The shame of Austerity Britain

Do your research the credit cards companies have increased the spending limits .so in the main younger generation keep on spending.mortgage rates are at the lowest for many years
the younger age group still want the latest phone, internet perhaps sky . coffee shops and sandwich shops etc etc
what they need is education to save?
my last project i checked 2500 mortgages cases most were to pay off credit cards loans , then they start all over again.
the richest man in china said we in the west spend today's money and tomorrows money,
china has been poor so long .they save their money.
an article in one of the nationals stated hundreds of 000,s of young are going back home to try and save? take look at how many coffee shops and sandwich shops there are in your location so who,s buying. take a look at who walks down the road with coffee and sandwiches and texting says it all does n,t it

Granny23 your post reminded me of the saying that 'people don't know what they don't know until somebody tells them'. The young mother you describe is in the position that many of my homeless clients are in; they have neither smart phone, nor tablet, cannot afford to buy a daily paper and the return bus fare to the nearest jobcentre costs £8. Without the library (and very often a helpful librarian) they would be even more disadvantaged than they already are. People who have no understanding of grinding poverty glibly make suggestions to me about what my clients could/should do and, pacifist that I am, I could sometimes shake them for their ignorance. Employment and support allowance is £73.10 per week for someone over 25 who is unfit for work - and even that is not payable for the first seven days of a claim.

Thanks for that post Granny23. Party Politics has a lot to answer for. What I find most unforgivable is the fact that the misinformation leads to splits in communities, as well as loss of amenities in your case. As you say if they object but with a viable alternative it would be different, but objection for the sake of it, is negative and helps no one in the end.

I hope your young mum and others get their much needed community support, be it in a library or some other building with the facilities they need, in a suitable place.

*Allygran18 the existing Library is in a really old building which is crumbling away. It is currently shored up with scaffolding and roof props but scheduled for demolition as soon as alternative premises are available. Council is cash strapped ATM hence the plan to move the Library into their underused Primary School (2 classrooms lying empty) at minimal cost - only adding on a separate entrance, with no access to the rest of the school, and additional car parking. This work will be completed over the School holidays, ensuring no disruption for the pupils.

It all seems eminently reasonable to me but there has been a deliberate campaign of misinformation for Party Political reasons which has muddied the waters and led to parental opposition to the plans, without putting forward any viable alternative.

Granny23, I have to ask this, is the Library safe to use? Was it a permanent move or temporary whilst the work was completed to make the building safe, or was the intention to demolish an unsafe building?

As you say the young mum added a new dimension to the discussion and the use of the Library, but will she be safe and will other's be safe using the building?

The Library in our nearest small town is in a building that has been declared 'unsafe'. The Local Council has proposed that the Library move into the local Primary School which has spare capacity, but a few parents have objected (mainly on the grounds that paedophiles will use the Library to access youngsters in the school?????) and have started a petition. The Council and the PTA set up a public meeting to allow discussion, which was descending into farce, with a Parent declaring that Nobody uses the Library nowadays - people do every thing On-Line.

Then a single mum with 2 wee ones in the school got to her feet. She explained that she was now on UC and was required to spend 30 hours a week 'job seeking' and as she had no (could not afford) internet access at home, she relied on the Library to provide this + free copies of local newspapers with job ads. She explained that bus fares to the neighbouring town's libraries would amount to nearly £20 a week as well as causing difficulties being back in time to collect her DC from school. She also pointed out that there were other people in town on the same treadmill, such that the Library was in near constant use for this purpose as well as the regular Library services.

This brave statement, changed the tone of the meeting as it dawned on the people that there was much more to the Library than simply the exchange of books. These are not unconcerned people just uninformed, or in this case misinformed by the people behind the petition, which, in this case is the local Labour Councillor and his cronies, who have been using the issue as an opportunity to attack the SNP Administration, without offering an alternative proposition.

annep, sorry to hear about your MS. From what you say you are already doing so much. There is more than one way of being useful to others. Writing letters and advising people in need, on a one to one, is as valuable as any other type of activity that benefits people in need, including organised volunteering.

