To think a lot of people make poor spending choices and then blame everything else?

[ThatTidySnake]

A lot of people are making very poor choices about what they spend their money on, and then it becomes everyone else’s problem or fault when they end up in an overdraft, with credit card debt or unable to afford things like repairs, food or presents. I get that not everyone is in the same position and circumstances matter, but it does sometimes feel like personal responsibility gets overlooked.

AIBU?

I am a natural spender with a fairly relaxed attitude to risk in general but I think a lot of problems arise simply from not knowing what’s coming in and going out, It’s so easy to spend here and there and get a shock when you see the effect on your balance. That’s why I go through everything in detail every month. Because otherwise I’d always spend more.

To my mind UC is income like any other, and if someone can save, all power to them, as budgeting over time is much better than month to month or week to week.

What annoys me is people who complain they can’t afford things that are completely inessential, as though because some people have them, everyone should. Or people who think everything they buy must be brand new. Or people who don’t pay into their workplace pension (with employer contributions) because they can’t afford it, but have expensive habits like vaping and going to the pub every night.

Agree with this 100%.
Also the bleating about 'struggling to save for a deposit' constantly trotted out to expectations of huge sympathy. I would haver some sympathy is 'struggling' meant something other than carry on spending as usual, put a few scraps away if there's anything left and then wonder why it's taking so long. I've said this before, but there was a family on TV when the Iran war first kicked off complaining because they had had to dip into their deposit savings 'they had been saving for years' to fly home from their holiday in Dubai!

Ok, I was a full time worker. Had children, lost job thanks to post financial crash job cuts. Husband turned out to be trash and I was left with two young kids on my own. Needed to claim benefits. I inherited a small amount (few thousand). With that inherited cash I was able to pay for driving lessons and buy a cheap car. As a result, I got back into full time employment, which I would not have been able to do had benefits been stopped as a result of receiving a small amount of capital.
I am now a higher rate tax payer with children who are raised with work ethic etc. The alternative would have been a lifetime of state support. Regardless of what judgements you pass about people’s life choices, the math speaks for itself

There are obviously people who genuinely struggle - I know what it's like, because my family did when I was a teenager. And it was stressful and unpleasant.

But there are also people who spend money on unnecessary things or spend much more on something than they can really afford: rather than a week in Dorset with camping kit that will be used every other year, they fly to Orlando.

I always find it a bit surprising when people post on here that they've lost their job and have no savings, but are tied to a phone or car contract and are busy cutting out luxuries that they and their family have got used to - their weekly takeaway, going away every half term for three or four days in an AirBnB, feeding their dogs on a raw diet, taking the DC on an outing (cinema, zoo, soft play) of some kind every other weekend (with lunch or a milkshake), buying lunch out whenever they go into town, whatever. In other words, they could have have put away £100-200 a week, but had made choices that meant that they had nothing in reserve.

After my adolescent experiences, I was far too paranoid.

Both extremes are not sensible to me. Spend money as you get it on luxuries, and save nothing. But I think saving everything and not having any fun or treats is just as bad.
There should be a balance.

@MissyGirlie

After my adolescent experiences, I was far too paranoid.

Same with both me and DH. Both of us had very austere childhoods, as neither sets of parents/family ever had any spare cash, working long hours, etc. My mother worked full time as a teacher and then did 4 evenings per week teaching night school at the local adult education college and father worked six days a week as a shop manager, with 7am starts every day, only got Sunday off. That was just to afford a pretty simple life, crap old car that kept breaking down, no foreign holidays, just the odd day trip to the seaside (unless the crap car broke down on the way which happened a lot!), I wore hand me down clothes from my elder sibling. DH's upbringing was very similar. That's probably why it "worked" when we got together as we shared similar values re saving and spending, which we still do today even though we've both had good well paid careers, lots of savings/investments, but we still don't "waste" money, still shop around and wait for deals/discounts, still take a flask on day trips so we don't have to buy expensive coffees etc. Childhood habits are hard to break once they become engrained into behaviour. We "spend" money, but literally every penny is given careful thought, i.e. do we really "need" it, will we derive pleasure from it, could we live without it, and we've always jointly discussed anything significant/major before buying, not just big ticket items, but also anything that's unusual. We still spend money after consideration and if we are happy it will bring us joy, like a brand new car we recently splashed the cash on, but it was bought outright from savings, as were all our previous cars over the past 40 years, as we're not "wasting" money on interest!

I think most people do find that "balance". All we hear about on SM are those polarised at either end of the scale. Basically, there's no interest nor newsworthiness of normal people saving and buying normal things.

The times have launched a campaign to get proper financial education into schools.

