How the term 'poverty' has changed

The country will never be "poverty"- free as the definition most often used is 'when a household earns less than 60% of the median income for the year. This is known as the relative poverty line'

commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07096/

However much average earnings go up there will always be those who earn relatively less. While, naturally, everyone would love to be in the above average bracket and have more disposable income, this does not mean that those in the bottom bracket are living Dickensian levels of poverty. It's all relative. Many of those living in defined "poverty" here would be regarded as wealthy compared with the poor in many other countries'

OMG I had a friend who used to do this, when we were about 12. This was in 1975
,so not exactly ancient history. She was from a one parent family and I know her mum struggled for money. She always used to say 'Save me the core',then she'd eat the whole lot,pips and all. I came from a relatively well-off family,so after this had happened a few times,I started taking 2 apples to school and gave one to her. The look on her face when I handed it to her. You'd think I'd just given her a 50 pound note!

Things have got much worse over the last 15 years, but it has not gone back to what it was.

I’m not quite 80, but I recognise what you say. Resilience and personal responsibility seem to have faded away with the sometimes overwhelming growth of rights.

Poverty has more or less gone back to where it was with 100000s homeless children, people dependent on food banks. Mass shoplifting for gangs. Trafficking, count lines. Today more nature is ruined so less natural resources, fewer houses have a working chimney to avoid heating and we have dug up most of our coal . We are also going back fast to pay for healthcare where poorest get a very basic service and those who pay get ripped off

Yes, poverty looks very different to what it did 80 years ago but people seem to have changed too.

Bitterness, disrespect, hatred, anti social behaviour, no work ethic, violence and a 'happy to shit in their own backyard' attitude is rampant compared to back then.

Re taking in lodgers. That was a plot point that the Ragged Trousered Philanthropist (written in 1914 so the same time the OP was writing about). It was a fairly common way for working people who weren't earning enough to support themselves to make ends meet. Of course, the wife in that novel was the one having to do all the additional work to look after an extra man. Also, she does get raped by the lodger. It's only a novel (with a clear political angle) but, while taking in lodgers might be a good solution in some circumstances the idea that it should be an automatic go to for families who, despite working hard, are struggling to get by is morally wrong. People are entitled to feel secure in their own homes. Taking in strangers carries risks.
Also - if you are renting a home subletting can cause issues especially if the lodger damages the home/generates complaints from neighbours.

Re taking in lodgers. That was a plot point that the Ragged Trousered Philanthropist (written in 1914 so the same time the OP was writing about). It was a fairly common way for working people who weren't earning enough to support themselves to make ends meet. Of course, the wife in that novel was the one having to do all the additional work to look after an extra man. Also, she does get raped by the lodger. It's only a novel (with a clear political angle) but, while taking in lodgers might be a good solution in some circumstances the idea that it should be an automatic go to for families who, despite working hard, are struggling to get by is morally wrong. People are entitled to feel secure in their own homes. Taking in strangers carries risks.
Also - if you are renting a home subletting can cause issues especially if the lodger damages the home/generates complaints from neighbours.

Having to rely on family, friends and neighbours for something so basic IS degrading!
Just the other week, someone on here made a thread about a neighbour asking to temporarily have use of her bathroom whilst hers is out of action, and loads of people thought it was weird.
Not having internet access these days is as basic as not having adequate bathroom facilities.

Of course if you wanted to be especially obtuse you could argue that many elderly people don’t have internet at home, but they have less use for in general - and are you seriously expecting young people to live like they’re elderly?

Imagine you’re 16. How difficult, and tbh, humiliating, would it be to not have internet access at home?!?

Can't speak for other posters can only speak for myself seeing as you quoted my comment I assumed you was responding to something I said. I don't really care for the arguement regarding other cultures, other cultures also practice fgm and child marriage.

This thread is about people in poverty not people who are managing, most of the broke families I know live in one bedroom in a shared house yes mum dad and kids all in one room even if you could fit a lodger under one of the beds it wouldn't be allowed by the landlord.
Even the people I know who are struggling but have more than one room for their living space why should their children be subjected to a random stranger potential pedofile being in their personal space. Again I don't care for "but the past" or "but other countries" all kinds of fucked up shit goes on in other places and other times.

Anyone that has the space to keep a lodger isn't in poverty and therefore not relevant to this discussion.

You sound totally ignorant and heartless.

Someone mentioned upthread that we can often afford life's little luxury's these days but not the biggies- housing and utilities- get a grip on those and vast numbers of people's situations would improve- there are so many who receive rent allowance as part of UC but it is vastly below what they actually have to pay in rent- ( particularly in more expensive areas) so money that should be used for food/utilities and general living is taken up paying the rent - or people stuck in homes with mortgages they can't really afford post relationship breakdowns but darent move out because there is no way they would get a suitable mortgage again on their own or even pass the renting hoops and even if they sell don't have enough for 12 months up front etc - there really is vast amounts of instability out there, a great deal related to unaffordable housing, some related to debt. We need more social housing of good quality and all sizes and more shared ownership that's not just 1 and 2 bed flats and without ludicrous service charges- where the % owned is not taken in to account - my own view is why should you pay 100% of the service charge whilst only owning 30% Asan example of the flat ? And 100% of the maintenance is on you too -

There’s the quote from comedian Henning Wehn: We don't do charity in Germany, we pay taxes.

