To think that this is unacceptable in this day and age

[nighttrains]

• An estimated 14.3 million people are in poverty in the UK
• 8.3 million are working-age adults, 4.6 million are children, and 1.3 million are of pension age
• Around 22% of people are in poverty, and 34% of children are
• Just under half (49%) of those in poverty are in “persistent povertyy_” (people who would also have fallen below the poverty line in at least two of the last three years). This is as of 2016/17

This is from fullfact.org/economy/poverty-uk-guide-facts-and-figures/

It's appalling for a so called civilised country

@jdoejnr1

Agreed, I also think you should have to move to a smaller property when your kids leave home or similar. Make way for those who need it the most.

Not if, as currently happens, that condemns disabled people to homelessness, because downsizers take all the available smaller homes leaving nothing for them.

It's also a huge trauma particularly for the elderly. Your home is more than just a roof over your head. Moving home is acknowledged as one of the most stressful life experiences.

No we need to ensure there's enough homes for everyone - including single and childless couples, empty nesters, and the disabled. As well as young families.

Could someone pls actually quantify how much money/household means that a household is in poverty? Before and after housing costs.

No, and the government shouldn't be propping up businesses by providing tax credits either. It is down to employers to pay a living wage, not to expect the taxpayer to pick up the costs.

The government need to put their money where their mouth is and pay hospital auxilaries, cleaners, school cleaners, assistants etc etc enough that they don't need tax credits. They can't criticise employers who don't pay enough when they are one of the biggest offenders themselves.

@TheSunIsStillShining

Could someone pls actually quantify how much money/household means that a household is in poverty? Before and after housing costs.

I would say you are in poverty when this calculator tells you that you cannot afford to rent or buy anywhere in the UK:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23234033

@Cabinfever10

You can blame the austerity cuts and 11 year freeze on benefits. If benefits had gone up at the same rate as they had (inflation rates only) instead of £72 per week it would be almost double. But as we all know benefit claimants are all "lazy work shy scroungers " so don't deserve anything. Strange that as soon as the pandemic hit the government gave each claimant household £80 per month but that stops in April, its a joke

Some of the problem can be laid at the feet of our ridiculous electoral system. Basically, 200,000 people decide elections, and they tend to be the kind of feeble minded bigot who votes for Brexit, and indeed, thinks that the unemployed are "lazy workshy scroungers"

@nighttrains

No, and the government shouldn't be propping up businesses by providing tax credits either. It is down to employers to pay a living wage, not to expect the taxpayer to pick up the costs.

The government need to put their money where their mouth is and pay hospital auxilaries, cleaners, school cleaners, assistants etc etc enough that they don't need tax credits. They can't criticise employers who don't pay enough when they are one of the biggest offenders themselves.

This is why we need mass council housing. Neverending pay or benefit/tax credit increases just enables the housing pyramid scheme. Propping up am unsustainable housing market. That's the route cause of the problems.

Using that calculator the minimum rent monthly in the UK is in Powys and then Stockton on Tees. The cheapest place to buy is East Ayrshire where you can buy with the lowest deposit and lowest mortgage payments.

Yanbu.

@nighttrains
We can't arrange mass uprooting of communities to cheaper house price areas. Even with increased WFH lots of jobs still need in person attendance. People can't all just pack in their jobs for a rent or buy they can no longer afford because of being jobless.

Also childcare. We largely rely on grandparent childcare nowadays. That couldn't happen if everyone moved away on mass.

Mass uprooting destabilises communities.
People lose their family support networks and society is fractured.

Mass council housing (NO right to buy) is the solution.

Depends how you define poverty. True poverty is where you don’t have a roof over your head, can’t afford to feed or clothe yourself or your family. But some think poverty is when they can’t afford a car or to go on holiday or buy presents for Christmas.

@nighttrains
according to this almost everyone is below.

I am genuinely interested in the amount of money per month which is referenced as being in poverty.

A family member works in social housing. A mother phoned up saying that she couldn't pay her rent this week because it's her childs birthday. I kid you not.

@SheepandCow I agree with you in part. If you live on your own in a 3 bed house because the kids have left you shouldnt be kicked out till appropriate accommodation has been found and the homeless should take priority of single bed property. However, whilst for many it is their home not just a house, it isn't the role of government to subsidise sentimentality at the expense of those who are in greater need. We don't don't do it with any other resource so why housing.

[quote TheSunIsStillShining]@nighttrains
according to this almost everyone is below.

I am genuinely interested in the amount of money per month which is referenced as being in poverty.[/quote]
"The poverty line in the UK is defined as a household income below 60% of the average. This threshold is currently around £195 a week for a lone parent with two children. Using this definition there are over 3 million children living in poverty."

