How the term 'poverty' has changed

Benefits are not "freely given". They are criteria dependent and require considerable admin to access.

Most food banks require referral from a relevant authority.

If you live "on hand outs" (as I currently do) "bettering oneself" on a budget that barely covers the basics is costly.

While the brave new world of technology offers opportunities to sell your services, goods and chattels, the market is flooded and terms and conditions often preclude active profit generation to a degree that makes an impact. Once you get near to I think it's £1000 you have to inform HMRC. After £3000 you are taxed. Given it takes hours to do all this and earn very little in real terms after expenses, and you might be doing this in conjunction with full time "work search" to avoid benefit sanctions, and (not in my case, thankfully at my age) possibly caring for children to the much higher standards of today, or (in my case) caring for elderly parents etc for extremely little in terms of significant gain, I can assure you that hopelessness sets in.

The spirit and flesh may both be willing, but in the current economic climate it often doesn't get you far.

Covering the basics and avoiding debt is where alot of people sit, treading water despite every effort. Society demands we behave ethically in our quest for money, so avoiding tax is scorned for the little people at the bottom of the heap, but is considered legitimate at the top of the tree.

I am not religious but I recall a Bible verse that says something about those who have the most will be given more, and those that have the least will have even that taken from them. Seems particularly relevant in discussions about poverty, which is built into society to keep the rich rich, and the the poor too fearful and busy with survival to do much about it.

You talk of "bettering" oneself. I counter with "get over yourself".

Clothing makes for an interesting comparison.

Because nowadays we import clothes from developing countries due to their cheap labour, clothes are relatively cheap and available in abundance. The child from decades ago described on her as wearing an old sack with arm holes cut out....this is totally unnecessary now. There's a recycling clothes bank near me, it's absolutely overflowing with stuff.

The fact that poor people in the UK are no longer dressed in rags, is not because we are richest necessarily but because we are exploiting poor people from overseas.

The dramatic social change over the last hundred years have made old style poverty unrecognisable. It's not because we're all rich now, it's because we're materially better off alongside living in a country with safeguarding and safety nets.

I've been reading witness statements given to the Scottish child abuse enquiry, from living adults who had traumatic childhoods due to a combination of poverty and social factors. My grandparents and great grandparents generation did what they were told by authority - sent their boys to war, sent their pregnant daughters to god knows what kind of care in a mother and baby home, sent their own little kids to Australia for a 'better life' which turned out to be exploitation and abuse.

There wasn't a kindly Dr Turner to make it all OK. There wasn't anyone to whistle blow to, there weren't any scandalous exposes because none of these things were considered scandalous at the time.

It even applied to the rich. Children endured broken lives after attending expensive private boarding schools, due to emotional, physical and sexual abuse. And there was nobody to tell, because at that time these were accepted ways to treat children.

I often think we should teach social history in school, so people can be aware of what life was actually like for our own families, a mere two or three generations ago.

Anyone who can afford a sewing machine isn’t living in poverty. You sell it to pay bills or buy food. These days, clothes come from food banks and other charities.

@JLou08 You’re right about benefits.

On kids living in absolute poverty:

Under the government’s current definition, which measures only average income and housing costs, 18% of the UK population was defined as being in absolute poverty in the year to March 2023, including 3.6 million children.

With the new model, which is set to be adopted by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), 1.6 million more children are in poverty than under the current definition.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/18/more-than-one-in-three-uk-children-poverty-deprivation-record-high?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Peasants get in line. Memorise sewing patterns to better yourself. If you can't sew just wear a sack.

Sorry to hear of your struggles- I hope things improve soon

@GutsyShark I’m very aware of slum clearances, and how new estates were built often without the necessary infrastructure.

However, I live in a Northern city, with hospitals, universities, shops, factories and reasonable transport links. Parts of the city and surrounding towns have relatively affordable housing. It’s far from the back of nowhere.

The world is very different to 100 years ago. You are comparing housing and living standards but it’s all relative. The houses you’re describing were mostly demolished after WWII and the government now has to provide social housing of a certain standard (arguably still disgraceful). The gap between the rich and the poor is growing and yes we have the welfare state but you still have people who can’t afford the essentials. There are many living in relative poverty despite working because of wages not rising with inflation. We have lots of families suffering from tech poverty too which leads to social isolation. It’s a very different world.

My DD went to brownies it cost £2 a week.

Renting a house or flat in my area of outer London would be about £2.5k a month.

Forgoing brownies wouldn't make a dent.

This was life in Australia in the 1940s and beyond. It was still life there in the 1980s (and so, presumably, it was similar for poor people in the UK).

I think very very few people live in true poverty these days. Benefits are freely given, there are several food banks in every town, and many people don’t feel the need to do anything much to better themselves, they’re just content to live on hand outs.

And nothing has changed in decades
I was watching a documentary on you tube about homeless families it was 2007,one family were in a B&B just two beds and a kettle no cooking facilities, the teenage girl was describing how if they wanted something warm to eat in the evening, they would put a tin in the radiator in the morning and it the contents would be warm by evening
Another family were waiting hours in the cold with four kids to see if the council would pay for a B&B for the night.

Interesting point re housing in the middle of nowhere. The government went through a post war phase of demolishing what they called slums and moving people out into new housing. But the new housing had poor transport links, no theatres etc where people used to go and the sense of community was lost. It caused a huge number of social problems that I think we’re still seeing to this day.

They gave them new houses but took so much away from them at the same time. It was the same people with the same problems just in a new house.