@TheWayTheLightFalls interestingly I saw very few charity shops when we lived in Copenhagen and few in Sweden when we used to go a lot too and never saw that many in Germany either- I did read that was because they felt certain functions should be state and not charity

But pps were dismissive of the concept which still widely goes on. I agree not possible with some accommodation and living conditions but for many who are only just managing it has and still is been a popular choice. Many cultures have multi generational living conditions which some of us would consider unacceptable. It does not mean they are living in poverty.

OP you are showing your disdain for poor people. Not poor enough for you because they don't work up chimneys on in the coal mine?

Our household income apparently makes us "in poverty" but we don't feel it. We have enough for all the bills, just maybe not enough for an expensive car and a big holiday. But my mum was raised by a widow with 5 children, working 2 jobs, no benefits, having to use doorstep lenders for extra cash and I can't class myself as impoverished next to that.

I’d like to circle back to this as having thought about it, your response gives off a touch of arrogance. I haven’t made out I am in poverty, but stated times are hard. Not quite a politician standing on a podium singing woe is me, but a woman having a valid input on a topic that so many are struggling with daily- I actually mentioned that I manage, however it is hard.

An ‘average family’ in the current climate are feeling the pinch just as I am, you’ll find that on many, many threads on this site.

I run a charity (food bank) and disagree in part - lots of charities are inefficient and/or duplicate effort, and some also couch help in religious or moral terms. They are more efficient than government in the UK, which is "piss up in a brewery" territory, but not more efficient than some governments elsewhere. I think a lot of current charity sector work ought to be done at gov't level. Ideally by paying people enough to cover their basic costs, whether through benefits or wages, imo.

Pfft! An ‘ouse??? My ancestors lived in a cave! And they had to fight off the sabre toothed tigers to get to it! Your granny had it easy!

The national average is just that- an average. The pay scales depend on the area, he is a new starter within the first two years of his role-being paid circa 28k, after tax and pension it isn’t a big wage to support a family. He’s a police officer, the annual rises are very little at first unless you can manage to secure a promotion. He specialises in domestic violence cases, has saved lives and taken children away from unsafe homes. He was being paid more previously to work in a bar. Please do not try to minimise the problem- he and all the other emergency service workers deserve more and the sad reality is the funding just isn’t there.

You wouldn’t believe the amount that comes away on his payslip, I know I was surprised.

I’m not here for an argument, as I said there are people in worse financial situations than me. I’m not here to cry about being poor, but please don’t try to dismiss my current living situation, as I can assure you it is very real.

Completely understand where you’re coming from but I suspect charities generally are better informed than governments about who needs what help and how to get it to them. Governments by their nature are woefully inefficient (which I think the public accept far too easily but I digress). Personally I’m not sure governments replacing the work of these charities would do a better job.

Bizarre number of posts about smart phones on this thread. Surely everyone realises with so many things being done online now they have become essential?

I live within a 20-25 minute walk from a library. Fine for me who is (relatively) young, fit and healthy and can walk. Some people will live further away than that from their nearest library so can’t walk and some people won’t be able to walk that far. So daily bus/train rides for people who don’t have a lot of moeny to begin with.

Now this inevitably means there will be high demand for stolen smartphones so I’m not sure how smart the move to all online is but again, I digress.

"I'm a fan of novels/films/dramas set in the Victorian era, and I must admit I am shocked at the level of poverty that existed in those times. Like not having a proper coat to wear in bitterly cold weather,and having to make do with a knitted shawl. Or no decent shoes,the ones they had were falling apart. Having to survive on a few slices of bread and margarine a day. Living in freezing,cramped,tiny apartments,often with 3 or 4 people to one bed."

I think, thankfully, this is less common but all these things still happen. Charities often plug the gaps; there are charities which deliver beds to people too poor to buy them for their kids and clothes banks for coats. In a children's centre I was in the other day there was a box of free newborn hats for people to take if they couldn't afford them. Horrible reality.

Yes, their own homes. And no ShoeZone I suppose.

But they had their own home? Whether rented or owned?

Nowadays, many people can't afford a home...no social housing and can't afford private rent...but, they can afford a pair of shoes usually, this is not because they're well off but thanks to importing cheap goods from China or developing countries...a pair of cheap shoes can be bought for a fiver. Forgoing a pair of shoes won't make a huge dent to a family budget.

Poverty has changed partly due globalisation but still exists.