Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think it is not poverty to blame.

362 replies

goneanddoneitnow · 13/02/2011 09:19

I see in the news poverty being blamed for childrens bad behaviour and under achievement as well as for health problems.
I think it is attitudes that need changing not income.
If attitudes could be changed through education of parents and students then I think you would find that income and health will improve as a result.
If children are reaching school unable to sit still, listen, share etc, without basic skills and knowledge then what are the parents doing?
And secondly what is the point of free nursery places from age three?
Shouldn't nurseries be preparing children for school?
The majority of the wealthy are wealthy because of the time and effort their parents and family put in and the effort they them selves put in acquiring valuable skills and knowledge.
How many times have you seen big lottery winners lose it all in a few years?

OP posts:
edam · 13/02/2011 11:54

I don't know, am not a lecturer so don't see enough of them. I am about to do my first ever lecture to journalism students, though, so will let you know! A friend of mine who also guest lectures there says some of them are lazy little sods with no oomph but others show promise. The ones who no oomph will not find it easy to get jobs - maybe they will sort themselves out by the time they graduate. You need to be extremely keen to get a job in journalism, it's highly competitive, so the ones I hear about texting at the back of the lecture or looking clueless when they are asked to contribute will not do well at all.

edam · 13/02/2011 11:56

('there' as in the place where I'm going to lecture, i.e. not the university I attended.)

Recent graduates I employed when I was a magazine editor were jolly good but then they were the ones who had got through the selection process.

Alouiseg · 13/02/2011 11:56

Possibly motivation and drive are THE most important factors.

edam · 13/02/2011 11:57

Yup, along with curiosity. And good communication skills. You don't need to be a creative writer or terribly literary.

edam · 13/02/2011 11:58

(Actually should stop talking about it and go and ruddy do it - have a feature I have to finish for Monday!)

TheVisitor · 13/02/2011 11:58

The "underclass" of today exists as these are the people who would have worked in the manufacturing, mining and shipbuilding industries if Thatcher hadn't have closed it all down and sold it off. Real poverty does exist - life as a single parent on benefits isn't a picnic, and I do remember going without food myself to feed my son not that many years ago. I budgeted well too. I think the OP makes a couple of true statements, as in the need for attitudes to change, but money is needed to help do that.

Nancy66 · 13/02/2011 12:01

The Visitor - that is not the underclass. The underclass wouldn't word no matter what

Nancy66 · 13/02/2011 12:01

...wouldn't 'work' that should read

CheerfulYank · 13/02/2011 12:03

I don't agree necessarily, but I do get irritated by the different situations sometimes. DH's friend (I'll call him John) is not married to his partner Jane. This is fine, but because they're not, she files as a single mother for benefits. She had a daughter as a teen and receives support for her. She and John had a child together and then broke up, during which time she became pregnant with her dealer's child. She got back together with John while still pregnant, and now gets support for the third child as well. They are also of the "can't afford healthy food" ilk, but can somehow afford to get pizza and McDonalds every night. They live in a horrible area and complain that they can't let their children out to play because of all the thugs around, yet their trailer is filled with every kind of computer, TV, gaming device, etc, imaginable. They could afford to move.

DH and I are married and have DS. We bought a house because it made sense at the time and we wanted DS to have a yard and dog and all that, and now we can barely afford it but are stuck. We make everything from scratch and garden, hunt, and fish to have fresh and mostly organic food. We do without a lot of things, keep our heating low, mend everything, utilize the free park and our library all the time. I'm not complaining at all; our life is a very happy one. But it is hard for me to hear that John and Jane got $10,000 back in taxes and used it for a new television and car.

And yet...those children need to be cared for, so what's the alternative?

(Sorry for this ramble; it's 7 in the morning here and I haven't been to bed yet...I'm playing an ultra-nerdy radio trivia game :o)

usualsuspect · 13/02/2011 12:03

I agree TheVisitor ...years ago when I left school theunderclass would leave school with no qualifications at 16 and get a job in a factory and earn their own money , but these jobs don't exist any more ..what else is there for them?

