Save the Children launches appeal for children in the UK

[Vagaceratops]

BBC link

And it will get worse :(

bochead rickets on the rise so is poor parenting more children being removed due to neglect

I see children first thing being given greggs for breakfast No WONDER rickets are on the rise

DMA72 well if the left had there way they would fish out even more in benafits and its the working like you whose taxs will pay for it and no doubut some serial welfare recipent will get a bigger home and be moved faster up the housing list

Oh grow up, Rosebud.
'the rich' aren't picking up the bill
The top 10% of earners pay more than 50% of all the income tax sitting in the treasury. They pick up the tab for more than half of all the money poured into the welfare budget. Stuff they never use themselves
Just to remind you:

we have free healthcare
free education
council/ha homes
housing benefit
income support
family tax credits
child credits
fuel allowances.
maternity grants.

Sadly, I'm not one of them. For goodness sake, nobody's saying people should be grovelling in gratitude, but just a little recognition that without them we really would be up shit creek wouldn't go amiss. Instead of which there is nothing but constant vilification and accusations of Tory scum.

DMA72 I'm in a similar situation to you, but once my mortgage, insurances, council tax, gas, electricity, water are paid I have NOTHING (and I do mean that literally) left of my salary. Food, petrol and clothes are bought from my tax credits of less than £60/week. What is never taken into account when thresholds for tax credits and other benefits are worked out is (a) commuting costs (b) housing costs (c) child maintenance payments. Someone who earns the same as me, but lives in council rented accommodation, walks to work and received regular child maintenance payments would be considerably better off, yet we're both entitled to the same 'top-ups.' Result: one family is managing okay, the other is struggling to feed and clothe themselves, can't afford to do household repairs, lives without heating, etc. (Disclaimer: I do NOT begrudge the other family having more money!)

Unfortunately, I don't see how a system of calculating tax credits taking these discrepancies into account would work, unless the state started examining every single person's individual circumstances which would patently be unworkable.

I have no trouble believing the working poor comprise a large section of families living in poverty and think this is disgraceful in a wealthy country. Unlike some posters though, I don't think the answer is to look down on/slag off people who are surviving on benefits/carers' allowances etc.

You can be sensible with how you manage money and end up struggling btw. I got a food bank token yesterday.

I am a disabled single mum. I have a daughter being assessed for behavioural special needs, and a son partially deaf waiting for a hearing aid. I need care to get by, which luckily the council recognise and provide. I see three consultants for a variety of health needs, my advisor at the Job Centre has said it would be foolish to try to work at the moment because my health is so poor.

So I claim benefits. Except yesterday my benefits were stopped. Something to do with a new form needing filled out. I missed it somewhere in my pile of paperwork waiting for someone to come out to help me fill it out (writing hurts). Fair enough my own fault, but it wasn't like I was out buying a flat screen telly instead of feeding the kids. I've been waiting twenty weeks for DLA. It's a constant battle to stretch my benefits to cover my additional needs, plus pay the extra rent on a three bedroom house as the council don't cover more than two bedrooms (my DD cannot share a room with her brother due to her behavioural issues, but they are as yet without diagnosis, so the council obviously don't care about that) so yes I do have some debts which make coping harder.

But all I want to do is keep my children happy and healthy. I would like to get my English Literature degree. And I want to be fit to work so I can get out and work in the community somewhere making a difference (and writing about it). I could be a contributing member of society, but it takes some time to get an operation done and stabilise my arthritis with DMARDs, plus help to adapt to a workplace and still cope at home considering both mine and my children's needs. That's all I am asking for, not a lifetime of benefits, but an opportunity to get well and then contribute.

Instead I have battles to get benefits, and rely on charity and seem to lurch from one crisis to the next between money and health. I feel like I am getting nowhere.

I sympathise with BOTH DMA72 and rabbits make gold eggs.

Childcare, transport costs, the rising price of gas and electric, and housing costs these are what are leaving the working poor and the squeezed middle skint. Something needs to be done about them.

Mr bo jangled -you have me marked down wrong.

Im a closet tory.

Not left leaning.

I do feel for people in dire straights I really do.

DMA72-is fantastic example of how people chose to work are less well off.

Its is my belief that its this group of people right now that are struggling.

If you own a home and get into difficulties its very hard to get council/ha accomodation.

