To wonder WHY parents can't afford to feed their kids isn't being addressed?

[BearPomBear]

Just that really....

@Jellycatspyjamas

The need for a furlough system showed the current benefits system as the farcical, unfit for purpose system that it is.

If it functioned properly, people would have been able to access funds to keep things ticking over when their work failed for whatever reason, the system would be flexible enough to cope with variable incomes and and nimble enough to cope with self employment.

It’s clear the government thinks people need around £2000/month to live to a decent standard of living. Quite different to current benefit levels.

Yes this.

It's worth noting that people who were receiving benefits before Covid did not receive the extra £20. Despite most also claiming through no fault of their own. Low wages, illness, disability, or redundancy

Meanwhile I read earlier today that there have been calls for the chancellor to further exacerbate the problem by getting rid of stamp duty.

The last thing we need is increased house prices. We need more council housing.

It's a shame that those who don't care can't see that lack of affordable housing and below subsistence wages/benefit amounts are a false economy.

Temporary accommodation costs are very high. As is the social cost.

Stable housing = access to community support. Long-term, mass council housing saves tax money.

But that’s because they’ve lost their jobs so are having to use the safety net. It fur sure wasn’t a choice and they worked hard to get in to their original position - before say being furloughed.

Because obviously those who lost their jobs pre-Covid didn't work hard and chose to lose their jobs

Because the kids fathers are twats and think that their kids are the government's responsibility.

The reason why is irrelevant .

What is relevant is that whatever the reason might be these particular kids need food.

@FlyingByTheSeatof

The reason why is irrelevant .

What is relevant is that whatever the reason might be these particular kids need food.

It's not irrelevant. If we want to solve the problem longer-term. Tall task perhaps but worth trying.

Surely this means the mothers must be literally starving? I can’t imagine any mother eating while her child was hungry.

Because a lot of it is bound up with low pay, and a lack of employee rights. (Keeping someone on a temp contract or just below full-time hours, to avoid giving them benefits, for instance.) Not to mention zero hour contracts. There are also massive hurdles many parents have to overcome if they want to upskill or retrain - not least of which is crushing student debt and the soaring cost of higher education. And all this is before you even factor in the effect of Covid 19 on the economy.

These are systemic issues which have been worsened by years of austerity under this government. It's not in the government's interest to draw attention to any of it.

We should absolutely be talking about it. To be honest I'm amazed we're not burning the likes of Jeff Bezos at the stake. Wealth inequality has reached such staggering proportions a new French Revolution seems frankly overdue.

But we chug along regardless.

I watched something other day and it was a single mother who had fled domestic violence with 2 primary school aged children. She had £5 a day until her benefits were sorted. She had to use that to feed them and keep the gas and electric going. It was December and she had to turn the heating off and they all slept in coats she didn’t have enough ejectric to cook dinner and fill hot water bottles...age must have sold her pearls earlier.

I remember in the 80s I used to sleep in my coat, hat and gloves in the winter. In the morning there was ice from condensed breath coating the inside of the windows. When poverty is drummed into your like that at a young age it has lifelong psychological effects. Sad to hear this is still happening today.

To be honest I'm amazed we're not burning the likes of Jeff Bezos at the stake

You could boycott Amazon?

The wrong people having children for the wrong reasons?

@FlyingByTheSeatof

The reason why is irrelevant .

What is relevant is that whatever the reason might be these particular kids need food.

But the reason is esential to the solution.

A)If the reason is daddy is sticking the family income up his nose then giving them cash or vouchers isnt going to help, the child needs directly feeding.

B)If the reason is mummy lost her job and cant afford enough while waiting for UC to kick in a cash payment or voucher is an easy and cheaper/more efficent solution

Real hard one is when the reason is A&B

The reason why is irrelevant

It's not irrelevant.

The reason for any problem is always relevant, because if we don't know or understand why, then the problem will never end.

To say the reason is irrelevant, is extremely short sighted.

A pp upthread mentioned that the reason is the fathers are twats or something like that.

The question is why are people choosing idiotic men to have children with. I'm not talking about the men who were once good...but the ones who have always been as useful as a chocolate teapot....yet women continue having children with such men.

Maybe education and awareness of the impact of poverty on a child would help in some cases.

I would add that it's not only single parents who are living in poverty, so the absent father is not the sole problem.

[quote SBTLove]@TableFlowerss
I think @Merryoldgoat point is that many people before they were in need of UC/ support they were comfortable and didn’t care how low benefits were but now they need it, the outrage is there.
Also, ppl who were furloughed still has a steady income.[/quote]
Yeah I agree, they wouldn’t have a clue how difficult it would be as they were never in that positions due to have well paid jobs etc...

Equally though they probably own their own home (mortgaged) so they won’t get their housing costs made up in the way someone that rents will. They may get minimal payments to pay the interest. They’re more likely to lose their home.

I was a single parent on benefits for a time in the early 90's. At that time, my benefits were enough to pay for utilities and food. Not much else, but the basics were covered. My DC never went hungry, nor did I actually. We ate ok. I was even able to give them both a few pounds pocket money each week.

When I look at how much someone who is in the situation now, that I was in then, is entitled to, it works out as far less because the cost of food etc has risen so steeply. I couldn't manage now the way I did then.

@Deathgrip

But that’s because they’ve lost their jobs so are having to use the safety net. It fur sure wasn’t a choice and they worked hard to get in to their original position - before say being furloughed.

Yes I’m well aware that some like you think that the people claiming now as a result of COVID are worthy, and those who were claiming before are unworthy. That’s a very easy narrative to buy into I suppose but it’s not reality.

