Habeas Domus

Life On The Breadline: Welcome To The World Of Britain's Working Poor

84 posts in this topic

Life on the breadline: welcome to the world of Britain's working poor

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/mar/17/life-britain-working-poor

The Rowleys are a hard-working married couple with two children. They do not earn enough to be in the 'squeezed middle' – the group that has attracted so much media coverage. They only just manage to put food on the table. In the first part of an occasional series, Yvonne Roberts takes Conservative MP Dan Poulter to Essex to see what life is like for this hidden demographic...

Richard-and-Crisy-Rowley--007.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A wannabe, non-apprenticeshipped carpenter and a vet receptionist?

I suppose its fair to say that the banks have preyed upon their tiny intellects, and that their politicians have failed them in regulating said banks.

Fvcking morons though. Chav numpties.

This IS Britain folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 10x joint earnings mortgage

The elephant in the room that all politicians refuse to acknowledge

Edited by long time lurking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 10x joint earnings mortgage

The elephant in the room that all politicians refuse to acknowledge

Everybody has been allowed to borrow money, unfortunately not everyone is able to pay it back....put it on the slate of the future, so seeing to it the future will have to be borrowing more. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Their interest-only mortgage payments are £416 a month.

So even if they hang on long enough to pay that interest there's a brick wall coming down the track- unless there's a repayment vehicle hidden away somewhere they forgot to mention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there only 4 weeks in a month now? Time for the mail to run a story on innumeracy?

I've just found over another hundred quid a month income for them down the back of the sofa (and probably another 90 quid of expenses)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So even if they hang on long enough to pay that interest there's a brick wall coming down the track- unless there's a repayment vehicle hidden away somewhere they forgot to mention.

Very few on IO have a repayment vehicle or one that would repay anything near what will be required......They have no intention of repaying, they will borrow as much as they can lay their hands on...it is only the interest costs they are concerned with, ask the government they know. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 10x joint earnings mortgage

The elephant in the room that all politicians refuse to acknowledge

To be fair they only renting from the bank. It would no doubt cost more to the rent from a BTL landlord and they might qualify for housing benefit if they rented from a private landlord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A wannabe, non-apprenticeshipped carpenter and a vet receptionist?

I suppose its fair to say that the banks have preyed upon their tiny intellects, and that their politicians have failed them in regulating said banks.

Fvcking morons though. Chav numpties.

This IS Britain folks.

Sadly, not quite the case - both started degrees and she betrays elements of financial wisdom. Perhaps they believed houses always rise in price. For which we can blame the press and TV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair they only renting from the bank. It would no doubt cost more to the rent from a BTL landlord and they might qualify for housing benefit if they rented from a private landlord.

This is a good example of the perils of borrowing from the bank of mum and dad:

- Their interest-only mortgage payments are £416 a month. Richard's father also lent the couple £30,000 for the deposit

- The kids are 5 years old so she wouldnt have been working when the mortgage was taken out.

- I don't know what a young squaddie would get paid, but lets be generous and assume 20K

That makes the mortgage £126 K, just over 5 X his old salary.

In their current situation, you might think it would make sense for them to sell up and rent, but if they do that:

Due to negative equity they will only come out with £15 K

£15 K in savings is just enough to disqualify them from a whole range of benefits

The father probably still wants his 30K back

They are screwed either way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, not quite the case - both started degrees and she betrays elements of financial wisdom. Perhaps they believed houses always rise in price. For which we can blame the press and TV.

He: Unfinished degree in leisure management???

She: A foundation degree in animal management???

Sadly, your post is not quite the case.

As I said, a NON-apprenticed builder/carpenter (soon to be highlighted on cowboy builders no doubt).

And she has an NVQ in petting cats and dogs.

Numpties, exactly what they are. And now in serious tick to the banks.

Meh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good example of the perils of borrowing from the bank of mum and dad:

- Their interest-only mortgage payments are £416 a month. Richard's father also lent the couple £30,000 for the deposit

- The kids are 5 years old so she wouldnt have been working when the mortgage was taken out.

- I don't know what a young squaddie would get paid, but lets be generous and assume 20K

That makes the mortgage £126 K, just over 5 X his old salary.