If you rent and lose your job-you have option of housing benefit as a safety net.

I dont read the daily mail if I can help it.
Im not benefit bashing just stateing apoint that all the people i personally know on benefits either unemployed or very low income boosted by tax credits are etter off than my family when hubby earns 41k gross.

Of course we have made some expensive choices

our children have done some nursery as its been educational and social benefit to them.

Heres theres shortage of good preschool places so middle dd has started preschool thsi term so have preschool and nursery to pay as they dont get funding until term after 3rd birthday but think if very low income they can get nursery from term after 2nd.

Our kids do clubs and hobbies.

so yes we choose what we wish to spend our money on.

we ensure the kids have tidy room over their heads, are clean , tidy , have nice clothes that fit and are well fed-to me thats a priority no 1.

Our 2nd priority is spending time together as family tough when hubby works in retail,

3rd is enhancing their life with hobbies and days out.

I recently got a bashing on mums forum as we discussed what we were all doing this summer.

I said e havent had as much money so tried to do cheaper or free days out

so libary crafts, museums, picnic at large park, country walks.-1poster said i do nothing with my kids they play in the garden they dont need to go out.

Then someone posted about clubs-Mine does rainbows and gym-same poster im a snooty moo wasting my money kids dont need hobbies.

post about tax credits-some ones just lost tax credits-to which she gets previous poster say I get loads but still dont think its enough, she then said to original poster I couldent bare to have no disposable income.

This same poster has 5kids, lives in council house, her husband works a low paid fulltime job.

she posted the other week shes feels bad as had to buy school uniform on catalougue. I mean septemer happens every flipping year not like a surprise is it.
I got quite annoyed as in last 3months

heard all about her i pad
new dining table
and george forman
expensive prams

shes not only one on mums forum who seems to think everythings a right.
Its the ones ho get it all but then have the audascity to whinge its not enough or they cant afford basics that gets my goat.

Disabilitys an odd one-I dont begrudge anyone disable getting disability by way especially a child I been very lucky mine been so healthy.
Thats apparently worth £240 a month.
The parent then gets a carers allowance on top-This one not sure of as a parent if has healthy or child would care for their child and already get child benefit and perhaps tax credits.

I would prefer this money to either be paid to a childcare for that child or someone thats not their parent.

Then they can get mobility car.

Its for this reason i think universils a good think link everything up.

as benefits are net, not taxed, and genarlly go up each year unlike wages.

If you added everything together its quite generous.

I have a freind at school whos crap with money.she works part time, bloke was unemployed but back in full time work again now.
They rent council flat-in all fairness wouldent want to live there.
Her rents £95 a week shes looking to move they have 1school age child so just pay for breckfast club. Her mum lives locally and has child and picks up.
so free childcare.

Her dd just started swimming lessons and asked why my dd not doing them
no 1 cant fit them in and no 2 cant afford it-I think this baffles her as on paper we must be minted.

Our rents 700, council tax £140 a month, ultilities keep rising and we run a car.

she spends more on food per month than we do as family of 2adults and 3kids.
shes always going out to eat or shopping.

lifes a series of choices.

She said shes behind with her rent and council tax and got repayment schedule in place.

Im guessing council slightly more leniant than agents and private landlord.

We would never miss or be late with a rent payment.
It would stress me right out.

of course examples above are personal examples.

The media love to pick the most extreme examples
I baffled why people even like to be intereveiwed as they get such a backlash.

I do believe that the oens in the paper /news are the extreme example.
Most are decent hardworking and just trying to get by.

Im not jealous of people on benefits.

Just think system is mad and unfair.

Im feeling squeezed and will keep cutting my cloth trying to keep living standards same on less money.

The whole principle it should always pay to work is the right one.

The co-alition say that but not sure how far they got with it.

whats the incentive to get promotion, better paid job?

if we were in poverty me and hubby would do our best to get as many jobs as we needed to get ourselves out of it.

I tried to argue the point other day on deciding on more kids.

We think oh number 4 be nice but we cant afford it there would be a shortfall.
but others have another child and the gap shortfall is always plugged with more benefits.

Somethings happened in uk last 15years in terms of culture thats just so sad.
Its a mess and not sure how to sort it.