@jdoejnr1
That is the first google result. If you actually click through it leads to a half page doc where the links don't work. Hardly a reliable source.

[quote TheSunIsStillShining]@jdoejnr1
That is the first google result. If you actually click through it leads to a half page doc where the links don't work. Hardly a reliable source.[/quote]
Then feel free to google the answer yourself if you think the answer is incorrect.

I get sick to the back teeth of the out-of-touch poverty deniers on this site. Poverty is real. If you are homeless and living on the street it doesn’t matter much which country you are from.

My dh was raised in food poverty: he often didn’t have food to eat for entire days, 3-4 of them when the benefit cheque ran out. I’m lucky in that there was usually food in the house, but it was definitely a case of eat what you’re given and be grateful, with no choice, little variety and not much in the way of taste.

That was in the 70s and 80s for us. We go back to the areas we lived in and things are worse. More people with less and less and fewer chances to get away from it. This is Britain, supposedly one of the richest countries in the world and how dare any of the hereditary middle class rich here try to tell us that it didn’t happen or that we should be grateful it’s not worse! It is an absolute disgrace.

And yet so many of these poor families have sky tv, they smoke and drink. They prioritise these over feeding their children.

Straight out of the Daily Fail @JenniferSantoro. Please give us the facts to back this up.

Or try to understand the stresses of that kind of life. In any case it’s not the fault of the hungry kids is it!

Nighttrains The government need to put their money where their mouth is and pay hospital auxilaries, cleaners, school cleaners, assistants etc etc enough that they don't need tax credits. They can't criticise employers who don't pay enough when they are one of the biggest offenders themselves.

I'm criticising the employers for not paying enough, I'm not sure what the government position is. Yes, I agree with you, but then the employers are the Health Trusts, LEAs, Academy Trusts etc, who set the pay rates, and the government would argue they don't set the pay rates here. The government set the rates for the MOD and Civil Service afaik.

I was trying to point out that this whole thread is hypothetical and pointless without people actually knowing what they are talking about.

Ok, did a little digging. This seems more reliable and closer to the ONS stats i remember:

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) charity, that's an income less than:

£248 a week for a couple with no children
£144 a week for a single person with no children
£401 a week for a couple with two children aged between 5 and 14
£297 a week for single parent with two children aged between 5 and 14

Not saying that there is no poverty in this country, but I would really like to know how many kids really only have a meal in school (as an often cited measure, but never quantified. Just aiming for our tear ducts, nothing more)

And also if we look at these numbers, a couple with no children are in poverty when they take home ~1000 pounds/month or 1,700 with 2 kids. Apart from London these are not actual poverty inducing figures.
For a fam of 4 you can easily rent a 2 or 3 bed within a grand/month. Leaving 700 pounds to spend. Not a lot, but manageable.
(For more than a year we managed with 400 pounds/month after paying rent and utilities. But we were not eligible for anything as our income was "high".. yeah, just most of it went to a private landlord. For example this is not even considered in these numbers)

Real poverty is when you can't buy food, can't buy clothes and have nowhere to live or barely can afford to live in some rut.

There is a real problem with the definition in the UK. Because it is such a wide net the actual real problematic areas get mixed in with the "get on with it" crowd. Focus should be on real poverty and a real social net for those who genuinely can't work and need help. But how can there be any real discussion with the baselines not even agreed upon?

In my work (nothing to do with poverty as such) my complacency about how we live in the UK was thoroughly rocked. I had never realised what a bubble I occupied.

I went to visit a family of four who lived in one room. In a corner there was a washbasin and a single electric element to cook on.
Another family lived in a tiny house owned by a dodgy landlord. In order to pay the rent both parents worked close to 12 hour shifts. Mum worked days, dad worked nights. They pretty much passed in the hallway. I could give more examples. And this in the so called affluent South East.

Unless you come face to face with this sort of thing, you'd have no idea. But maybe give a thought to how how you think someone on minimum wage or zero hours actually manages to keep a roof over their head, and their kids fed.

My point is exactly the above (saraclara)
The discussion and real help should be focused where there is the real need. Not on a family who live in a 2-3 bed, but can't go on a holiday.
There's a finite amount of money, so let's spend it well.

Yeah. It's shit. There are about 900 million people living in slums worldwide (around 13.5x the population of the UK). It gets me down a lot.

@Gancanny

And yet so many of these poor families have sky tv, they smoke and drink. They prioritise these over feeding their children

Do please provide some evidence to back up your prejudice.

@TenThousandSteps I don’t read the daily fail. My evidence is 30 years worth of experience in law and order, safeguarding, investigating child abuse and neglect. I’m not saying for a second that every family in poverty prioritises their social needs over their children’s welfare, but I saw it again and again over the years.