So many posts. such strong feelings. I'm having to read a couple of pages at a time. Its good to see so many united Monica agree with you in everything and I think a lot of pensioners could help with contributions towards health care. My husband would willingly as long as it was ringfenced and spent wisely. . maryeliz I was waiting for you to say "Let them eat cake"

Allygran1 I will see what I can do. Have M.E. which however is easing and has hindered me from volunteering anywhere as I need to be dependable. I have advised people and helped on a one to one basis in very small ways but I will certainly investigate this after the summer. My help at the minute consists of letter writing to my MP ( who must be sick hearing from me) and donating to food banks etc.the usual. Recently I have become aware accidentally of how difficult it is for young single mothers trying to get back into work and how stressful it is . People just dont realise. They think benefits are wonderful. I will be complaining. I'm just not sure anyone listens but we must try.

"mostlyharmless Sun 24-Jun-18 16:57:59
I’m not sure that you’re talking about real poverty there allyg. This thread is about the homeless living on the streets and people having to use food banks because their welfare benefits have been suspended, or delayed by months.
The homeless are extremely unlikely to own multiple TVs, iPads and iPhones as you suggest".

Mostly, we are not disagreeing on this. My post was about another important areas of poverty that is hidden, but just as insidious.

It does not detract or in anyway downgrade the severity of the desperation of the homeless, or those left without money due to incompetence in the benefit system. Nor did I nor do I suggest that the homeless have multiple iPads or iPhones or T.V's.

If this thread has wandered and you want to keep it pure, so be it. There is plenty to talk about on this topic sadly.

Well said, alreadytaken.

I despair of trying to educate people who cannot understand that however cheap or expensive food is you cannot buy it if you have no money. If you are normally on a low wage you cant save for hard times so if you have no-one who can help you then you starve.

If you ever had anything valuable you sell it for a fraction of it's value but sometimes it's worthless. My child had an iphone but it was an old one and the screen was bleeding. No company would buy it. Fortunately they dont need money - but if they were on benefit they'd have no money to replace it, would need a phone to try and get work and couldnt sell it for something cheaper. But it's so much easier to ignore this and think everyone has something "valuable".

Another one here who has never understood why the Labour party has not defended its economic record.

Dont know if the greed or the stupidity is the worst.

annep, your quote from Bob Dylan captures exploitation in just a few words.

There are fortunately lot's of people who can help those trapped by these exploitative companies and sometime individuals who knock on doors. The less controlled the more difficult to deal with in law, but not impossible.

You say "this is something you feel deeply about", you might want to help anyone you know of or fear for, by volunteering with local debt support organisations. They are usually found in local newspapers or on notice boards in Supermarkets.

Or if people can't or don't want to get that involved, they can just let people know, that when things are totally out of control, they can go into Bankruptcy, it does not have the stigma once attached to it, and last for a much shorter time than in the past. People in genuine need who do not make Bankruptcy part of how they themselves exploit the system, should not fear going on line, there is a cost, but there is no humiliation attached to the process anymore.

Before doing so they should realise and check how it will affect them if they own property, or vehicles. Depending on how much they owe, it might mean selling the property. But the lenders will not be able to phone them, bother them in anyway, or take them to court, once they pay the fee and fill in the form to the Insolvency Service on line if they wish, the Insolvency Service will take over. It is less fraught for those who rent property, however, it might affect getting a new tenancy agreement, as there will be credit checks when doing so. Council or Housing Associations, are less stringent than private landlords.

I volunteer locally with a debt advice group, because I too feel very strongly about the hidden debt poverty trap.

The main thing is to let people know that if in difficulty with credit cards, or catalogue companies, they should phone them, offer to pay something and say for how long. They will need to work out how much is paid out to pay to live, and what is left is what you spread out between the creditors, proportionate to the amount they owe to each one, there is a formula and one or more of the people owed money will send a simple form to get that amount and then allocate what is left each week or month after living cost's to the creditors. If that works out at £1 and for another £2 then so be it.

