To be shocked at this comment about poverty?

[abacucat]

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?

We need to stop normalising relative poverty. Being able to feed, clothe and shelter yourself are the absolute basics. So many people are living hand to mouth in the uk now, one step away from financial disaster, it’s very sad.

This. It's beyond sad, it's rage-inducing to think that people actually voted for this.

And will vote again, many think the Tories are doing a good job

I said this on another thread.

We now have Charities working in the UK so children aren't suffering from malnutrition.

We have an increased disease and death rate across the board because of poverty.

And now posters are saying that essential clothing isn't a need?

Thank fuck we have a lot of rain.

What the fuck has happened in the UK? (apart from the Torys).

and ensured before I had children I would not bring them into a life of poverty.

Go get yer smug bastard medal. Must be amazing knowing no one who provides will ever die/become/disabled/leave/be made redundant.

I don't see this poster's comment as smug. It's obvious that, having grown up in poverty, it was important to do all she could to make sure her kids wouldn't suffer poverty the way she did.

"Our Government has several multimillionaires."

And yet we pay to, feed, clothe and give them alcohol and pay for them to live by their workplace and the transport to get there. On top of their wages.

Yet if you can't afford bus fare to get to the Job Center you are told to walk, what? In bare feet now?

We are starting to mirror Countries in Africa and the Middle East etc.

Lizzie48, that's an impossibility for the majority of people and I've seen a few very wealthy people lose everything on becoming disabled.

Are we not supposed to breed? Should we just keep shipping in immigrants to make up the shortfall in population?

Does the UK not exist anymore?

I am not crap at budgeting by the way. I am excellent at it.

How do you know the shoes or clothes you see that are broken aren’t vintage or the owner wants them to look like that

No one chooses to walk about with cold wet feet in winter because they have other choices, no one who is neuro typical or doesn't suffer from mental health issues that is.

Why are you trying so hard to pretend this is a choice. It's not. As said, I grew up poor, I've experienced cold wet feet in the depths of winter and it's fucking unpleasant to say the least.

As a pp said, feeding, housing and clothing youtself is a basic requirement, and not being able to afford a pair of shoes that protect your feet, from the elements and the crap on the pavements, is a absolutely poverty. Just because it's not as extreme as food banks or living in a card board box doesn't mean it's not poverty.

It depends on the context. My teenage son would not replace his school shoes for about 4 years (his foot size had not hcanged but there was a hole in the bottom - I even suggested putting cardboard in it). He just felt they were comfortable and didn't mind how they looked. I could have afford to buy him 100 pairs had he wanted. Whereas the lady seen at the toddler group might have wanted shoes without holes. I have shoes with holes in sometimes as not bothered to replace them. I am not too fussed about how things look although I did splash out for £2 cently on some new gloves as my current pair got a hole in them from gardening.

I think the conversation has moved on from people arguing that some people don’t mind holes in their shoes to people who who can’t afford to buy new shoes at all.

Sure, this particular lady may just not be bothered about the holes, and have thousands in the bank. But not being able to do anything about wet feet for a month, even though you hate it? Not because you’ve frittered your money on holidays or handbags, but because there’s no money left after buying food and paying rent? Risking tetanus, infection and no choice not to risk it? That’s a whole different story and I’ll argue till I’m blue in the face that that is relative poverty.

In the UK.

In 2018.

Not normal. Not right.

I am not risking tetanus or infection, just a wet foot.

abacucat, you would be if it was an ongoing problem because of poverty.

People in poverty also don't have adequate heating. Their houses aren't nicely decorated etc.

All that impacts on health.

Doctors are reporting a rise health issues that have been caused by the patient's poverty.

We need to stop normalising relative poverty. Being able to feed, clothe and shelter yourself are the absolute basics. So many people are living hand to mouth in the uk now, one step away from financial disaster, it’s very sad.

Yes, to all of this ^^

So many people are in relative poverty and don’t recognise it because there are others worse off and in absolute poverty. Not being able to afford shoes when you need to replace a pair is poverty even if there are thousands of people worse off.

