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

[RentingForever]

Same with contents insurance (What do people have this is so very valuable? Especially if you are so 'poor') by the time you've paid out a couple of hundred quid for 10 years or whatever, you can probably just afford to replace anything that gets nicked if you get burgled... and I'd say you'd be very unlucky to even be burgled once every 10 years. £2000 should cover what most families have. TVs, laptops, cameras, etc are dirt cheap these days and having such insurances is totally pointless in my opinion.

Having adequate contents insurance is required under most private rental AST contracts these days. I even have to insure my landlord's fixtures and fittings against accidental damage.

[Bes]

Having adequate contents insurance is required under most private rental AST contracts these days. I even have to insure my landlord's fixtures and fittings against accidental damage.

Really? I didn't know that. Isn't that what the deposit held in the DPS is for? In any case, I still won't pay a penny to these insurance companies - bunch of crooks for the most part.

Edited March 19, 2012 by Bes

[Norbert]

The big issue to me here is not that they are on the breadline, it's that their actual disposable income is equivalent to someone working full time earning £30,000 a year.

...and yet they bring in less than £20,000 between them.

So the idea of a "ten times salary" mortage is pretty redundant, it's more like 4-5 times salary if you compare it to a single wage earner.

This is the new reality that labour created. It's no longer about what you earn, it's about how much you can get in benefits to top it up.

Salary multiples are redundant. This kind of gross distortion is the new reality and little changes to this elaborate benefits system would make the whole house of cards fall down.

[Kurt Barlow]

2 acres would enable a better quality of life. Small woodland, small pond, small orchard, small house and a fairly good sized poly tunnel. Also a bit of acreage would enable people to keep animals though I think breeding animals for food is very energy intensive (6 times more so than crops I think).

Where do I sign up for this?

[Saberu]

COMING IN

Child benefit: £132

Richard's wage after tax: £680

Crisy's wage: £248.20

Working tax credit: £291

Child tax credit: £452

Richard's tax rebate: £75

Total: £1,878.20

Christ, almost 1900 pounds is a good after tax income for one household. They are horrible at managing money. OMG 280 pounds/ month on food. I could get that down to 100/ month easily for their family. Why eat like kings when you are poor?

People.... this is almost 24,000 pounds/ year NET. A single high earner would need to be on over 30,000 salary to get that, and I'm sure such a person could support a family on it.

Notice how half their income comes from benefits? Welcome to Britain where you are only rewarded for having children. It's not worth being single in Britain unless you earn over 30k/ year.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Saberu

[Tuberider]

blimey, what a bunch of c*nts you all can be

it's just people living their lives. leave em alone FFS. at least they're working, trying hard and not sponging off the taxpayer.

you lot can be a right bunch of twisted and bitter ar5eholes.

[Tonkers]

Working Tax Credit is just everywhere!

[billfunk]

blimey, what a bunch of c*nts you all can be

it's just people living their lives. leave em alone FFS. at least they're working, trying hard and not sponging off the taxpayer.

you lot can be a right bunch of twisted and bitter ar5eholes.

I wasn't attacking them personally. I only said they fail, and are failed by the present system.

Since you bring it up though they are claiming £900 a month in benefits. If you put morality aside this is fairly pointless. They are living a marginal if not unviable lifestyle which is a drag on the economy.

[Saberu]

and not sponging off the taxpayer.

But they are. Why should people with children deserve to get enough benefits to double their income? While those without children get nothing. Obviously the solution to make this fair would be a Universal Credit where everyone is treated equally and if you want children it can be at your expense, not at your profit as the amount of benefits they receive exceeds the cost of raising the children.

[Norbert]

Can we just flag up one more time as I did above, that this household's income including benefits is equivalent to a single wage earner on £30,000 p.a.

To me it reads like "we earn a pittance but benefits are giving us the money we'd get if one of us had a well paying job".

I have nothing against them, it seems they are doing their best, but I can't really see what their plight is... They don't seem that badly off at all.

The lack of pension (or equivalent investments) and the interest-only mortgage to me are the biggest cause for concern.

It's the benefits system that is broken. It's just another tool that's supporting inflated house prices.

[Bes]

blimey, what a bunch of c*nts you all can be

it's just people living their lives. leave em alone FFS. at least they're working, trying hard and not sponging off the taxpayer.

you lot can be a right bunch of twisted and bitter ar5eholes.

Perhaps they shouldn't be splashing their finances all over the papers if they don't want people commenting on them

[Norbert]

Perhaps they shouldn't be splashing their finances all over the papers if they don't want people commenting on them

Personally, I'm just twisted and bitter in relation to the ludicrous benefits system we have and don't take any opinion on people purely because they take advantage of it.

It would be more than noble to reject a few hundred quid a month when it would mean you can't compete in the housing market (buying or rental) and your family will suffer.

I would just like to see a situation where people earn enough to get by, without needing some kind of bizarre state-sponsored equalisation based on how many children you can have, responsibly or otherwise.