Remind those you share this information with that, it will only be temporary arrangement, but the creditors will suspend in most cases, the interest, some will give them a payment holiday, there is a lot of help out there whilst people get themselves together and have time to think through their finances.

Sorry, I am always on my soap box to get this sort of information out there. Please, if you can tell more people, share the information. Thank you.

I would get too stressed reading these posts. Its something I feel deeply about. Can I just say ( as Bob Dylan said) we are only a pawn in their game.

Sadly Maizie that is capitalism, not the fault of our Government. The fault lies, with the Bank's. Barclays were if I recall the first to realise that selling money to the masses, in the form of a credit card was good business. Of course a lot more controlled in those days, but the business concept was established. Once Barclays sent out that credit card to all it's customers, that was it. I was one of them and I cut mine up along with lots of people at the time. Many did not,although it was virtually impossible for a long time to get into enormous amounts of credit card debt then. The controls on credit were good.

Sadly, as always those who see opportunity in human need and in some weakness, exploit the vulnerable. As we know: Pay-Day-Loans, exploitative interest rate credit cards, for people with bad credit, easy money with a big consequence. Easily accessed on line, one minute click and the money is in the lenders account within a few hours.

Maisie, there are always elements of most things on which we agree, however there is also a difference in who we blame. My view is that we do live in a time of access and excess and these two things are not good bedfellows, and will always leads to exploitation.

You are so right, about people getting into debt, but you know, we are free agents in this, we do have self control, we do have understanding that there will be enormous consequences for having everything we want, rather than need. Some people do not have that self control, no matter what the warnings are about interest rates, or increased credit limits offered by email. The temptations to the borrowers from the exploiters are many. But we have to take some responsibility for our actions and decisions. The alternative is a State I would not want to live in.

Equally I also believe the exploiters- the banks need controls, and if they can't self control, they must be brought to account, and controls imposed by law.

The only problem with this is, that it pushes lending underground and that is when the really vulnerable suffer, the desperate, those needing to use credit for living expenses, rather than things they want, and this is where we agree.

The exploitation once underground get's pushed downward because the exploiters become unseen, uncontrolled and then uncontrollable.

The whole thing is difficult and multi facetted with those being exploited often dependent on the exploiter, which always adds a dimension of resistance to controls by the very people the controls are designed to protect. Many want to have that access to that excessively expensive commodity -money, even if they can't afford it, because it accesses the things people want, rather than need.

One thing for sure Maize, something needs to be done about hidden poverty through credit, particularly for those who use credit to pay their bills as the norm, rather than those who create a lifestyle that is beyond their means with lavish purchases. This brings us back to one consideration UBI. Not the entire answer but worthy of investigation.

I’m not sure that you’re talking about real poverty there allyg. This thread is about the homeless living on the streets and people having to use food banks because their welfare benefits have been suspended, or delayed by months.
The homeless are extremely unlikely to own multiple TVs, iPads and iPhones as you suggest.

You can't run a society fuelled by expectations that the population constantly updates their possessions, and buys things they don't actually need, in order to keep companies in business and not expect people to get into debt.

Especially when wages are not keeping pace with inflation.

Pheasant75, I cannot disagree with anything you have said. As far as the Politicians are concerned, it strikes me that the main concern is to appease people who shout the loudest.

Your hospital neglect of two in laws is just becoming the norm, it seems. Your so right apology does not bring back the dead, nor does it compensate the deceased for the suffering they may have gone through at the hands of those they should be able to feel safe with and trust. Nor does it take away from the relatives the feeling that we should have noticed something, those nagging doubts stay for a life time.

There seems to me to be a deliberate attempt to drive a wedge between the young and the old in this Country. Whilst we should never generalise, some of the younger generations for the first time I believe, resent the old.

