View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. This poll is closed
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #17661
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    If you.are living on 70 quid a week after rent with food and amneties to pay for you are not going to be able to better yourself and if you have children to care for in that situation then it's fair to say they aren't going to have much opportunity.
    But that's (part of) the point I'm disputing, whether this report from the "independant experts" covers amenities under "household costs" (which on the face of the words used, implies it does). You can feed yourself very cheaply if you're prepared to or you can spend all your money on shit. Yes I know it all sounds like the "bootstraps" argument; so I'll simply ask "How much money should someone be entitled to have to spend on themselves each week to "not be destitute" to you?

    I'm curious what the physics of a 20 min car drive are that takes both 2 hours via public transport or is unwalkable/bikable, so I'm guessing your grandad lives 20 mins down an A-road from Stoke. I'm not gonna touch on the nature of your situation that leaves you as a grandchild responsible for his care; these things happen, but I will say I'd rather taxpayer money was going to someone eg. in his condition that requires better attention and care (by funding paying jobs in care-work rather than leaving it as the responsibility of friends and family) than going to someone who has a part time job but feels that his compensation for it not affording him a netflix subscription means he's living in poverty.

    Incidentally, what the BBC article doesn't really point out is that these independant experts are trialling a 'new' system of determining whether someone is in poverty. If this new method comes up with the figure of 14 million people; I'd say it was the method that needs refining; not panic at the 'realisation' that a fifth of Britain are living in genuinely destitute conditions.

    As for having kids you cannot remotely afford to look after and the psychology of being poor that you also mention - different kettle of fish really. I'm not professing to have solutions to poverty; just that redefining it in such a way as to include so many people is counter productive if you're actually trying to help people who *need* it. Assuming the pot isn't bottomless...
    Last edited by AeneasBK; 2019-06-04 at 09:06 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Posting here is primarily a way to strengthen your own viewpoint against common counter-arguments.

  2. #17662
    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    But that's (part of) the point I'm disputing, whether this report from the "independant experts" covers amenities under "household costs" (which on the face of the words used, implies it does). You can feed yourself very cheaply if you're prepared to or you can spend all your money on shit. Yes I know it all sounds like the "bootstraps" argument; so I'll simply ask "How much money should someone be entitled to have to spend on themselves each week to "not be destitute" to you?
    According to this article £70 a week is officially considered destitute, so if we can agree on that then we can actually have a conversation rather than debating semantics which I have no interest in doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    I'm curious what the physics of a 20 min car drive are that takes both 2 hours via public transport or is unwalkable/bikable, so I'm guessing your grandad lives 20 mins down an A-road from Stoke.
    20 odd mile drive, no train links, no direct bus and a change over being required on the bus route. I really shouldn't of mentioned my circumstances because the point I wanted to make is that public transport outside of large conurbations can be terrible, I just wanted to ground the point with real life experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    I'm not gonna touch on the nature of your situation that leaves you as a grandchild responsible for his care; these things happen, but I will say I'd rather taxpayer money was going to someone eg. in his condition that requires better attention and care (by funding paying jobs in care-work rather than leaving it as the responsibility of friends and family) than going to someone who has a part time job but feels that his compensation for it not affording him a netflix subscription means he's living in poverty.
    Is anyone making a claim that not having a Netflix subscription is the marker for poverty? Because from what I'm reading we aren't really talking about young adults making poor life choices, but children growing up in poverty.

    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    Incidentally, what the BBC article doesn't really point out is that these independant experts are trialling a 'new' system of determining whether someone is in poverty. If this new method comes up with the figure of 14 million people; I'd say it was the method that needs refining; not panic at the 'realisation' that a fifth of Britain are living in genuinely destitute conditions.
    I can't find the methodology but they are "experts" from the UN. I don't see much reason to doubt them, I guess their definitions follow the UN's criteria.

    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    As for having kids you cannot remotely afford to look after and the psychology of being poor that you also mention - different kettle of fish really. I'm not professing to have solutions to poverty; just that redefining it in such a way as to include so many people is counter productive if you're actually trying to help people who *need* it. Assuming the pot isn't bottomless...
    I'm not professing to having answers myself either. I would suggest however (which was why I linked in the first place) that ignoring it or claiming you merely had to look around whilst you live at No.11 isn't all that helpful or credible.