[winkie]

But they are. Why should people with children deserve to get enough benefits to double their income? While those without children get nothing. Obviously the solution to make this fair would be a Universal Credit where everyone is treated equally and if you want children it can be at your expense, not at your profit as the amount of benefits they receive exceeds the cost of raising the children.

I think non means tested child benefit is a good benefit.....it is many of the other add ons that are unnecessary and wasteful, tax credits and child tax credit and all the rest of it, a bureaucratic nightmare that is not fair...keep it simple.

[singlemalt]

This story epitomises everything that’s wrong with the pervading British way of thinking (at every level of society I might add).

In this example two people make a personal decision to have children evidently before they’ve established themselves educationally and secularly so essentially on a very shaky foundation. They then presume that we are all somehow collectively financially responsible for them!

Too often there’s a complete absence of personal responsibility in this country and the British media then have the audacity to accuse the likes of the Chinese government of interference and control when the expectation is for the UK government to intervene at every opportunity?

[the stig]

This story epitomises everything that’s wrong with the pervading British way of thinking (at every level of society I might add).

In this example two people make a personal decision to have children evidently before they’ve established themselves educationally and secularly so essentially on a very shaky foundation. They then presume that we are all somehow collectively financially responsible for them!

Too often there’s a complete absence of personal responsibility in this country and the British media then have the audacity to accuse the likes of the Chinese government of interference and control when the expectation is for the UK government to intervene at every opportunity?

Nail - head - hit.

[Norbert]

In this example two people make a personal decision to have children evidently before they’ve established themselves educationally and secularly so essentially on a very shaky foundation. They then presume that we are all somehow collectively financially responsible for them!

Indeed. And trying to provide a secure and stable home for the responsible becomes ever more difficult when they have to contribute towards those who just go ahead anyway and hope "the government" will do something.

It doesn't make me feel too good to know that in aspiring to own a house, I have to compete with those who are paying for it using state funding who had children at the age I was just starting my career.

[evetsm]

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.

This is rather arrogant and superior is it not, maybe they are not as smart as you ? I would have thought that the banks were to blame for approving the loan. It is always the case that the lender is to blame(or the govt that underwrites insane lending), because they are supposed to do due diligence.

[erranta]

This story epitomises everything that's wrong with the pervading British way of thinking (at every level of society I might add).

In this example two people make a personal decision to have children evidently before they've established themselves educationally and secularly so essentially on a very shaky foundation. They then presume that we are all somehow collectively financially responsible for them!

Too often there's a complete absence of personal responsibility in this country and the British media then have the audacity to accuse the likes of the Chinese government of interference and control when the expectation is for the UK government to intervene at every opportunity?

Sorry but another R-SOLE comment

How can you take personal responsibility when you are forced into being a high-rise, box living, feudal, landless serf? Even that 'option' has been removed by our elite scum in recent decades!

Where will the UK's 'cannon fodder' come from - Middle and upper classes I presume?

Edited March 20, 2012 by erranta

[lie to bet]

There is nothing new about this.

Most young families have who have a new mortgage and young children struggle to make ends meet.

They should have saved a deposit whilst both earning as part of their plans to settle down and marry.

They are struggling but should be able to get through 4/5 years and then things will start to get easier.

[madpenguin]

This is rather arrogant and superior is it not, maybe they are not as smart as you ? I would have thought that the banks were to blame for approving the loan. It is always the case that the lender is to blame(or the govt that underwrites insane lending), because they are supposed to do due diligence.

+1 The entire problem with the UK can be laid at the door of the lack of sensible financial regulation together with promoting strongly the idea that unless you own your own property you are some kind of loser.

Both these polices have contributed enormously to the ridiculous cost of living, and personal debt in the UK, and the lemming like desire to "get on the housing ladder", means "average" families on average wages would not be able to afford children if they carefully budgeted for them, (certainly not the upcoming generation who will be burdened for most of their working life paying off student loans, another part of the con trick), in short the UK economy is sick and unbalanced, it's fine if you have money but for the average person with average abilities it is no longer a reasonable place to start a family or simply enjoy life.

Edited March 20, 2012 by madpenguin

[19 year mortgage 8itch]

They are struggling but should be able to get through 4/5 years and then things will start to get easier.

That was the plan in 2007 but now its 2012 and 4/5 years has passed.

Things aren't looking up.

[Ruffneck]

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.

maybe so but at least they are working

[madpenguin]

maybe so but at least they are working

Quite, One of my kids has done Animal Care at NVQ and is now half way through a degree, it includes a heap of biology, knowledge and care of numerous illnesses in different species (not just mammals but reptiles and birds too), as well as financial management (strangely enough veterinary practices, catteries, kennels, farms, zoo's etc also have to keep accounts and work out how to grow and run a business), and has a lot of practical work involved.

Just because it doesn't happen to be something socially worthwhile like investment banking doesn't make it worthless, it's pretty much essential for veterinary nurses and a good starting point for going on to study to become a vet.

From looking at the people at her Uni who have graduated they seem to get work faster than people in a lot of other fields, don't lump it in with "media studies", there's far more to it than "petting animals"

In the OP's posted story the husband who has been studying "Leisure centre management", this also another skill which can be used in the real world.

