To think you're not poor...

[RunningjustasfastasIcan99]

AIBU to think you're not poor if you can afford SKY TV? Felt a bit irritated that on "rich house poor house" this week the "poor" family had massive Tv's in the kids bedrooms and sky tv. I know they didn't have a ton of money and were in the bottom 10 %. But really?

Lol’ing at sky being a luxury. Maybe in 1992

But they weren't in debt if I recall correctly . So Complaining about struggling can still be inclusive of struggling to keep up with what they like to provide their dc for example ? A tv and an X box is hardly the epitome of spooling your kids rotten is it . Particularly if they are at an age when most their classmates may have these type of gadgets . they may have been much longed for Christmas gifts that took months and months to save for . Where as the richest 10 percent could buy those things for Christmas and still provide a summer holiday for example .

It’s £140 to cover food, clothes, fuel, car repairs, hair cuts, presents, household items, trips to the dentist, prescriptions, toiletries, other medication, shoes, school uniform... doesn’t sound like that much to me.

When I say disposable I think they mean after bills and housing so that includes food / clothing / savings etc etc . My point is people are arguing this family are being frivioulous because they have sky were as I feel it's up to them what they spend that on

I mean the 140 includes budgeting for those other things

My god why do people judge others? Maybe they have friends/family working for sky and get it cheap or free? Yes it happens

Why do people watch such pointless and deliberately inflammatory programmes?
You should be reading an improving book instead. nods

I wouldn't have Sky if you paid me.
Mind you it probably wouldn't work here as broadband is crap rural on the edge of town so we can look longingly at the estate through the trees where they have superfast fibre while we have overhead phone lines from a different exchange miles away.
But I don't really watch TV so it doesn't bother me.

Exactly. How dare they have something to entertain themselves. I despise the sheer nastiness behind threads like this.

Rich House, Poor House is very formulaic and it is clear the families are loosely following a script as the format is the same every week. Despite this there are insights to be gained into why some people are better off than others. What is interesting is that even those in the lowest ten per cent of earnings group have a home and access to money. They would be envied by millions of people in foreign countries.

My DH and I find also find it of interest that we used, when at our maximum earning potential, to be in the top ten per cent and now, with my enforced early retirement and his recent redundancy, are in the bottom ten per cent. I imagine we are living lives of what used to be called genteel poverty. We have the nice house we bought when better off but are scraping by living a faux Rolls Royce life on a beat-up Mini budget.

We still read, think and have wide interests rather than resorting to Sky packages and like to think that it is what you are rather than what you spend that matters. However, we know many rich people and they do avoid the poor like the plague as if impecuniousness is catching.

Lol’ing at sky being a luxury. Maybe in 1992

Of course Sky is a luxury. It's spending money on something that you can easily do without or spend much less on than the full packages.

You can get probably 90% of what Sky offers by using your Sky box as a Freesat system (or having a Freeview or Freesat TV) and using either Now TV or Netflix for under a tenner a month for the pay TV element (broadband and line rental are extra obviously). That would be a sensible choice on a low income.

Or you could go all out and have a paid Sky TV, possibly with movies and sports channels that costs 2 or 3 times as much per month. On a very low income, that's probably not a sensible choice and the money would be better spent on things like better food, clothes and shoes for DCs or putting into savings to reduce the risk of needing expensive credit.

That is interesting that teacher has the contrast between before and now. In general it is harder to move up than fall later so I always try to recommend people get as good qualifications as they can when young. Put off babies and indeed sex as long as they possibly can and buy a fallt or house with two full time incomes before having babies. the "poor" couple in the latest issue at least had the house the husband bought ealry on in his life wihch gives them a lot of stability based on that sensible early decision of his as a slight bufffer now his poor wife is so ill.

We see families in the show. We don't see single men who tend not to be housed or nothing like as well housed when they fall on hard times. it is certainly a formula and they deliberately pick couples where at least one person works hard and full time and veyr nice people too.

Why get Sky when the local library is free and reading improves literacy rates and provides entertainment?

mrsmarigold my library is shut most of the week!

But not all of the week!

My point was there is a heck of a lot you can do for free, I just struggle to believe people chose to pay for SKY if they are poor, it just does nothing for your brain as it's such a passive activity. If you have a family surely you feel ambitious for them and want to promote social mobility by encouraging active learning and pushing yourself, physically and mentally, good habits are learned early on.

Maybe I'm just so bloody middle class, that's why I struggle to understand. I have been through some really hard times but I guess it's priorities. We've never had SKY as it's a total waste of money and I'm very frugal.

I did check the other week when the local library in the area of the NE where one of those family lived was open ( the rich family took the children to be beach in the rain when they could have been in the library) and it was open every day for at least some hours other than 2 including Sunday so not as bad as people think.

In the other episodes the richer family have often been working class made good so we have not seen the bigger contrasts - books v sky we saw on the latest episode, classical music, yoga etc

Exactly Xenia.

I've been poor and had game consoles. The sale value was pennies so wasn't worth selling to get the bad times. I would agree about not having sky tv though. There are cheaper options.

As for tvs you can buy second hand for really cheap. I got a Samsung tv for £2 in a house clearance once.

Gosh, the library was open in an area where one family lived, that means it must be open everywhere. Perhaps you'd like to come and (re) open my local library?

No library here either and bus fare to closest would be well over 30pcm!

On this week's show the family hadn't always been poor, the mother worked until she got ill and could no longer work so perhaps they got those things before that happened. Obviously you are right though poor people shouldn't have televisions and their children shouldn't have games consoles if they want to claim they are poor?

Apparently sky tv is like smoking: the very wealthy and very poor do/have it, but no one else can afford it(!).....

But maybe people don’t want to leave their house Marigold? I’m out the house all day at work, I don’t want to go out all evening for entertainment (admittidly I am not poor but that doesn’t mean poor people should be turfed out either)

Dh is supposedly in the top 1% of earners and we don't have sky . We can get all the channels we watch for free or for a much smaller price than sky so we have made in our eyes a sensible choice .. sky fleece people !!
I guess though if they would rather have that than a meal out it's up to them 🤷‍♀️

Why get Sky when the local library is free and reading improves literacy rates and provides entertainment?

My local library is over 4 miles away. It is open for limited daytime hours with one late finish a week. At 7pm. I don’t get home till gone 6 so not sure how that would work.