I used to work for large retailer on housing estate.
it depressed me a lot, monday was benefits day and they would alll queue up , even postoffice had a bouncer then come over buy fags from the kiosk, tehn load their trolleys with loads of crap. some would go down to pub and sit there all day, others would just get a few cans and sit on the grass.
there as no job centre in this area.
Some would queue outside the chemist-also with bouncer for methadone shot.
Reguarly saw kids walk round with no shoes on or no coat.

Staff and customers would sit there saying when you gona get a house then , how far you on the list, you really need to do this.
Many would moan they dident get enough.

Was I bitter? just a little as was paying over £800 nursery fees , hardly seeing my child whilst they pushed theirs around in latest designer buggies moaning they lived a hard life and whinging about the child and the fact that dad had run off or he wasent paying maintainance.

Its sad situation yes-but we cant save them all can we?

I live in a city-where jobs I guess are easier.

I grew up small rural town where there are hardly any jobs, the one sthere are are part time and low paid.I think they have it harder again as running a car and public transport so expensive.

Buttermintoes-

The top 10% of earners pay more than 50% of all the income tax sitting in the treasury. They pick up the tab for more than half of all the money poured into the welfare budget. Stuff they never use themselves

This is the Worst. Argument. Ever.

The richest pay the most tax because they earn a disproportionate amount of the income.

Here is a chart of income disparity:

www.hugdaily.org/brian-rogel/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/income-dispartity-chart.jpg

Yes, it's for the US, but the trend is the same for the UK.

Now, if there is a house full of 100 people, and 1 of them earns £1 billion pounds, and 4 of them earn £100 million pounds, and the remaining 95 of them (the 95%) earn only £25,000 pounds. You should quite rightly expect that the richest 5% pay almost all of the costs of running the house.

It would be a demented sort of idea of justice to ask the 95%, who earn .000025% of the top earner does to pay anything towards the pot which isn't nominal.

If you sincerely desire for everyone to make a substantial contribution to the pot, then you should be arguing for fairer pay, so that more people can afford to contribute to more.

Sadly, I'm not one of them. For goodness sake, nobody's saying people should be grovelling in gratitude, but just a little recognition that without them we really would be up shit creek wouldn't go amiss. Instead of which there is nothing but constant vilification and accusations of Tory scum.

Doesn't follow. The wealth which they own, properly distributed, could go towards brining millions out of poverty. All this wealth (and income - if people were properly paid) could go towards paying a greater proportion of total taxes.

We see constant vilification and accusations of Tory scum because the Tory party is, and always has been, the party of the richest, for the richest, by the richest. They are utterly hostile to well-being and welfare of anybody who isn't in this top 5%. They have shown this to be the case again and again.

Now they are killing disabled people and trying to dismantle the NHS. They have put someone as Health Secretary who is on record saying that the NHS was a mistake and that it should be abolished.

There are very good reasons so many people are hostile to the Tories.

DMA's situation is exactly why asking for more taxes to be paid to fund more benefits would be farcical.

There has to be a balance between the taxes we pay in and the amount of benefits we out. We all want a decent level of benefits but it has to be affordable. I know that's a word that socialists would prefer not to talk about since there's always that mythical rich person who should pay more.

But the reality is that any increases in public spending need to be costed and where the money comes from, identified. Gone are the days of borrow now, worry later.

The more we throw money into benefits, the less incentives we give for people to actually work, take responsibility for themselves and fight for a better future.

If a child is hungry because their parents are not spending their money wisely then the buck stops with them. The state should not increase benefits to compensate for their failures.

you make some good points Mam. don't think throwing more money on benefits is the answer.

There has to be a balance between the taxes we pay in and the amount of benefits we out.

There will never be a balance between the two, as the benefits we pay out are a fraction of the total budget.

We all want a decent level of benefits but it has to be affordable. I know that's a word that socialists would prefer not to talk about since there's always that mythical rich person who should pay more.

Our benefits system is not particularly generous. Compared with most of europe and other OECD countries, it's average or below average:

fullfact.org/factchecks/is_the_uks_welfare_system_the_most_generous_in_europe-27368

But the reality is that any increases in public spending need to be costed and where the money comes from, identified. Gone are the days of borrow now, worry later.

What increases in public spending?

The more we throw money into benefits, the less incentives we give for people to actually work, take responsibility for themselves and fight for a better future.

