordable places to live.

 

[bostonmick]

1 hour ago, Whatmuff said:

Ok so let's here your wonderful right wing logic with this scenario.

A girl leaves school and wants to be a nurse. She lives in Bromley and is now qualified and takes home £22000 a year, she has got married and is now looking for somewhere to live. What are her options as a 2 bed flat in Bromley costs in excess of £200 000. On her wage she can only borrow just over £90000.... A nurse. So what's your plan for this? Just kick every other member of society to the kerb as they aren't fortunate enough to be earning the 100k a year needed to live in the South East? 

Before long you won't have any Nurses, Policemen, Fireman, Soldiers, Cleaners, Teachers. And it's attitudes like yours and blaming the left for an inequality problem that's been brewing. But I guess your ok so crack on and blame the left and the poor. 

Or she could do what a lot do and go into agency work earning £20+ per hour. So over the year would raise her income to around 50k.this is happening on a massive scale the NHS pays out millions each year to agency staff. There is a 73 year old consultant phsyciatrist on the books through agency at our local hospital on £260 per hour can't drive so home visits have to be done by taxi. We have a screwed up system that's for sure. 

Edited November 17, 2018 by bostonmick

[Rewulf]

21 minutes ago, amateur said:

Bromley has always been an expensive place to live. However, were she to look a few miles away, within very easy commuting distance to Bromley, then there may well be other affordable places to live.

 

No ,no, no , she wants to live in Bromley, and if she cant afford to live in Bromley because, between her and her new husbands wages (which , in the example were completely ignored for some reason) are not sufficient to buy the property they WANT, then obviously someone else needs to pay the difference.
This can either be achieved by robbing the rich to subsidise the poor, or the more likely scenario of robbing the poor to subsidise the , errr.. poor.
Then everyones a winner..NOT.

[bostonmick]

I want to live in Chelsea and be driven to my private helicopter in a chauffeured Bentley. But alas I can't afford to. Am I in poverty. 

[Rewulf]

7 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

I want to live in Chelsea and be driven to my private helicopter in a chauffeured Bentley. But alas I can't afford to. Am I in poverty. 

Obviously !

Some people need to get a grip, just because you cant have the things you WANT because you cant AFFORD them does not a poor person make !

[Retsdon]

58 minutes ago, bostonmick said:

At present there are around 180k unfilled jobs. No they don't pay vast amounts but most will attract credits of some kind from the system. 

And there's the problem. Who benefits from this subsidized labour?