I am not risking tetanus or infection, just a wet foot

Of course you are. The soles on our shoes do more than stop our feet getting cold or wet. They protect us if we stand on glass or something rusty, a hole in your shoe means it would go right through to your sock or foot. As such you're giving yourself a higher risk of tetanus or infection. As well as the risk of hurting yourself through a cut or laceration.

I think if you only have one pair of shoes that that counts as poverty.

Yes, I have built up a collection of shoes in different colours -it's taken years to do, and most have either been Xmas/birthday presents (and got from cheap places online - some are uttely beautiful imo!) or got from charity shops. I'm lucky because I'm disabled and therefore don't walk much and so my shoes don't get worn out. I realise that not everyone is as fortunate as I am.

But thinking back to when we really were poor and I was tearing my hair out trying to feed my child for the week, Iz had one pairof shoes which were too small as they were my mum's, and yes, they were sole-holed and letting in water as well as wearing a similar hole in my socks (which I couldn't afford to replace either), so I do think two pairs of shoes is a necessity not an extravagance.

To be fair though I would imagine there are other reasons that made this lady think that the mum was in poverty. She probably wouldn’t have thought twice if it was a well dressed lady that happened to have a hole in her shoe

Roomba

Re: big footed ds! Mine is the same and he grew a size with every year, was in a size 8 at 8 years old and thank god he stopped last year when he was 14 and remains in a size 14 which is still available on the high street in certain shops.

I was panicking and so was he. Now at 15 nearly 16 his feet have stopped but he's still growing and is 6ft 2.

Back to the thread, I knew a mum at playgroup when dd was a baby who only had one pair of shoes and she was in a terrible state. Her coat was also like rags. Lots of people tried to help her but she wouldn't accept. She was very proud.

This thread has brought back memories from my childhood. I grew up in poverty. I remember many many times when my shoes came apart at the sole my mum would superglue them back together and put them under the table to hold them together overnight whilst the glue fully dried.
We had a roof over our heads and nutritious food in the cupboards and the bills were paid but we were definitely poor and would have to wear our ‘mended’ shoes until my mum could afford to replace them after a few weeks or a month or so.

This thread reminds me of the few famous Women who have made remarks about envying the starving in Africa because of their body size.

Some of the posters are either working to their own warped agenda or are as vacuous.

@Birdsgottafly

I was talking about why that particular poster might feel about it, not saying we should all see it that way. Obviously there are no guarantees in life. But it's understandable she feels that way after the poverty she faced in her childhood. I was simply saying I don't see her as being smug.

It's not how I feel about it. There are children born into poorer families who have a really happy childhood and there are children born into wealthy families who suffer emotional neglect and are very unhappy. (You only need to read the Stately Homes thread to know that.

This thread reminds me of the few famous Women who have made remarks about envying the starving in Africa because of their body size.

Link or it never happened

For those saying it’s easy to afford secondhand shoes well... if you’re a 5/6 yes. If you’re and 8 with wide feet you have no change.

Plus wearing secondhand shoes can cause all kinds of problems with your gait, back pain etc. Because of how another person may have worn in those secondhand shoes. I know becaue I struggled for years with all manner of pains and aches all down to poorly fitting footwear. This is why footwear isn’t a luxury.

I struggled with poorly fitting shoes to work in. Blisters, cramping of my feet, back pain, calf pain. Wet, cold feet, athletes foot from constantly wet feet. Having to go through that because you can’t afford new shoes IS poverty.

Just did that poverty thing linked to earlier.

In the poorest 20% but can’t say I feel poor. We have enough to pay rent and council tax plus keep the house warm.

We might struggle with replacing big items.

sanpelle accused of living in poverty.
Accused? What a word to use! It is not a judgement or a criticism, it’s a fact. You either are or you aren’t in poverty, although we could argue about the precise definition all day. Not having weatherproof shoes in an advanced economy in 2018 is (or should be) considered within pretty much any definition though. It’s sad and scary that the actions of this government have made this something people would argue about.

There is no shame in poverty, people denying this is poverty are basically indicating they think poverty is somewhat shameful. And it must be denied to make the op feel better. It's not shameful.

As the pp said, it either is or it isn't. It is not something you're accused of, guilty of, is not a sin, it's not a crime and it's not shameful.