Right-wing nonsense. You can't simultaneously pull away the ladder and then tell people to try harder to climb up the wall. The benefits you get in the UK are pretty pitiful and barely enough to survive. The vast, overwhelming majority of people who are on welfare want to get jobs. If you attack the welfare system any further, you will simply end up making it harder to pull themselves out of poverty... or end up killing them.

Furthermore, the responsibility for unemployment at the moment lies squarely with the Coalition, who have caused the first double-dip recession since the early 70s. Don't moralise and lecture people to get a job when there aren't enough anyway.

If a child is hungry because their parents are not spending their money wisely then the buck stops with them. The state should not increase benefits to compensate for their failures.

Oh be quiet. This is argumentum ad Daily Mailum.

ttosca
...but it's still their money. Their money, not the country's, not the governments, not ours ? it's their money. We are taking nearly half of every single pound they earn and then treating them with the utmost contempt!
You can't just say OK, we think you're too rich so you just give us all your money and we'll give it away to other people (well actually, we already are saying. OK give us half your money to do what we want with !)
The Tory party isn't just the party of the rich, it's the party of many many independent, self reliant people, who take responsibility for their own lives and want as little government interference as possible. It's utter bollox to say they are hostile to anybody outside the top 5%. This image just suits the socialist agenda, regardless of the fact that a large proportion of the labour front bench could easily swop places with the Tory front bench as regards wealth and upbringing.
And what an astonishingly hyperbolic statement to finish with ? the Tories (who aren't even in power, mores the pity. It's a coalition government) are killing disabled people.

Mam also makes some inaccurate points. Not all benefits go up. The thresholds for free prescriptions, just to give one example, has not changed since 2009. This allows you the princely sum of £39 every two years for glasses (just to give one example of what's covered). This £39 for every two years has not changed in line with inflation and does not adequately cover the real cost of needing optical treatment.

And this (also from Mam's post): Im not benefit bashing just stateing apoint that all the people i personally know on benefits either unemployed or very low income boosted by tax credits are etter off than my family when hubby earns 41k gross.
Someone on, say, £15,500 gross with one child would have their income topped up by approx £2,900 (unless they were paying childcare costs). They would have a very, very long way to go before having income parity with someone on £41K gross. Don't forget, too, that the £15,500 I quote is also gross and that PAYE/NI would be deducted from that. It's not just higher earners that pay these things!
Obviously Mam has given extreme examples and picked up on people posting in other forums who seem to live the life of Riley on various benefits.
These extreme examples are really NOT representative of the majority, whatever the Daily Mail and some posters on MN would like you to believe. They are far more likely to be people like DMA and Rabbits.

social mobility shrank in 13years labour were in power.

the economys a mess even in boom years lond term unemployent was high.
inacapacity became more popular than jsa as think pays more and some not all could fake back pain and go docs,I like to beleive they small minority.

The new governement inherited a terrible mess.

Labour still say spend more and balls want to tax the rich more.

if millionaires then maybe thats fair.

but someone on 42,00 whos higher rate tax paper , losing child benefit and especially living in south east is not rich.

Its all relative some areas cheaper than areas.

does an unemployed family need to live in kensington mansion to find work in london?

they like to portray tories as nasty party.

But they have to do something so support most of changes so far.

of course there will be anomolys and genuine people will have isues as news seems to find these people.Hopefully the geuine ones will sort it out.
common sense will see through.

robbing peter to pay paul whos poorer makes paul richer and but peter poorer.

If we pay in we expect something back or if we not eligible for somethung back

buyt you could argue all of us do with roads, education and health we expect money to be used wisly and given to those in need.

does an unemployed family need to live in kensington mansion to find work in london?

How many unemployed families live in Kensington mansions? Really?

Ah, my dear friend Ttosca.

The public spending increase I was referring to is the call made by STC for an increase in benefits. I am making the assumption that said increase requires more money and therefore that money must come from somewhere. If you think that's not the case then do tell.

Your ultra-leftwing positions are mercifully the minority.

two fingers.

if read my previous posts then I said people in the media extreme examples.
plus people I know are too small a sample /represntation to represent benefits a whole it was just an example that was personal to me to me not someone i read about in paper.

I did say I think most are decent hardworking and not defrauding the system or milking it living the high life.

Im not in the system apart from child benefit so cant acuratly give you in depth guide on thresholds/who gets what, whats gone up.