In their current situation, you might think it would make sense for them to sell up and rent, but if they do that:

Due to negative equity they will only come out with £15 K

£15 K in savings is just enough to disqualify them from a whole range of benefits

The father probably still wants his 30K back

They are screwed either way

They certainly are.

Going back about 7 years if they lost their house and managed to get a council house then they'd only have to pay 50 quid per week. Now you're talking about 100 and rising. An avenue closed off.

Realistically they'll be on the breadline for life.....so they should cut all expenses down to the bone.Washing machine insurance? Pets? Do us a favour....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He pays £400/500 a month in income tax and £130 in council and they receive £900 a month in benefits. Pointless recycling of money that no doubt keeps someone in a job.

She spends 45% of her income getting to work.

£450 on an IO mortgage that will only go up.

An economically unviable family unit spending most of their money on taxation and usury. Two children so they will be OK for the next decade methinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She spends 45% of her income getting to work.

Yes, there are very likely cleaning jobs within walking/cycling distance....or maybe she just enjoys driving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...they are actually showing a surplus of around £300 a month so they should have no worries. Ha. I have lived on a budget like theirs and the £300 a month surplus is always pssed against the wall pretty easily. The Grauniad probably omitted these costs as it seeks to paint them as responsible people.

10 fags a day = £100

12 beers a week = £50

Multipy by two and you would have reached your budget. As a singleton I used to do frivalous things like go for meals with friends, dates and have barbecues.

Personally my own view on the subject of the working poor (including me) is to allow them to be peasants again. The drive to promote sustainable living combined with the high and rising price of fuel makes it increasingly unviable for most people to work these marginal jobs. The government should allow people 2 acres on which to build a celtic style semi-sub-terranean "eco-house" (like that Hobbit house that was on here a few weeks ago) and grow their own food. Granted they would not be generating any tax income necessary for high level amenities (health and law+order) but they would be less of a drain on the taxpayer. There are 3 million unemployed and many millions working part-time and in non-jobs. These people should head back to the fields and work for living. They would be happier; the country would be richer.

Just have to get it past the planners first. Ha. I am sure they would rather people live as spoon-fed slaves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...they are actually showing a surplus of around £300 a month so they should have no worries. Ha. I have lived on a budget like theirs and the £300 a month surplus is always pssed against the wall pretty easily. The Grauniad probably omitted these costs as it seeks to paint them as responsible people.

10 fags a day = £100

12 beers a week = £50

Multipy by two and you would have reached your budget. As a singleton I used to do frivalous things like go for meals with friends, dates and have barbecues.

Personally my own view on the subject of the working poor (including me) is to allow them to be peasants again. The drive to promote sustainable living combined with the high and rising price of fuel makes it increasingly unviable for most people to work these marginal jobs. The government should allow people 2 acres on which to build a celtic style semi-sub-terranean "eco-house" (like that Hobbit house that was on here a few weeks ago) and grow their own food. Granted they would not be generating any tax income necessary for high level amenities (health and law+order) but they would be less of a drain on the taxpayer. There are 3 million unemployed and many millions working part-time and in non-jobs. These people should head back to the fields and work for living. They would be happier; the country would be richer.

Just have to get it past the planners first. Ha. I am sure they would rather people live as spoon-fed slaves.

Well they wouldn't need any healthcare because they would be eating organic home grown food so would never get ill

And they wouldn't need any education either

plus they would have nothing anyone would want to steal and humans are naturally kind, benevolent and co-operative creatures anyway

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they wouldn't need any healthcare because they would be eating organic home grown food so would never get ill

And they wouldn't need any education either

plus they would have nothing anyone would want to steal and humans are naturally kind, benevolent and co-operative creatures anyway

:blink:

They would likely need healthcare and it would be beneficial to educate their children. They would have less for other people to steal but in any case there are already laws in place on theft. The other solution seems to be to keep them in hutches working pointless jobs and taxing them then handing them back the same money. Absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every weekday, Richard Rowley leaves the family's three-bedroom house at 7am and drives their £650 Honda, which is 12 years old, to work. Richard would like a permanent job but five applicants for every vacancy in Braintree means that he has had to become technically self-employed, working through an agency as a construction labourer. He returns from work just before 5pm.