Only a very small percentage of benefit claimants are reliant on benefits longterm, unless they are disabled, carers or otherwise unable to work. A significant number of those on universal credit are actually working. More than four million working people were living in poverty in 2018:

www.theguardian.com/business/2018/dec/04/four-million-british-workers-live-in-poverty-charity-says

As a country we prop up private businesses profits through tax credits by subsiding salaries because they are too low.

But sure, everyone on benefits is a feckless layabout - except for those worthy ones who are claiming now because of COVID, obviously

Oh please... Don’t put words in to my mouth.

I know there are plenty of people that work hard - full time on a minimum wage job and get top ups. They deserve every penny they get. Imo they work as hard as anybody on a top salary. Because the wages are that low here, working full time on the minimum wage isn’t enough.

Completely separate entity to the 2 parent families where not one of them works. Some people do make it a lifestyle choice fact. That’s what I begrudge.

There are also people that make bad choices. I know a family member asking to borrow money for the shopping - forgetting that they told the person they were asking to borrow from - their wife bought herself a new phone work for about a grand a few weeks earlier.

I can think of other examples that I personally know of, but I’m not going in to it any further because it’s pointless and I normally avoid these threads. But no one can tell me - that it’s not true that some people can’t afforded to feed their kids because of poor choices that they make....

The majority of people do work hard and benefits aren’t a life’s choice. Again if the minimum wage was higher then straight away that would make a difference.

I also know it’s not as simple as saying get a job because there aren’t many jobs in offer. And most people would much prefer to work and be able to support themselves. Also most people do make the right choices!

The reasonsshouldn't be difficult to figure out to anyone paying attention:

Food prices have been steadily increasing.
Wages have been static
Housing costs have increased
Starting from 2012 there has been massive cuts to benefits.

So, yeah...times are tough all round.
You can say what you like about individual responsibility and what you personally have done to cope.....
But its still a fact that the more difficult something is..the more people won't be able to cope with it.

This is telling.

Wages aren't rising either

[quote SBTLove]@TableFlowerss
I think @Merryoldgoat point is that many people before they were in need of UC/ support they were comfortable and didn’t care how low benefits were but now they need it, the outrage is there.
Also, ppl who were furloughed still has a steady income.[/quote]
Yes - you are quite right.

I am in receipt of a good income and have a reasonably secure job (who knows though?) but grew up in poverty.

I always knew and believed that benefits were not enough to sustain a family because a) I had the experience and b) I listed to people who were actually IN that position.

There are plenty of people now suddenly discovering that all of those 'scroungers' were right - it's a pittance and not enough to sustain a family.

The solution to this is one that will take generations to resolve.

It needs good education for all
Decently paid jobs for all
Adequate housing for all
Opportunity for all

Many people from poor backgrounds have a dearth of opportunity, have no 'way out' of their situation and end up in the same cycle of dysfunction and deprivation they were brought up in.

Until we lift up everyone this will always be a problem.

Getting rid of the benefit cap , the two child limit, the five week wait for UC and the “getting paid twice in one month” issue in UC would help instantly.

This^^ added to life throwing tragedies at people unexpectedly including domestic abuse, mental health, death of spouse, redundancies unless you come from a very affluent background it can happen to anyone

The reason it isn't discussed is that it would require the government to admit that there are structural reasons why, not that it is the result of bad choices on behalf of the individuals.

Framing it this way allows them to allocate all of their successes to themselves and all of the failures of others to them too. Therefore the public will be unsympathetic, especially when provided with a shirkers and scroungers narrative to buy into.

In reality, addressing these problems would require the changing of societal structures that currently work against people from certain backgrounds whilst working in the favour of others. Not only that it would require greater levels of taxation on the well paid and wealthy, especially on the wealthy, and the admission that in most cases our outcomes are significantly determined from where we got our start in life, not just on our own efforts and decisions ( although of course its also ignored that environmental factors have influence over our decisions).

The problem is those on benefits, might have debts, they now have to pay towards council tax, they still have to pay broadband and water and a top up rent. If you are single Id get 80.00 a week. Id still have to maintain my car insurance etc., its pathetic. What they should do is allow all debts to be put on hold whilst someone is on benefits, also you shouldnt have to pay council tax or top up rent. People with kids though get over £100 a week per child, how are they not feeding them.

As I read on another thread on this topic, there is an element of future planning, hoping for the best but preparing for the worst.

Increasingly in our social media driven culture, people live right up to their means - ok, you never know what's round the corner, and sometimes you simply don't earn enough to put any money aside. But equally a lot of people have more than 1 child without thinking 'what if...' ditto entering into car lease agreements or buying a house, or having 'nice' holidays, or buying the latest tech.

I'm lucky in that I'm able to work and earn a decent salary. But my OH and I joke that we live 'poorer' than we are. I drive an old car, most of the furniture in my house is either second hand or 15+ years old. I've got a sim only phone contract for £7 a month and a cheap Android smart phone I bought for £50. Even before Covid 19, we didn't do fancy holidays, in fact I've never travelled outside Europe. But as a result I've paid off my mortgage and if I was redundant tomorrow I have enough to live on for maybe 5 years without any other paid income.

Now yes, partly I'm lucky to have got to that position. But I'm only there because I haven't ever had a new or even nearly new car, or spent loads on furnishing and decorating my house, or bought expensive clothes or jewellery. Some (not all) of those people have now been massively affected by Covid as their work has dried up, they've been furloughed or made redundant, and are struggling.

I know also that there are people who've done none of those things, been as financially careful as possible and are still completely broke, because for one reason and another they've never been able to earn enough to improve their financial position.

It certainly isn't black and white - there are people who are their own worst enemies, others are doing their best but lack skills or opportunities to improve their situation. There are families that whatever the household income, would never have enough, children that would sadly always go hungry.