Children may not live in absolute poverty and thank goodness that's the case. Do you realise that there are lots of childless adults living in absolute poverty? There is a huge homelessness problem and there are people actually living on the streets. Housing authorities only have to accommodate vulnerable people who are assessed as unintentionally homeless and they will look for any reason to say the person is intentionally homeless as there just aren't enough spaces for them to be accommodated.
The benefits for a single adult without a disability are very low and some on that low amount actually are unable to work but don't pass the assessments for PIP to prove that.

The thing about just renting out the spare room shows the op must of never met someone who's actually broke. The broke people I know all live in just one room together mum dad and all the kids. Even having one extra room would be a dream for them.

I think the feeling behind this thread may have been caused by reading too many Mumsnet threads where people moan they're broke because they can't afford four holidays a year 😂

No, I don't think you are right. My definition of poverty is similar to yours but you need to acknowledge that expectations and legal changes mean some of the options available to earlier generations aren't available now. People live in one bedroom flats (or temporary housing or on the street) with multiple children. There is no space for a lodger. Logers nowadays wouldn't be happy paying rent to sleep in the living room and use an outhouse. You would also be judged mercilessly and probably reported to social services for putting your children at risk by inviting strangers to live in your home in such cramped quarters.

The ability for single parents to hold down multiple minimum wage jobs is more limited than it was then. It wasn't that long ago (Gen X and before them) that being seen as a latchkey kid was normal. Now, primary school age children aren't allowed to walk home from school by themselves and someone would report you to social services for leaving your primary-school aged child at home alone while you were at work. There were also multiple black markets for food and cloth. Whilst I'm sure there are still people who sell goods off the back of a truck, I don't think food black markets are so readily available.

Whilst there is a recognition of SEN, there is no funding for it and it is a constant battle for parents to get just a scrap of what their children need. Yes, there is UC and DLA, but it is not enough to survive on, there are long waits for payments (made even longer by beaurocratic incompetence), which are then often messed up etc.

So, poverty today is the same as it ever was - the inability to feed, clothe and house yourself and your family on whatever wages you have. It just feels like there are fewer options for escaping it.

Why’s it hard to reconcile? Perhaps you don’t know how children are existing?Some are sleeping in cars, disused buildings or on the floors of relatives or friends. 160,000 kids in England alone are homeless with their families. At least 74 kids have died in temporary accommodation since 2019.

The welfare state is by no means amazing. It’s been dismantled.

i agree re far less, and much of it is hidden now.

I was a teenager in the 1960s when a lot of the old barriers in society were breaking down. Not so much for us, but certainly by the time our 1970s born DC were growing up. They can’t remember the pretty awful house we lived in with only one coal fire and a lavatory in the yard, when I’d go to the laundrette because we couldn’t afford a washing machine.

Poverty (mainly relative) now must be so hard, because it affects far fewer, and the comparisons are everywhere in the media. Back in my childhood, and early adulthood, lots of us were ‘poor’ by today’s standards, and ‘the rich’ were a different species. Children like ours, who became adults in the late 80s/90s weren’t limited nearly so much by the ‘know your place’ attitude that was rife in the past, they were the first to go to university, to enter the professions, rather than simply have a job.

I worked for a while in local government, and some of the households who would be classed as poor managed very well. Kids were clean, fed, parent(s) trying to improve their circumstances, with some positive outcomes. Others? Sadly the poverty pattern continued. Poor life choices, poor money management, lack of good role models, dysfunctional relationships. And of course Illness and disability, which are not choices, will usually have a negative impact on household incomes.

Lastly, where we live also makes a difference. There are plenty of places where a decent house can still cost a fraction of those in London and other expensive areas, and where rents are also more affordable.

I do think the nature of poverty has changed. My grandparents also lived in real poverty. But ...

Poor people now don't have rooms to rent out, it's more expensive to make clothes than buy pre made, fuel costs for baking make baking a cake v buying one mean its not always cost effective and a lot of people do have more than one job. Although childcare standards are higher so I don't think you could leave kids alone to work.

What are you going on about? How am I dismissing anything? I’m talking about how we everything is relative and the fact poverty ‘looks’ better now isn’t relevant to how we address the problem

I was brought up in the 60s/70s and we were quite poor but we never went hungry. The bills were paid in the following order, rent because that ensured a roof over our heads, then food, then fuel (coal) and anything else left was for clothes etc.

People back then spent more of their wages on food than we do today. We didn't have a phone, we didn't have a car until I was about 9 years old. Neither me nor my friends did after school activities only brownies. Days out were a rare treat. I can't ever remember going out for a family meal.

People now seem to want to prioritise luxuries over essentials.

Part of the challenge is the emotive nature of the word poverty and the technical definition of poverty as defined by 60% median income.

The welfare state is amazing and means that no should be homeless or starving. Life might be incredibly tough and living in bad housing with very little food but there is a safety net which means no children sleeping on the street.

However, the official measure has over 3 million children poverty which seems hard to reconcile.

Then if the national median income changes, increases or decreases, thousands of people are technically moved in or out of poverty because of a definition but their actual circumstances haven't changed.

The new government has set up a Child Poverty Taskforce. I was sceptical but I met someone from a local community group recently who’d bern invited to share her views with them and it sounded very positive.

So you've just dismissed the entire study of history?
FYI people usually find it worthwhile to learn from history eg age of death in the past/ age of death today & the impact of various improvements. Then we can lern what to do in the future.
That's just the general idea.