  3. #17663
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    It can definitely work. But some times there is no decent bus route to work (or you'd need to change multiple buses and it would take far more time than you can possible waste in transport). And the bus is still a daily expense. When we are talking about just 70£ a week, more than 10 of those go to the bus if you qualify for a discount. And that's the cheap option
    If you drive your car an hour to work, that's two hours of car driving per day, I'd wager you're spending about as much as you would for public transport. Especially once you factor in insurance and maintenance cost.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  4. #17664
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Yeah that was my point; a car is not exactly that much more costly than other transportation costs so if we are counting them in that 70£ then it's a decent chunk that goes to transportation whether you have a car or not. Thus since the car does not exactly cost that much more than public transport, it's not really a luxury.
    Fair enough. Ignoring the initial cost of buying the car, though. I'd still rather steer this towards a discussion of inequality than poverty. The term poverty is misleading in a European context. Unless you'd like to talk about homeless, I don't think it quite applies.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  5. #17665
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    There are two types of poverty, absolute poverty and relative poverty. Absolute poverty or destitution suggests you cannot survive without help. Relative poverty suggests you do not have access to the standard of living that is commonly accepted as basic for the place that you live in. Relative poverty can very from town to town, let alone country to country.

    Consider this. What do you mean when you say someone is poor? Do you mean that without assistance they would die? Or do you mean that they live at much lower than the average standard of living? I contest that we call people poor when they are in the second situation. The common use of poverty therefore denotes relative poverty, not destitution.

    Poverty is not about not being able to survive, it's about not being able to prosper. Someone who is poor will struggle significantly to improve because they do not have the resources for it. It is more about what percent of the people in the lower income levels have limited upward mobility than it is about suffering.
    Right. Isn't that what they call "inequality" these days, though? For the sake of a discussion, I think the separation of terminology is preferable.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  6. #17666
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    Fair enough. Ignoring the initial cost of buying the car, though. I'd still rather steer this towards a discussion of inequality than poverty. The term poverty is misleading in a European context. Unless you'd like to talk about homeless, I don't think it quite applies.
    It does on the periphery.

  7. #17667
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    No, you have a valid point. And him raising the bar to European standards where you're considered poor while having a solid roof over your head, regular food intake and basic luxuries like TV, telephone and these days I believe even internet paid for you by the state... that's not a fair argument.

    What his point should be is inequality, not poverty. See, if I own the best BMW but everyone around me is driving Lambos... I'm poor in comparison. If I'm earning 500k a year but everyone around me is a billionaire that gets 500k/y from interest rates alone, I'm poor in comparison. That's a bullshit argument and just feeds into the entitlement attitude that is the root of some of our political unrest.
    That is part of decreasing inequality though.


    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    If you live an hour away (by car!) from your workplace, you either are in a city and not using public transport enough or you really need to make some big decisions in your life. Like moving closer to work... a car is not strictly necessary in Europe. The US? Sure, maybe... but not Europe.
    Not really, in Europe it also depends on where you live and what you do. Buses don't drive faster in Europe, Trains only connect so many places.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    If you drive your car an hour to work, that's two hours of car driving per day, I'd wager you're spending about as much as you would for public transport. Especially once you factor in insurance and maintenance cost.
    Do you understand that for poor people time isn't exactly something they have much of? Now saying they should take longer to commute because it's cheaper might cost them more in the long run.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  8. #17668
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Do you understand that for poor people time isn't exactly something they have much of? Now saying they should take longer to commute because it's cheaper might cost them more in the long run.
    If you live in a city, public transport is likely to be faster. At least where I live. Trust me, if you're poor, public transport is your best bet.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  9. #17669
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    Well the State Visit is going well, it's been pretty funny watching Trump on his best behaviour as he fangirls on QEII, can't wait to watch him revert to type if he has to spend any time round May Infront of a microphone, reap the whirlwind Mrs May.

    Phillip Hammond rejects reality and substitutes it with his own. Just look around you guys! You certainly can't see any of the poverty from No.11.
    It's a shame Phillip retired from public life, he could have injected some entertaining drama into the proceedings.

  10. #17670
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    If you live in a city, public transport is likely to be faster. At least where I live. Trust me, if you're poor, public transport is your best bet.
    That depends on the city and how great of an infrastructure it has. Also, usually poor people don't work or live in the inner cities where traffic is an issue or they have to start work when public transport isn't an option.

    Seriously, you can't say public transport is the solution when a car makes everything else a bit cheaper because you can actually buy in bulk or not have to pay someone to pick stuff up.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  11. #17671
    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    Ehm, I'll concede that one if you can show some evidence it's a statistically significant number of people who are working jobs that *demand* a car. Living 30 mins from your workplace and not wanting to take a bus is not a lifestyle that demands a car. Although try telling that to some of the people I've worked with that maybe they should just ... walk ... to work, and yes, gosh rain is such an inconvenience isn't it - you'd get nowhere

    On the flipside I'd happily agree that a computer and access to the internet is as much as a basic need as can be considered one. Fortunately there is free access to both all over the country, so having one at home (which isn't remotely as expensive as owning/operating a car) isn't even a necessity; but hell it's a big QoL improvement to get your job search etc. done at home

    I reject the notion that someone working 40 hours a week is living in poverty. Unless they barely speak English and don't understand the words "minimum wage law" and are being grossly exploited.

    Living beyond your means is not and should not be anyone elses problem.

