To think that poor people shouldn't be able to afford pets?

[tellmesomethingtrue]

Why do people who claim to be poor or say moneys tight, then buy pets? I genuinely can't understand this logic.
AIBU to think that if you can't afford a basic house DIY or to buy your kids uniform, then you therefore can't afford pets?

It’s subjective what each household decides is in their budget. Maybe they mean they are prioritising a pet over other things.
There is also the argument that so many pets are in shelters now, even if someone on a low income takes them in it’s better to go to a loving home than being in a cage in a shelter for years or euthanised

I used to work at a vet's. I don't know how often my heart sank into my boots when a person came in with a bloody french bulldog, proudly saying, 'he's a rescue'! And then proceeded to tell me they were on UC and couldn't afford a plan, or insurance, or indeed, the cost of a consult. . . and didn't we have payment plans, or special rates for beneficiaries?

I wish so much it weren't the way, for many people, particularly the poorer who are more likely to be isolated, their animals may be the light of their life, but having animals is expensive. The food is expensive. Vet care is expensive. It all costs.

Having said that, we had clients who denied themselves, or did whatever they could, to ensure their pets didn't suffer from their lack of money. They paid back every goddamned penny, and their animals never suffered want.

Totally agree
And I grew up poor with pets

Poor people should have no joy in their lives?

Because?

Won't someone think of the pets

People prioritise things differently, simple as that. Saw a woman on the TV recently being interviewed by a Reporter. The Woman was scrolling through her phone with beautifully manicured gel nails. She had the false lashes and the lip filler but was showing the Reporter her electricity bill and explaining how she couldn't afford it.

Pets bring so much to their owners and I absolutely see why people have them even though they may be a stretch financially. I'm not hard up but have had pets all my life and none have cost me much money aside from food and flea/ worming so I can see why people may risk it.

You do see a lot of threads here though when people list all their money worries and/or relationship woes and end by saying they have 2 dogs so can't leave or something. But I doubt they wait until their lives go to shit and then get pets.

Because a pet is a living being, not a plaything for their joy with no concern for the pets wellbeing. If you cannot afford decent pet insurance, good quality food and whatever else the animal needs then you cannot afford an animal because that animal will suffer.

Take up a hobby for joy.

How do you go from being wealthy to being poor in a matter of minutes? I hear this sort of nonsense all the time but it's not true. Being wealthy implies you have resources to fall back on. Savings or insurance or a property you can downsize.

You mention school uniform - so you think it's OK to bring children into an impoverished existence, but not pets?

Poor people shouldn't have hobbies.

But she could afford it couldn't she? She just didn't want to.

Same goes for having children.
Only the comfortably off deserve to breed, have pets and own flat screen televisions and smartphones. I think they should have suffered from full-on rickets before they are eligible for any joy in their lives.

The OP very clearly refers to people who are already in poverty and then buy pets, not to people who fall on hard times whilst already in possession of pets.

Idk, the only person I know who is really, seriously poor to the point of food banks, completely running out of money on a regular basis, no prospect of a job etc only has her cat to live for (her words). Without the cat she'd be completely alone nearly all the time. She loves the cat so much. It's a substitute for a family. I'm sure she could do with the money for other things, yes, but I'm so glad she has the cat. She needs it.

Poor people should sit on orange boxes and wear sacks and shouldn't have houses. They should live in hole in t road

You move in strange circles then. Just about everyone I know who has pets can afford them.

In any case people's circumstances can change after they get their pets.

Who are these poor people? Are there any among us? Why are we talking about them as if they're a homogeneous group? I don't actually know the parameters for the category. Do we include people who will shortly be declared bankrupt so are spending all they have before this happens (so currently rich). Or people who are land rich but burdened by boarding school fees? Or the elderly lady who has had her cat since she was 70 but both are now ancient and the rainy day money is gone? Or the family waiting to inherit from her who will shortly be in a bigger home but have very little disposable income due to the large mortgage? Or the family who were secure until Dad lost his job, got depressed and are struggling to keep the house now? Who is 'poor? Whose pet would you like to take and put in a shelter?

They shouldn’t ‘ave any animals except the roadkill they can scrape up for their dinner @Cherrypickled

Because some people make bad life choices.

I have a friend who has a horse in livery (I also have horses and have kept mine at the same livery). Total costs are at least £400 a month and that’s before any sort of veterinary emergency. Her daughter routinely doesn’t have appropriate shoes on and there isn’t food in the house to eat. She’s always hungry. My dd has bought her lunch at the school canteen because she had nothing to eat and no money in her account to buy anything. I feel bad for her. She doesn’t have a good life because she just isn’t a priority. I know how hard it is to give up a horse when it becomes too much, but children should always come first.

Luxury

Presumably if these kids need uniforms then they already exist, the pets are being added later on when money is already tight for those kids.

It would be lovely if life were predictable and stable enough to always go education > job > financial security > kids > pets but it doesn't work like that. Even leaving aside unplanned pregnancy you have the possibility of redundancy, your employer going bust, recession, physical or mental illness, complex conditions in your children, major housing costs, fraud, caring for elderly relatives...

Generally speaking what I hear when people say things like 'shouldn't poor people prioritise x?' is 'I could never end up in that situation'. The idea that we could lose our financial security - which isn't very far away for the majority, maybe one or two paychecks? - is terrifying and it's reassuring to tell ourselves we're smarter, we plan better, we're never going to be in the position of having to find £1500 in vets fees for the elderly dog who we bought 12 years ago when everything was fine but now someone's ill, and someone else can only work part time because of the kids' care needs, and we can't sell the house, and we can barely afford food let alone insurance for that dog, and we're scared that it'll get put to sleep if we give it up to a rescue...

I'm poor with pets I can't afford and they eat cheap food from Lidl.
I won't buy the stuff from work, far too expensive when you're on minimum wage.

They already can't afford dentistry, contents insurance, transport, takeaways, holidays . . . . the least you can allow them OP is to stroke a fucking cat.

YABU