Leaves the house at 7, back before 5 pm. Seriously, we're supposed to feel sorry for this guy? Sure, they're not rich, but BFD, he's clearly not working that hard and their parents seem to have plenty of spare cash to help them out. What's the problem?

Not to knock these people, but the Guardian's entire approach to this is pure nonsense. They're working class people, with jobs, and a house, and plenty of time to spend with their kids. If only we could all be so lucky. Government intervention to try to turn them into middle-class wannabees is only going to create distortions in the market making life difficult for everyone. On an individual level, it would be nice if they had a higher income, but creating systemic distortions through handouts only increases house prices and/or creates marginal tax rates that trap people in poverty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, not quite the case - both started degrees and she betrays elements of financial wisdom. Perhaps they believed houses always rise in price. For which we can blame the press and TV.

When we have a Bank of England that failed to even see the blatently obvious financial crisis coming, one can hardly blame the citizenry for a lack of understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a 10x joint earnings mortgage

The elephant in the room that all politicians refuse to acknowledge

It looks like more than a 10 x income mortgage to me. But either way, the cost of living is being driven by the balmy cost of housing. The home should be half that quoted or even less possibly. Poor , loose, profligate lending policy over many years is to blame and was kind to almost no one now you look at this sort of couple. They do the right thing and live on less than people who do nothing on benefits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like more than a 10 x income mortgage to me. But either way, the cost of living is being driven by the balmy cost of housing.

Which of course (like the fags and booze, if they exist) The Guardian doesn't want to mention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very few on IO have a repayment vehicle or one that would repay anything near what will be required......They have no intention of repaying, they will borrow as much as they can lay their hands on...it is only the interest costs they are concerned with, ask the government they know. ;)

We started out with a IO mortgage, but did have a endowment policy, after two years I realised it was a complete waste of time and switched to a repayment mortgage as I didn't want a shortfall at the end.

However it appears that banks will quite happily give people a mortgage even if they have no repayment vehicle. Is the trick to take one out at the start of the mortgage and then stop paying into it after 2 or 3 months and then the banks never check? Or don't banks even care about that illusion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...they are actually showing a surplus of around £300 a month so they should have no worries. Ha. I have lived on a budget like theirs and the £300 a month surplus is always pssed against the wall pretty easily. The Grauniad probably omitted these costs as it seeks to paint them as responsible people.

10 fags a day = £100

12 beers a week = £50

Multipy by two and you would have reached your budget. As a singleton I used to do frivalous things like go for meals with friends, dates and have barbecues.

Personally my own view on the subject of the working poor (including me) is to allow them to be peasants again. The drive to promote sustainable living combined with the high and rising price of fuel makes it increasingly unviable for most people to work these marginal jobs. The government should allow people 2 acres on which to build a celtic style semi-sub-terranean "eco-house" (like that Hobbit house that was on here a few weeks ago) and grow their own food. Granted they would not be generating any tax income necessary for high level amenities (health and law+order) but they would be less of a drain on the taxpayer. There are 3 million unemployed and many millions working part-time and in non-jobs. These people should head back to the fields and work for living. They would be happier; the country would be richer.

Just have to get it past the planners first. Ha. I am sure they would rather people live as spoon-fed slaves.

Good post IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He: Unfinished degree in leisure management???

She: A foundation degree in animal management???

Sadly, your post is not quite the case.

As I said, a NON-apprenticed builder/carpenter (soon to be highlighted on cowboy builders no doubt).

And she has an NVQ in petting cats and dogs.

Numpties, exactly what they are. And now in serious tick to the banks.

Meh.

They have been swindled if anyone wants to call a leisure management course a degree - oit's just this kind of thinking that has led so many to low paid jobs with Uni debts when they should never have gone and never been told it was even necessary. Course like that shouild be day release when on the job and some sort of NVQ. Same for her foundation course. A course such as that cannot possibly be called a degree. We are leading people up the garden god damned path. So pathetic I feel sorry for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.