    But again, this whole mini-debate is entirely about "my personal interpretation of words" so if people want to say "No, common usage of the words poverty and destitute ought to bring to mind people who only have £70 a week to spend on what they choose" then fair enough I have to recalibrate my lexicon
    So £328.40 a week, minus tax and NI leaves £291.31, average £1261 a month.

    Average energy and water bill is about £140 for a family of 4. Rent can vary massively but ~£700 for a 3 bedroom house seems to be the low end around me (Bury/North Manchester.) Add another £100 for Council Tax. Let's say £15 for cheap internet + landline.

    So Gas, Electric, Accommodation, Council Tax and Internet/Phone (the absolute basics with household bills) comes to £955 leaving £306 for the month or £70.60 a week.

    So yeah, £70.60 just over £10 a week split between a family of 4, £2.50 a day each to cover clothes, food and toiletries before any "luxuries" like entertainment can be considered. Average food bill is over £50 a week for the UK and with toiletries (and other household products like bin-bags and detergents) you're left with very little to cover clothing and that's the very basics of "what they choose."

    Things like furniture, fridge/freezer, boiler, oven, washing machine are all things that would put the family into debt. Home improvements or even essential repairs become a dream and luxuries are things like a TV, computer or toys for the kids, forget saving money for a holiday.

    Having the second parent work would incur childcare costs that can go up to a couple of hundred pounds per child - potentially costing more than they earn - and even if they do manage to get them both looked after and come out with a bit of profit (about another £70 a week for full-time work) you end up with two parents who are working full time and struggling to properly maintain the house or spend time with the children.

    And yeah I know this paints a very dire situation and there is a lot that the UK's benefits system will do to provide some relief, but to raise their disposable income to £10 a day per person (and that still has to be spent on essentials like food, clothes, toiletries and household goods) they'd need their income topping up by £840 a month.

  12. #17672
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    15,961
    Confirming that the public transport infrastructure in the North West is absolutely dreadful.

    The handful of exceptions are developed areas like Manchester city centre, tourist spots like Blackpool, and any one who only has to rely on the Glasgow to Manchester/London line.

  13. #17673
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    If you live in a city, public transport is likely to be faster. At least where I live. Trust me, if you're poor, public transport is your best bet.
    I live in Greater Manchester, the tram system into the center of town is excellent but getting in and out of the center before 10am (peak time ticket) costs £4.20 a day which is more than a quarter of the disposable weekly income being discussed for a 5-day week. It might be cheaper than running a car but it's still a significant cost.

  14. #17674

  15. #17675
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    15,961
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Likely, the LD kinda took the pro EU approach and ran with it hard and made Change somewhat surplus to requirement, the EU results confirmed this.

    Wonder how many of them join the Lib Dems.

  16. #17676
    Hope they manage to get out soon, wont be good for me (Swedish) but hopefully it will lead to the collapse of EU and make the world a better place.
    Germans pushing for whatever they feel is the right thing can never be a good thing.

  17. #17677
    Quote Originally Posted by Kronik85 View Post
    According to this article £70 a week is officially considered destitute, so if we can agree on that then we can actually have a conversation rather than debating semantics which I have no interest in doing.
    Sure, we can't agree on that; the whole talk was examining why Phillip Hammond was rejecting the idea that 14m British people live in poverty.

    Again: I'm not trying to deny there are poor people in the UK. There aren't 14m of them unless you change the definition of poverty, which the UN has done when it includes social and cultural "needs" (as pointed out by your link). I hadn't realised until I read it that you could own most of a £300 000 house and still be considered living in poverty by the UN. Crazy how language changes I guess.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Posting here is primarily a way to strengthen your own viewpoint against common counter-arguments.

  18. #17678
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Problem with FPTP politics. When you try to move into a place that is shared by another party you either wipe it out or become part of it. LD surged so it's death of Change.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodonius View Post
    Hope they manage to get out soon, wont be good for me (Swedish) but hopefully it will lead to the collapse of EU and make the world a better place.
    Germans pushing for whatever they feel is the right thing can never be a good thing.
    Oh look another idiot peddling the 4th reich view point of Germans controlling the EU for their own means.

  19. #17679
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern Goblin View Post
    Likely, the LD kinda took the pro EU approach and ran with it hard and made Change somewhat surplus to requirement, the EU results confirmed this.

    Wonder how many of them join the Lib Dems.
    Ideally all of them, no idea why Soubry and co are holding out. They were always going to either replace the Lib Dems or disappear.

  20. #17680
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallisto View Post
    Problem with FPTP politics. When you try to move into a place that is shared by another party you either wipe it out or become part of it. LD surged so it's death of Change.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Oh look another idiot peddling the 4th reich view point of Germans controlling the EU for their own means.
    Nazi 4d chess, who knows. But what is true every world war have germans on the loosing side.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •