to wish all these filthy rich people who claim to know what it's like to live off a pittance, would just fuck the hell off?

[sickofthisshite]

AIBU?

Sarah Ferguson claims a family of 4 can easily live off £80 p/wk to cover all living costs

Boris Johnson has said the poor "should show gratitude to the mega rich"

Iain Duncan Smith says living off £53 is doable for a single person.

According to DC, customers at Waitress are "friendlier & more engaged" than those he has interacted with at other supermarkets. As if people who shop in Sains, Tesco, etc don't have opinion on politics & the state of the country, their lives. Just because someone is inarticulate or introverted does not mean there thoughts & feelings are irrelevant.

The list goes on.

Who the hell are these prats to judge those in the vicious, relentless struggle of poverty.

I hope there perfect little bubble is one day burst.

It makes me sick to my very core.

maniac I said with housing benefit, if you're only getting £53 a week you'd be entitled to housing benefit.

YANBU. I've never really been skint and I wouldn't like to tell anyone what its like. Those programmes where they live on a small amount for a week are a load of crap because they know that they can make a sacrifice or two for one week and then go back to comfort after.

One comment I see on here frequently "that everyone is one paycheck away from disaster" is just wrong. People like IDS, DC, BJ and even people like me aren't. If you have a buffer of savings or a property with a lot of equity or other sources of income etc. you can manage. For people like that it is genuinely difficult to imagine what living without a safety net is like.

None of this is intended to be a stealth boast so sorry if it comes across that way. Its just a comment that if you are reasonably comfortable you really don't have the same pressures and worries and it can be hard to understand what it is really like for people who do. That's why you don't tell them how to live their lives or how easy it is to manage

I hope they keep saying this loudly and clearly

It is the only way that voters will realise what they are voting for. There is a real risk of a Tory out and out majority at the next election - we need them to show their true colours to avoid this.

I am happier with them being so blatant about who they represent and who they are serving (i.e. the mega rich) than being weasly and accommodating and sounding as though they a compassionate.

They are a group of people at the top. The Tory party exists to keep the rich rich and the poor serving them. I prefer it when they are honest about that.

but housing benefit is only a subsidy isn't it? (not even a subsidy most people on mn say, just fair rent) So it would still easily cost you £40-£50 a week.

My h is out of work as one of the conditions of his job seekers allowance is that he has to have a broadband connection and phone. That is how they check job searches etc these days. So you would need to pay water, gas, electric, internet, phone and food. Every 2 weeks we get to £220 to pay all bills plus £135 child benefit every 4 weeks. After. 7 weeks we are still waiting to see if we will get housing or council tax benefit.

Sarah Ferguson claims a family of 4 can easily live off £80 p/wk to cover all living costs - perhaps not "easily" but I can't find a quote where she actually says this. But here is the breakdown

Boris Johnson has said the poor "should show gratitude to the mega rich" - not sure "gratitude" is the right word but the rich do pay the majority of tax article here and considering "the poor" recieve benefits, that are funded mostly by tax paid by the rich, there is truth in that statement

Iain Duncan Smith says living off £53 is doable for a single person - It is. It's not pleasant. But I would describe it as "do-able". I've done it.

According to DC, customers at Waitress are "friendlier & more engaged" than those he has interacted with at other supermarkets. As if people who shop in Sains, Tesco, etc don't have opinion on politics & the state of the country, their lives. Just because someone is inarticulate or introverted does not mean there thoughts & feelings are irrelevant - Supermarket snobbery - but true. I find that shopping in Waitrose is a more pleasant experience that shopping in Asda, the people tend to be more pleasant and sociable, as horrible that is to say.

Oh and housing benefit can longer cover the full rent so we will have to find the other bit from the other

manic No it wouldn't.

Some people get full rent paid via housing benefit.

If you were only earning £53 a week you'd get full HB on a bedsit or possibly one bedroomed flat

MrsPear I'm on job seekers, they want you to go online to do job searching but this can be done from home or a local library. When my internet plays up I go to the library. In the absolute worst case scenarios they give you a sheet to write your job searches on

Thinkaboutittomorrow
Hear hear, completely agree.
Please let them show who they really are so people know not to vote for them....

sparechange how true! I have met such people. They reek of arrogance.

What I'd like politicians to do, is to LISTEN to the masses We're not greedy, we live a fairly simple life, yet still I feel we face a barrage of pity, arrogance & complete misunderstanding from the 'the people above'

I just want to provide for my dc & give them a happy, non materialistic upbringing. It is so difficult though, when you have to budget to the absolutely, last, literal penny.

Yes Tequila, but to job hunt you need internet and a phone. You need stationery and access to a printer. You need decent clothes and fares for interviews.

The library offers all of those, that's what I have to use sometimes!