But on budget day when read the paper or see the news notice some benefits have gone up when hubbys been on a pay freeze last year-thats all.

on the issue of health it bugs me that wales get free prescriptions and just over bridge we pay especially as that goes up.

Feels like tax on illness. ironically family freind terminal cancer in wales couldent get drugs from his trust which cost 3grand but could in mine.

school dinners have just gone up.-school dinners vary depending on la, neigbouring la they £2.15 and they have more deprived areas than ours hows that logical?

Hubbys just got new glasses not free but £25 specsavers as he has monthly contacts with them £22 a month.

Hes also not blessed with good teeth so private dental costs at our nhs dentists are high.

It all adds up and some aritry threshold doesn not take that into account does it.

I dont live in a kensington mansion, i live in a newham dump, and my rent is £950 a month for 2 bed,

I am planning on keeping my 3 kids with me and my partner in this 3 bed for the foreseeable future.

2 bed

and I still payed over £100 for my glasses with prescription, it wasnt the frames that cost, it was the lenses.

This shows that you have no idea what you are talking about, mam:

"Disabilitys an odd one-I dont begrudge anyone disable getting disability by way especially a child I been very lucky mine been so healthy.
Thats apparently worth £240 a month.
The parent then gets a carers allowance on top-This one not sure of as a parent if has healthy or child would care for their child and already get child benefit and perhaps tax credits.

I would prefer this money to either be paid to a childcare for that child or someone thats not their parent."

Do you really believe that the parents who care for a severely disabled child don't do anything different from parents caring for a healthy child? And that this is a job that any childminder could do instead?

Where would you get the carers who would be willing or able to get all the training you need to care for a severely disabled child- as parents do because they have no choice?

And if the money is not enough for a live-in carer, who pays for the adaptations to the house where the child is being cared for?

And if the child needs care throughout the night, who pays for the overtime?

Or if the child has a fluctuating condition which means she is sometimes at school and sometimes in bed/in and out of hospital, who pays for a carer to be on standby for when s/he might be needed?

My dd is very moderately disabled, not even enough to get the lowest level of DLA. It is still enough to seriously curtail her quality of life, to mean that one parent has to be prepared to drop everything and rush home at a moment's notice, and to mean endless expensive trips to hospital, equipment that has to be paid for by us because nobody else is doing it. It is costing us serious money, which thankfully we can afford to pay.

And fwiw you do not get a mobility car on top of either allowances; it comes out of other benefits.

What the hell has that got to do with the price of fish?

I'll take that as a no then.

What the hell does the rich wanting gratitude for their income tax contributions have to do with a discussion on child poverty? I should think that pointing out that the poor bear the brunt of higher interest rates and banking charges is rather more relevant to the topic at hand then a couple of entitled richer folks whining that the poor don't have the appropriate cap in hand grovelling attitude.

also rabbits home your situation improves.

think lots struggling right now with varied levels of income and some situations more complex than others so when we hear about not having certain mateliastic things as poverty stricken it raises a few eye brows.

Ttosca explains the inherent nonsense in this argument up thread.

And in response to 'the rich' don't use health care, education, maternity benefit etc. Yes, they do. There is no private A & E health care. The public sector funds teacher training. SMP is a universal benefit.

Besides, people move up and down the income scale (admittedly less now than say 20 years ago).

The well off aren't the people who are struggling to feed and clothe their children - they're not the ones suffering the effects of this banking sector induced economic crisis.

Cory- I did say I had no issues with disability.
mobiulity car i was mistaken.

I just know a few people whos child has moderate disability and see it as form of income.

what I would like to see is disability increased as belive its an important benefit
But I also think that parents with disability dont get enough help.
Just look at that poor lady last year in the news.
schools the system should do more, they use carerss alowance as its cheaper then giving more help.

I talk as someone know grew up with sevrely disabled brother
I know a lovley lady who has respite care.

maybe a grant to help made modifications to house.
free hospital parking.

just unsure if agree with carers allowance in current form.
Another example that large girl who had to be broken out of her home in wales she was like 60stone a teenager.-yet she was paid care of her mother who was mobile.

maybe thats a rare anomoly.

I thourght the co-alition were working closly with disability groups on any changes and david cameron himself has 1st hand experience on the issue.