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 be shocked at this comment about poverty?

552 replies

abacucat · 18/12/2018 23:52

I have been thinking for a few days about a comment a MNer made on a thread about poverty. She said that she has nearly been in tears because a woman at the toddler group she went to had a hole in her shoe and thus had wet feet.
I have a hole in my shoe. I got a wet foot today. I don't think this is a big deal or worthy of "nearly being in tears". Surely it is pretty normal to have to wait a bit to be able to afford to replace things like shoes?
I just do't see it as a big deal at all, and I think this comment was OTT.
AIBU?

OP posts:
EerieSilence · 19/12/2018 05:37

It's relative. Where we live, being able to afford a new pair of shoes shouldn't be something you need to save for. Holes in shoes can happen but having to wait till the end of the month t replace them isn't normal. Our standards of poverty seem to have gone back 60 years.

Wallywobbles · 19/12/2018 06:07

Standards of poverty are clearly relative. Being able to eat and pay your bills should be obtainable by everyone. Having to choose a more expensive method of electricity payment because you are poor is a sign of being too close to poverty.

Having enough put aside to cover 3 months costs is clearly desirable, and would cover pretty much every emergency. In an ideal world everyone should be able to save 10/12 months of the year even if it's just €10.

I know of nowhere where that ideal exists universally. And nowhere where people understand that that's what they should do.

Donthugmeimscared · 19/12/2018 06:17

I recently had to wait until the end of the month for some new shoes and could only afford £8 Primark ones as I had to go home half day from work so didn't get paid as much. I wouldn't say I'm poor poor but pretty hard up of late. My children also wear shoezone which don't last too bad.

toomuchtooold · 19/12/2018 06:18

I think it's definitely living hand to mouth to have to wait for shoes but whether it's poverty depends on how much money is coming in, not only on how much is left at the end of the month. If a family is living off of a decent salary but they have a sky high mortgage and run a big car and go on a couple of foreign holidays a year, but that means every penny is accounted for and they don't have any rainy day money for unexpected expenses, that's not poverty. In contrast my parents both worked in low paid jobs but they were extremely careful with money and they had savings so they could deal with unexpected expenses.

AndItStillSaidFourOfTwo · 19/12/2018 06:24

I have two, max three pairs of shoes per season, because I have ridiculous feet and ortho issues needing orthotics. I also get expensive brands, because they are some of the few that fit (even with my brand of choice there are usually two or three suitable pairs only). I literally can't buy cheap shoes, because if I fitted into them width-wise they wouldn't be suitable for my orthotics (which also need to last), and vice versa.

I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford/budget for them, or to buy in advance in sales. I don't think people 'should' have to wait to replace shoes, actually, to the extent that feet are getting wet in winter.

BarbaraofSevillle · 19/12/2018 06:27

When I said 'saved for' I meant in advance, ie making sure money is put aside every week/month so that it is available for shoes/washing machines etc when necessary, before money is spent on discretionary items like shop bought lunches or high end phone contracts.

Coyoacan · 19/12/2018 06:28

I think poverty is struggling to have enough to eat or staving off eviction, not waiting a month till you can afford to replace a pair of shoes

Food poverty is normally considered to be the most extreme form of poverty, though unfortunately it seems to be getting quite common in the UK.

But otherwise poverty, to my mind, is not being able to meet all your needs. I don't live in the UK, but having wet feet in winter, especially if you have to stay all day with wet feet strikes as a sign of poverty.

LEMtheoriginal · 19/12/2018 06:33

I only have one pair of shoes outside of work. My work shoes are falling off my feet but thwy are comfy so until they actually fall apart they shall stay.

I have a pair of DM's for outside of work. I love them but by christ they were expensive. I am not poor at the moment but definitely not rich. I cannot wear cheap shoes as they cripple my feet. So for me its one pair of decent shoes. So my boots were £130 but i fully expect to be wearing them for at least 2-3 years pretty much as my only winter shoe. If i needed new ones now i would be stuffed as i am skint and this will continue for a few months. So i too would be in holey shoes until i could afford a decent pair.

SnuggyBuggy · 19/12/2018 06:46

There is a really wide range of what people perceive as a normal amount of shoes to own.

My DH has a pretty decent salary and 3 pairs of shoes, work, trainers and sandals. He often has to dry them or wear them wet but feels no need to buy a spare pair.

He thinks I have a ridiculous amount of shoes when I don't think I do compared with other women. He also doesn't see why I want both brown and black boots or pumps in a few different colours for different clothes.