I appreciate some people on this board believe only nuclear physicists, engineers and bankers are doing real jobs, but in the real world we need a host of other jobs, some quite unglamorous to keep things going, the snobbery some people have towards certain jobs is getting depressing.

A far more pertinent question is why do people in ordinary jobs feel compelled to take on 10x mortgages, why do banks grant them 10x mortgages, and why is the cost of living so high that 2 people in work are so pressured in this way (to those who shout about the "hardship" they experienced buying a house I would say compare the relative amounts you paid to those that young people have to pay today, theres no comparison)

Edited March 20, 2012 by madpenguin

[JustAnotherProle]

Quite, One of my kids has done Animal Care at NVQ and is now half way through a degree, it includes a heap of biology, knowledge and care of numerous illnesses in different species (not just mammals but reptiles and birds too), as well as financial management (strangely enough veterinary practices, catteries, kennels, farms, zoo's etc also have to keep accounts and work out how to grow and run a business), and has a lot of practical work involved.

Just because it doesn't happen to be something socially worthwhile like investment banking doesn't make it worthless, it's pretty much essential for veterinary nurses and a good starting point for going on to study to become a vet.

From looking at the people at her Uni who have graduated they seem to get work faster than people in a lot of other fields, don't lump it in with "media studies", there's far more to it than "petting animals"

In the OP's posted story the husband who has been studying "Leisure centre management", this also another skill which can be used in the real world.

I appreciate some people on this board believe only nuclear physicists, engineers and bankers are doing real jobs, but in the real world we need a host of other jobs, some quite unglamorous to keep things going, the snobbery some people have towards certain jobs is getting depressing

I'm confused, how can one go from an NVQ which is a vocational qualification to a "degree", which is an intense specialist study at an accredited university involving publication of a peer reviewed paper? In order to be a vet for example, and the last time I checked, you would need an A level (at least) in one or more science subject, preferably biology and chemistry, and then a further 5-6 years study at a specialist vet college.

I don't think people who consider serious science based jobs essential to our economy and civilisation as snobs, I'm not sure many who post here would agree with you on bankers either, I do however tend to agree with them when the types of studies being promoted as "degree" level in obscure "soft" subjects such as "leisure centre management" are given the same credence, as say someone who has worked through a hard science degree and published in a peer reviewed paper, I would rather have a society full of engineers and scientists than media studies grads and leisure center managers personally! This is no way a dig at people who are motivated to do these types of jobs but lets actually put them into perspective.

[madpenguin]

I'm confused, how can one go from an NVQ which is a vocational qualification to a "degree", which is an intense specialist study at an accredited university involving publication of a peer reviewed paper? In order to be a vet for example, and the last time I checked, you would need an A level (at least) in one or more science subject, preferably biology and chemistry, and then a further 5-6 years study at a specialist vet college.

I don't think people who consider serious science based jobs essential to our economy and civilisation as snobs, I'm not sure many who post here would agree with you on bankers either, I do however tend to agree with them when the types of studies being promoted as "degree" level in obscure "soft" subjects such as "leisure centre management" are given the same credence, as say someone who has worked through a hard science degree and published in a peer reviewed paper, I would rather have a society full of engineers and scientists than media studies grads and leisure center managers personally! This is no way a dig at people who are motivated to do these types of jobs but lets actually put them into perspective.

NVQ wasn't the only qualification she had, obviously you have to have A levels to do a degree, or a mix of qualifications to qualify in points, but it was available to study to get a taste of the subject (School had it's own farm), BTW as far as I can remember Animal management is a BSc.

Basically my argument with the "society full of engineers and scientists" view is that the world needs ditch diggers too, and hairdressers and a multitude of other professions, not everyone would fit these types of jobs and everyone finds the niche that appeals to them, the opinion that someone is "only a hairdresser" for instance is sheer snobbery,

I have someone in my family who is "only a hairdresser" who employs 6-7 people and has a thriving business, and owns her own home outright but I'm pretty sure she'd be stumped if you asked her to build a bridge or work out the tensile strength of a material, I am also certain some engineers and scientists are happy to use her business, it also doesn't mean that the job doesn't involve a fair amount of training to do it well, or has no value to society.

I'd rather have a Leisure Centre manager who knew everything there was to know about the subject than someone brought in off the streets, how do you know how much knowledge or training is needed for a degree for leisure centre management have you done one?, and done a hard science degree to compare?

http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/careers/profiles/leisure-recreation-management/

"Leisure/recreation management studies provide an excellent grounding in general business management skills, including finance, human resources (HR), physical resources management, business planning, marketing, legal matters (health and safety) and customer service. These are all highly transferable skills and can lead to a management role in any sector."

From looking at this it's pretty much a straightforward business degree which as it says could have application in a number of other fields

I once worked for a large pharmaceutical company, the rates they paid science grads was appalling, they could probably have got more as leisure centre managers

Edited March 20, 2012 by madpenguin