It seems to me that living in a Country with benefit systems, although believed not to be enough, means that unlike my parents generation and those before them, who lived in poverty, and by that I mean, they had no money, they lived from week to week till they got their pay packet. When they said we have no money, they meant, they had no money. Debt was a no, no because that could land you on the streets, or at certain times in the workhouse in previous generations.So generally the working poor lived well managed lives, because the alternative was too bad to risk.

Today, poverty is hidden in debt, and being poor, does not mean, austerity, often the debt poor, are surrounded by nice furniture, certainly high tech gadgets, a car, at least a couple of TV's and of course the IPhone, or iPad, every child seems to have a "tablet". Some might go to school not having had a breakfast, and teachers are feeding them, but this is not because of poverty, this is because of bad parenting, poor domestic management, and lack of care. How much does a bag of porridge oats's cost, I get a bag for £1. Cornflakes, 60p for own brand for a giant box. Six eggs, 60p, milk, for four litres, £2.00 . Smart price loaf of bread, 30p. Smart price jam, 30p. I could go on. So it is a matter of priorities, responsibilities, and not expecting the world to take care of us. Now this is a generalisation, some will fall outside of this description.

Sadly, I think no one is brave enough to tackle some of these real issues. It is the fear of the self appointed righteous pointing the finger and making everyone who does not think that everything should be provided for those 'in need', is an uncaring middle class monster. It is the definition of need, that needs urgently to be addressed.

If there is no effort to provide for oneself or family, but people are living in hidden poverty but in relative luxury, through debt. How far should the Country go, how far should the Bank of Mum and Dad go to support that hidden poverty? For that is what we do, we support it, thereby encouraging the, we want it all at any cost, mentality. We as a nation are doing those in the above position no favours in the long run, by continually bailing them out. What has happened to personal responsibility and self respect?

There has to be a reality check. Those in genuine need, those in debt need to be assisted, but only once. Multiple bankruptcy is a way of living for some, because they loose nothing, they keep the credit card purchases,the debt is written off, and once discharged off they go again. This is happening over and over in a lot of cases. What is that way of living teaching children in those circumstances, it becomes a learned behaviour, that might perpetuate the debt life style in future generations.

It is 'tough love" that is needed, kindness, caring for those in worse circumstances than the general population certainly, but for that, there has to be a return, an expectation of change. Nothing for nothing. Those in dire genuine need will always need the care of the nation and the communities in which they live. Sadly the hidden debt poor, live at the level of uncontrolled luxury goods, and outward affluence, that hides mismanaged lives.

yes your comments are correct,but we must not forget the younger generation are brought up on debt , credit car companies have raised their credit limits so they keep on spending no thought on reducing debt at all,they all want their latest phones , internet, netflix, coffee and sandwiches out. Friday and Sat out spend spend spend. hols abroad etc etc .
I have 3 grown up adults and have spoken with many parents all have same problem, if you ever watch the sheriffs on TV they tell you the same problem younger generation do not mid if they go bankrupt where as we would see it as embarrassing!
the interest rates are the lowest for 60 + years but will the youngest save NO bank of mum and Dad or grandparents come to the rescue all too often .politicians of all parties blame each other they have lost the plot.
Hospitals have no where near enough beds, PFI was brought in some years back WHY??
I have lost 2 in laws and both parents in hospitals through neglect and received apologies but that does no good .
so the majority of the under 50,s should stop and look ahead as well as most politicians.

MaizieD On the topic of UBI and the response I posted last night. There isn't a lot more I can add to what has been said Maizie, other than to say that to remove UBI from being at the mercy of different political attitudes and therefore constantly in danger of being withdrawn, which would defeat the purpose of UBI as a major step in social change for the twenty first century, I have come to the conclusion that UBI would have to be given Act of Parliament status. This would embed the commitment of all political party's into the structure of our society in law.

All major social change in our Parliamentary democracy comes through being embedded in Law through an Act of Parliament and subsequent amendments. This would be the way to go.