The problem is I don’t think people will care. Young people think pensions are hundreds of years away, and ultimately the welfare state means nobody is truly 100% financially responsible for themselves any more - there’s always a safety net.

Some do, many don’t. I would say 50% of my friends are irresponsible with money to the point of being reckless. Like I said - they’re mid to late 30s; no pension, no savings, switching jobs every year. Yet always spending on clothes, beauty treatments and evenings out.

Let's hope it actually happens. MSE Martin did the same as did Carol Vorderman, and here was another famous person who tried. All got all the right "noises" from the government of the time, but nothing actually happened in schools, and the initiatives quietly got forgotten.

That is true. It would be a very boring headline!

I think big corporations spend a lot of money on marketing, product placement etc to get people to spend, I also think people have different control thresholds, in addition, the amount of financial products that are available can add to poor decision making. Combine this with insecure employment opportunities, spiralling and unpredictable pricing of everything, life becomes more stressful. I have also seen people who are fortunate to come from money, so there buffer gives them a financial freedom. So - yes, I think you are being unreasonable because you are assuming a level playing field for everyone… and it’s not.

@Badbadbunny Martin Lewis is useless at investing though isn't he.

Not sure what carol was doing but many people over complicate things and use big terms or make people think it's a maths thing.

Grandpas guide to money book would do !!

• grandpa's fortune fables

Their choice though. My friends don't work (she is disabled and her DH is a pensioner - just on the state pension as far as I know), and they are in a silly amount of debt. They love their hobbies and holidays too much. They are very good at moving their debt around though. They have a house they rent out that they can sell when it gets too bad. Their plan after that is to go on a cruise, and jump off the ship 😮

It's 16k.

After 6k your monthly UC payment gets reduced by £4.35 for every £250 over 6k.

That's less than £20 for every £1k over. It stops at 16k and you lose the UC completely.

@XenoBitch jumping off the ship isn't such a bad idea

I think older suicide is quite common more so than we think .
I would certainly choose it over dementia and or being on a care home !!

Anyone who has 100 spare should open a sipp for their children now you can open one at any age

Small amounts now massivley compound for them .I wish someone had done it for me

Yeah, it is not that much in the scheme of things... but the DWP will also want to see what you spend your money on when you are between £6-16k to ensure what you are buying is not seen as Deprivation of Capital.

My friend is only mid 50s, so I hope they don't do it soon!.
They just keep spending and racking up huge debt. They have been lucky in that between them, they have inherited a couple of properties over the years, and when the debt gets too much, they sell up. But they are at the end of the line now. They get a credit card, and see it as cash instead of a buffer/emergency. They just spend it all.
I don't understand it. I know when my friend worked, she was on a very good salary so they are still trying to live the same lifestyle even though they do not have the same incomings anymore.

I read that in Japan, elder crime is a thing... so they go to prison and are housed and fed.

A lot of it comes down to time. If you’re retired or don’t work you’ve got plenty of time to shop around, get the best deals, look for the best savings accounts.

I’m sure there’s always some reason people these days are lacking when others manage or used to manage in the past. However when you’re in the thick of it juggling two full time careers, young children, a high mortgage , you’ve barely got time to breathe let alone manage your finances.

It's 10.5 years since the bag charge in England and around 2-3 years longer for other parts of the UK.

Still get people - mainly from poor income households who never bring their own bags when shopping. Why??? The carrier bags are now 40p each for most of the supermarket chains. If you buy an average of 10 bags a week - that includes B&M, Poundland, clothes shops etc. That's at least £200 a year. I worked in a supermarket next to a council estate with c300 properties. Vast majority of the residents shopped and 95% bought bags each visit. Plus I had to void off something so the customers could buy a bag, If they brought bags from home, they would been able to buy the item I voided off.

Then see people use these brand new carrier bags as bin bags. Stop this habit. Bin bags are cheaper - per unit, bigger and able to tie them up properly. Many supermarket bags, you can only tie the handles but the far edges don't get tied up.

I bought a Tesco one recently as my shop ended up bigger than planned. But that does not happen often. I always take a reusable bag with me.
I don't think anyone is buying 10 bags per week. You just saw one snapshot in time... if you had saw me with my 40p Tesco bag, then you might have assumed I do that all the time. I don't.

I can't believe how much they are now anyway. They used to be 5p.

It’s easier not to buy “things you don’t need” when you have more money though.
When you can still have a nice life without “extras”.

Whats the actual point of slogging away on NMW, paying rent rather than mortgage and doing nothing. We are not in the Middle Ages. See the world, enjoy the hobbies, look after the family.

I think people get upset about the choices. Not the cost. £150 on a tattoo is a waste.£150 on a wedding dress is bargain. Despite neither actually being necessary but both being important to the spender.