Dimsumlosesum · 19/12/2018 06:47

There could've been any number of reasons she had those shoes on. Our family income is high. I own five pairs of shoes - three pairs are very old and have holes in and are used as going in the garden/quick run to the shops etc shoes, one is a pair of wellies, and one a set of trainers. Sometimes before stepping out the front door my kids have hidden one of my non-hole shoes. Sometimes I forgot to dry them after having been cuaght in the rain last. So I have to put on my dry but with a hole in shoes, and hope I can stay out the puddles. I just haven't got round to buying a new pair yet, not because I can't afford it, it's just there are other things occupying my mind right now. Etc. I agree with you OP, it's not always a sign of poverty, and saying she was nearly in tears over it is Hmm. My best friend doesn't have much, but she'd be really offended if I cried over her shoes etc - it's a bit offensive, pitying people.

CrazySheepLady · 19/12/2018 06:53

I think it shows a very kind heart to be upset when someone is physically and emotionally moved by examples of how lack of money can affect people.

Surfskatefamily · 19/12/2018 06:56

Im the same. Get wet feet as holes in both shoes. So annoying. Problem i have is when i can afford shoes i cant afford much so have to buy cheap and they last 5mins on me as i stomp everywhere.
If i could afford a good quality pair this might be less of a problem

Mistigri · 19/12/2018 06:58

Not being able to afford to buy a pair of shoes is pretty much the definition of poverty.

But people sometimes have holes in their shoes for reasons other than poverty. My teenage son only owns one pair of ordinary shoes, because he's the fussiest shoe wearer in the history of shoes and it takes ages to find a new pair, and so sometimes he does wear shoes that are not in a very good condition.

DeezMutts · 19/12/2018 07:01

I most definitely would consider having to wait to buy shoes or wearing ones with holes in as being in poverty. And if it was for dc I’d have us live on beans in toast til payday and get the shoes if we didn’t have the spare. Our household income is below national average so I’m not in the mn mega wage bracket.

Donthugmeimscared · 19/12/2018 07:04

@DeezMutts I tend to already be at the beans on toast stage most months minus the shoes.

anniehm · 19/12/2018 07:07

It's quite normal to get a hole, but once it's developed most people have a second pair so they don't have to get wet feet a second time. I get my decent ones resoled - spending £60 on a decent pair can work out cheaper in the long run

Bluntness100 · 19/12/2018 07:10

It's not normal no, but it's uncommon. And we have too much poverty in this country, but there is no point denying its poverty.

I grew up like this and it's fucking miserable having cold wet feet. I've been there, done that and know 100 percent it's not a pleasant situation anyone would chose if they have other options.

It's not thr being able to replace shoes in isolation, it's having only one pair of shoes and being forced to wear them in the cold and wet for weeks or months till you can afford to replace them.

Is there a lower level of poverty, of course there is, no one is saying this is as poor as you can get, but to say it's normal, or not a sign of poverty is wrong.

As said. I've been there and done it and walking about with cold wet feet is really unpleasant let's not pretend otherwise.

BigFarmer · 19/12/2018 07:11

"The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.

This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness."

BathshebaKnickerStickers · 19/12/2018 07:13

I have a hole in my converse which I wear all the time.

I have a replacement pair sitting in the box up the stairs but I've not deemed the hole bad enough yet to justify the new ones.

Maybe I have low standards....!! Maybe its related to my years of crap self esteem.

I have my boots on today- they look better with my classy santa dress...

Bluntness100 · 19/12/2018 07:14

Sorry that should say it's not uncommon.

fieryginger · 19/12/2018 07:16

Back in the 70's, DH had a friend whose dad knocked the blade of some skates they'd come across, DH's friend wore them. He also had wellies cut down and laces poked in to make them shoe like. Not sure how that works but DH is a truthful man.

That's poverty.

TheBigBangRocks · 19/12/2018 07:17

Poverty is having no food or shelter so being homeless. Very common to have to wait until payday to buy something.

continuallychargingmyphone · 19/12/2018 07:18

Well yes, that’s the poverty trap Big - see also able to take advantage of special deals, being able to travel and so on. Being poor is expensive.

However, I think the poster in question was probably trying to show her kind heart

BoomBoomsCousin · 19/12/2018 07:20

I think not having a second pair of shoes and being unable to afford another pair until payday would tend to indicate poverty. It will be fairly normal for a lot of people on this site, but that's because there are nearly 4 million children who live in poverty in the UK. We are a rich country but it's not evenly spread. Lots of people live in poverty in this country and families with children are well represented in that number.

jarhead123 · 19/12/2018 07:21

YANBU.

We have 0p in the bank, its payday tomorrow. Tomorrow we will have nearly 4k in our bank, so not poor by any means, just waiting for payday....

We couldn't buy the shoes today but could tomorrow.

Swipe left for the next trending thread