The detail of how much is to be payed (has to be enough) a token amount would not work. Along with creating a robust national framework for identification and analysis of potential skill's requirements and vocational retraining/ further education or higher education over the short, medium and long term to offer the very best opportunities of gaining transferable skills that actually match the types of work available. This suggested framework essentially will have to be an integrated process, critical to the success of our economy the well being of all citizens and sustaining the UBI system so it works for society and the economy.

All very easy to say, not so easy to manage during the change process. But everything starts somewhere.

Scotland showing us how to do it. You’re right granny23. England and Wales just need to get on with it.

In England: But the new requirements focus firmly on home ownership and private renting. Any separate specification for what is urgently needed – building for low-cost renting by social landlords – is entirely absent.
www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2018/mar/19/affordable-homes-low-cost-rent-uk-planning-policy-government-developers?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

www.sfha.co.uk/news/news-category/sfha-news/news-article/scotland-on-course-for-biggest-growth-in-social-housing-since-1970s

I'll just leave that there to show what can be done - where there is a will there is a way.

mostlyharmless thanks for the link to Andrew Yangs UBI platform info.

There are a few things that concern me, not about UBI, the principle of which I sense is the way forward in the twenty first century, in a Capitalist world. It's about, as you say how to fund it? In this country the juxtaposition with the benefits system is another concern. So I guess I am saying that it must not be used in the first instance to replace a system for a previous time. Or as a sticking plaster, for a short term fix. Nor can it be an overnight innovation. It has to be structural, embedded, and across Governments. There is a danger that traditional political position of right across the spectrum and left across the spectrum, will hijack the concept and 'make it in their own image" so to speak, when in fact it is a restructuring of society to benefit from capitalism in a free world market. So Apolitical. So there will be a lot of built in resistance from traditional stances.
Andrew Yang, I am sorry to say will not succeed in my view, however, as you say it will raise the profile of UBI. This is just the sort of thing, that Trump would understand. He may have lots of fault, and I don't want to go there, but he does understand capitalism.

The big question how can UBI become part of a structural and embedded programme of economic action that will benefit and change society permanently. Not though the action of one President or one Government, be they left or right wing, or even Liberal. This is more than that.

Will you forgive me if I come back to you tomorrow on this I really do need to read up something and think about this a lot more. I am also quite tired and that affects my ability to respond well.

In the meantime take a look if you will at this link, it is about Schumpeters wave theory of innovative revolution. You might have come across it, if so accept my apology in advance. It explains so much about why we have to restructure society economically to benefit society from capitalism, prepare for constant change, and innovation. Whilst cushioning society from the negative side of this inevitable process, and capitalising on the benefits for all. Understanding what is going on is really the ground plan.

www.economist.com/node/186628

I will come back to you tomorrow.

What do you think about Andrew Yang standing for President on a platform of “universal basic income”? (See link above).
It could at least help raise the profile of UBI.
I’m not sure that VAT is the best way to fund UBI though.

Mostlyharmless. Yes I do feel that if Schumpeter is correct, and his “perennial gale” of Creative Destruction theory is to be the way the twenty first century world wide is to develop, then there will, inevitably I believe, be as you describe it, "turbulent employment fluctuation". The country's that see and understand this, and accept the inevitability of change, whilst, grasping the opportunities for social change that this present's will prosper, economically, socially, and technologically.

The issue will be acceptance that there will always be a proportion of the population either unemployed, retraining or in further or higher education with a view to planned employment opportunities. Skill shortages would be addressed.

The turnround, for want of a better word, in that population will be unlike unemployment as we have know it before. It will eventually be rapid, planned re-training or further or higher education to specific skill bases.

Basic income for all, will eventually also allow for personal development of choice, that might take a little longer but it will I feel sure be the future.

My feeling is that Country's who do not see this future coming, will I fear suffer social unrest and economic failure.

It is all so different to what we know and are use to. Even a little counter intuitive, however, change never comes easy, but come it does. When it does we have two choices, accept it and see opportunities or reject it and stagnate.

So yes, I am predicting that "basic income" as a social change agent in a capitalist world is the future.