TheVisitor · 13/02/2011 12:05

Nancy, that is the underclass. The factories they would have worked in have gone, and there is now a benefit system which helps them live. It's all very well saying that they're all feckless wasters, but where are the jobs that they could do? It's not exactly a thriving job industry at the moment.

sakura · 13/02/2011 12:09

of course poverty is to blame. I live in Japan, the country with the lowest crime rate in the world. And it's not a coincidence that it has the smallest gap between rich and poor in the world either Smile

Nancy66 · 13/02/2011 12:10

No, that's working class.

the underclass is something else entirely.

sakura · 13/02/2011 12:11

Oh, sorry there may be some Middle Eastern countries with an even lower crime rate but that's because of their draconian punishments

ThePosieParker · 13/02/2011 12:12

Poverty makes life very hard and when life is very hard it's easy to see everything as incredibly hard, including raising children.

BaroqueAroundTheClock · 13/02/2011 12:13

Just incase people missed it the first time poverty isn't just about £££'s

" poverty is defined "as the total absence of opportunities, accompanied by high levels of undernourishment, hunger, illiteracy, lack of education, physical and mental ailments, emotional and social instability, unhappiness, sorrow and hopelessness for the future. Poverty is also characterized by a chronic shortage of economic, social and political participation, relegating individuals to exclusion as social beings, preventing access to the benefits of economic and social development and thereby limiting their cultural development." (from the UN)

ThePosieParker · 13/02/2011 12:17

Great post.

sakura · 13/02/2011 12:19

Poverty is also relative, so a "poor" person is defined as someone who is too poor to be involved in the cultural norms of the society in which he lives.
IN Britain that would probably be owning a mobile, or being able to afford a meal out now and again. A person who cannot do those things would be considered poor in Britain. Whereas a rainforest tribesman who has no material goods might not be "poor" if he has access to the same goods/foodstuff as other people in his community.

This is where the rich/poor divide becomes important. The wider the rich/poor divide, the more disenfranchised the poor will feel. Whereas a country could be comparatively poor, but if its citizens have equal acess to resources they won't feel poor, they will be more altruistic and crime rates drop.

sakura · 13/02/2011 12:20

sorry, I saw that my post was basically elaborating on the last paragraph of Baroque's post

christmaswishes · 13/02/2011 12:21

Yeh just because somebody is poor doesn't mean they can't teach their children good values and help educate them by taking the time to do it and parent them properly but the same can be said for people from rich backgrounds, they also need to take the time to bring their kids up with good values, good parenting, work ethic etc too. I don't believe money has anything to do with kids bad behaviour poor or rich its the parenting, teachers, family etc that need to set good standards and be role models and give them love, guidance and stability.

CheerfulYank · 13/02/2011 12:23

I feel lucky to have been born poor...my best friend and I were both born to young parents without much at all. And now we see people our age who are poor for the first time, and they've no practice at it. :) They do a terrible job, whereas we've held on. We were just talking about it the other day; we've fared far better in the economic decline because we know what to do.

There. That's my Pollyanna statement for the day. :o

TheVisitor · 13/02/2011 12:24

I'm working class. These people were working class, but are now underclass due to employment not being available.

sakura · 13/02/2011 12:25

BUt money can buy you out of a lot of shit. YOu can hire a cleaner, freeing you up to spend more time with your children. You can afford healthier food, you can buy books (very helpful seeing as there will soon be no more libraries). You can have a holiday from time to time. You can afford a car enabling you to take your kids out and about...

OldMumsy · 13/02/2011 12:26

A lot of people live in povery because they are stupid. They also pass on their stupid genes to their children. We often confuse cause and effect.

WelliesAndPyjamas · 13/02/2011 12:27

You need to leave the uk to see poverty. This is a very priviliged country, even for the poorest.

And I agree with op. Poverty and behaviour are not linked. Heard of badly behaved underachieving rich kids? Of well behaved high achieving 'poor' kids?