What standard of living do you think should be the minimum everyone can afford?

[MondayAgainnn]

What do you think the absolute basic minimum should be?

I think everybody should be able to afford:

Decent food
Safe housing
Any extra medical things needed, including dentistry
Internet package as it is completely necessary nowadays
Enough clothes to stay warm, dry, appropriate trainers for exercising etc
Enough for some discretionary spending - obviously this is harder to quantify, but things like Netflix, a coffee, cinema tickets I feel should be a normal attainable part of life for everyone
Enough to save a bit

Whether it is through work or through benefits I feel everyone in society should be able to have a lifestyle that is dignified, basically comfortable and with room for treats. Not just subsistence level.

What do you think the minimum should be?

Quite agree. People need to have something to aspire to.

Isn't the question, to what extent should people take responsibility for their own lives and plan for the multiple scenarios which might happen to them?

No one would argue that an 18 year old leaving school should be able to have their home, car and holidays.

Everyone should say that an adult working full time at a job they are qualified for after a period of time, maybe five to ten years should.

No one should bring children into the world without working out how they are going to pay and support them. Including if circumstances change.

I agree with several other posters that anyone who is working full time should be able to cover all their basic living costs. This is the social contract. When people slave to the bone and still struggle badly, obtaining what you need through non-legitimate means becomes more attractive. Paying people fairly is vital for social cohesion.

In my view, this means paying all your bills, eating well, being able save a modest amount (equivalent to maintaining a months's salary so that you have money for emergencies when needed) and yes, being able to afford a modest holiday.

Everything is relative. Even our very poor today live better than they did 100 years ago. Holidays may seem like luxuries but that's because they are a relatively modern concept and have traditionally only been the preserve of the rich. In the modern west, holidays are now so normalised that those who don't experience them do miss out by comparison and children who don't go on holiday often don't see the opportunities the world can offer them (let alone think they can strive for them). Not always, and with clever workarounds for some, but enough for it to be a strong trend.

Where has this happened?

It's based on socialism ideology which has time and time again failed to win the majority in many countries/states.

I’d like to think that everyone could afford to send their kid/s to an activity (football, rugby etc)

There’s still the mentality that some will be better off on benefits than working but with UC and the 2 child limit, that’s no longer true.

i work full time and get UC as I have 1 child. The taper rate means that I am better off working full time… if I only worked 16 hours I would be much worse off income wise. I’m on more than NMW but with price rises things are harder than before.

This year I am finally going on holiday for the first time in 5 years. Just a long weekend in skegness but to me it’s going to be great!

But bills are paid, fridge is stocked and we do cheap days out. I have free bus travel through work and nursery is paid for.
my goal is to save for a holiday abroad but that will be a big luxury!

The point is - should they be? If you work full time I think you should definitely be able to afford at least a couple of weeks away each year.

Benefits should pay the bare minimum necessary to sustain life. Work should pay a lot more than benefits, so there is clear incentive to work.

So it hasn't happened?

I'm going to look at this a slightly different way.

I think those families that have one/two parents working full time on the minimum wage should be better off than someone on benefits* who does not work.

We need a system that encourages people to work that makes their life noticeably better.

I was on benefits for 4 months about 20 years ago when I could not find a job (rural location, no car, rubbish public transport). I was thankful for help to pay essentials and certainly would not expect money for cinema, netflix, coffee out etc... That's ludicrous! For entertainment I went for walks, read books (free from local library), applied for jobs, helped people with tasks etc...

I think it's a sad state of affairs when a hard working couple with kids are no better off than if they didn't work.

Perhaps we need a scheme where those working over 25 hours a week but on low wages get benefits such as reduced Netflix subscriptions, coffee out vouchers, supermarket food vouchers?!?

*And pre-empting "what about disabled people who can't work" comments, I'm referring to those who CAN work but don't.

I have an idea, how about we look at those countries with the highest standards of living, lowest levels of inequality and happiest and healthiest populations?

Then copy some of their ideas?

All of this theorising and guess work really isn't necessary

Well my point was only that the life of reily on benefits is impossible. Anyone who appears to be doing ok on them is not painting the whole picture (being generous)

They do pay the bare minimum, we were as a single income house hold on benefits for 8 weeks. Any longer and we simply would not have survived, at all. £600 a month for an adult and a child.

So it hasn't happened?

Technically no because socialists parties have never won. Because it will never work..as evidence that of all the countries in the world- only 4 countries are socialists- China being the largest- and they have more worries.

Everybody is different so someone might prefer to spend their money on a holiday someone else may prefer a newer car or a new kitchen.

How do you know? It’s fraud, happening precisely because people get away with it. No one can know the full amount being stolen unless every fraudster got caught. And if everyone got caught, no one would be doing it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/12/safe-happy-and-free-does-finland-have-all-the-answers

Finland
The rich and big companies pay a proper amount of tax
There is no private education so everyone has an interest in making education excellent
There is a much smaller gap between the richest and poorest

But those policies work in Finland because it's Finland to start with, You aren't going to make the UK like Finland by copying the policies, that's putting the cart before the horse. Make the UK like Finland, and THEN Finnish policies will work.

Our birth rate would then plummet. So how would we ensure that we have a replacement population?
When I was a child there were a lot more community groups and churches were active. There were cheap coach trips, although staffing ratios etc wouldn't allow kids today to do what we did. Every school child from Liverpool would go to Colomendy. There used to be community schemes 'job creation' which would offer DIY/gardening to those on low income/elderly/disabled. All that helps. People should have decent housing and be able to upkeep their homes.

Yes.

And fundamentally we need to change the
Mindset and expectations of the British public.

I would love to see a breakdown of what they receive in benefits because the standard allowance for a couple is £578 a month.

People expect too much. A middle-class lifestyle with a home full of gadgets, 2 cars on the driveway, and someone else to pay for it all.

Was waiting for this lazy example to come up. This is as misleading as when people call Scandinavian countries socialist. Finland is a country with a smaller population than London and the same as Yorkshire. Finland is basically a small outpost of Western Europe shielded from population pressures thats major economies face.

Unless and until people start to understand how economics works, we will keep seeing lazy, uninformed, throwaway statements like the ones on this thread.

I think disability benefits should fund all that and extra for additional expenses plus treats, in recognition that people can't work.

Benefits for children should have greater funding but through schools and health visitors; add free meals for all kids, greater access to free clubs with benefits, plus more funding for trips and treats.

After all that, I would like minimum wage to increase to an extent by which nobody in paid full time employment should require benefits. If that means subsidising businesses like farming more instead to pay those wages, that's fine. It'll cost less to administer and put some honesty back into the process about who is benefiting from low wages.

Netflix - No. Free TV license if we must subsidise BBC regardless, and have a scheme to wipe and reissue secondhand electronic equipment.

My point was, that the bit about people stopping working because of higher taxes