I think that the economic divide in the population is disgusting but I think that the rich shouldn't be penalised for being rich.
I think state education needs to be severely revolutionised to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to develop themselves and their careers.

I'm 22, I had a state education and no financial help from anyone. I also have a mental illness. At 18 I was on benefits (Housing Benefit, Job seekers). 4 years later, I own my house (3 bed terrace in naice village) and earn about £30-35k across two jobs (7 days a week though!).
I took advantage of the fact that I had no responsibilities (ie children) and worked very very hard. I appreciate this isn't available for all, but it is for the majority. In 10 years time, I hope to be earning a lot lot more.

I think "rich-bashing" can be just as unfair as "poor-bashing". By the time I'm paying super tax and earning in the top 1% I would have put in a lot of hard graft. I know people on lower incomes work hard but it isn't a secret that this country is capitalist and where the money is.

And they'll pay for interview clothes if you ask them - you might not know that know it may be something they don't tell everyone

Derailing... I have a tv and no licence, perfectly legal.

I lived on benefits for quite a few years when a single parent (with no maintenance either), so I do understand that life on benefits is hard, but do-able. I went without a lot of things that many people consider to be essentials (e.g. didn't have a TV) or little treats (never bought food/drink when out at all). I made the most of every small deal or offer, and all the little discounts/grants you can get when on benefits. I am not quite 'filthy rich' these days, but very comfortable (top 4% or something). Not everyone who is on a high salary has been handed it on a plate. I feel empathy for those who are stuck on benefits, but I also hear a lot about poor budgeting skills and not making the most of money saving opportunities.

I think someone could exist on £53 a week if they were quite resourceful. Note I said "exist".

And many people wouldn't have a clue how to eat on a tight budget. My sister is way poorer than us and lives on takeaway, her food bill must be massive. Many people lack budgeting skills.

Tinkly - the library can provide access to the internet and a printer (they charge for printer and photocopier use).

I used public transport to job-seek. Lived on toast for a very long time because I couldn't afford anything else. (I don't think housing benefit wasn't even available then, many years ago). Maybe it was, but I wasn't aware of it. Any spare money I had I kept back for interview clothes.

Thankfully, I wasn't reduced to living in a hole in the road (Monty Python sketch). My post was starting to read like that, so had to mention it

Point just being - sometimes you have to take the rough with the smooth, work extra hard at budgeting and job-seeking. Rich-bashing, when unjustified, annoys me too. We're not rich, by any means, I'd say comfortable, but it has taken a long time and a lot of hard work to get to this point. But we get sneered at by people who say "You have no idea what it is to struggle". Actually, yes, we do, and did, for many, many years.

Tax avoidance also annoys me - the likes of Starbucks, Google, etc.
That's another subject, I know, but loosely connected.

Money is not linear.

To someone surviving on 50 quid a week, a tenner extra is a fortune. To someone earning a hundred grand a year, it'll not make much difference.

Needs are not linear either.

Everyone should have the right to decent housing, food, warmth, and a dignified standard of living (eg being able to buy kids a birthday present). People do not have the same level of "right" to unnecessary luxuries, like fancy clothes, cars and designer handbags. We may want these things, we don't need them on the whole. Look at a picture of a third world child dying of a preventable disease and tell me they aren't just frivolous, really.

Social goods are not individual.

Living in a society where people have a decent level of educational attainment, where crime rates are low, where people care about each other benefits all of us. This is why it is just for the wealthy to pay more tax and to contribute more as a proportion of their income.

DH is a higher rate taxpayer, as was I when I worked, so this is not a politics of envy. We both feel that it is only morally right for us to contribute, and we would both be happy to pay more if it were to make a difference to social inequality and to help those from poor backgrounds have a fair shot. As we do not have a decent redistributive tax system at present, we try to take some responsibility by giving to charities instead. However, this means that we decide where money goes, which it unfair- really it needs to be a democratic decision.

Slitheytove - could you explain how, please? I've worked in schools who only used the television for video purposes, but they still had to have a licence. My understanding is that if you own a TV, you have to have a licence.

I should add that yes, DH and I worked hard for what we have for many years... But I wouldn't FOR ONE SECOND say that we work harder than the cleaner on minimum wage who has three jobs, or the carer who patiently deals with person after person for a pittance. People who assume that they have got wealthy because of hard graft are blinkered, I think, to the extent to which people in low paid jobs also work incredibly hard, for little reward.

You need a TV licence if you watch (or record) programmes as they are being broadcast (on a TV or online). If you only use your TV to play DVDs, or to play games, or you watch catch-up services only, no licence is needed. www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one

Totally agree, they're a total joke.

Evans - you only need a license for live programming so if you watch DVDs/videos/iplayer after it has broadcast you don't need a license.

We've all but stopped watching live tv and would get rid of our license but I believe in public broadcasting and it's nice to have the option to watch the news and question time live