Whatever happened to "saving for a rainy day"?

Well said, Pammie1.

crazyH

I’m going to be screamed down for this. Disability Benefit should be means tested. If you can afford to fly abroad on holiday twice a year and pay for your family (abroad) to live comfortably, paying for your grand-nieces’ education, then you can surely pay for your own cleaners etc or whatever DLA is meant for,

Are you disabled ? Because if not, you’re really not in a position to judge. Living with a substantial disability costs money. And it’s not DLA any more for working age people. It’s PIP - and there’s no need to means test it for monetary value because the eligibility rules are so tightly drawn and so rigidly enforced that no-one who isn’t genuinely disabled would qualify. I’ve lived with a substantial congenital disability and worked for as long as I could - full time - until my condition deteriorated so much I couldn’t continue. I can assure you that I don’t fly abroad at all or live in the kind of comfort you describe. I’m grateful for the extra benefits, which pay for things like running a car, without which I would be housebound, and lately, for the help with the cost of charging essential equipment and extra washing due to incontinence.

DLA is paid to children under 16 and those who had reached retirement age when PIP was introduced. I have several friends who have severely disabled children and some relatives who fall into the latter category. I can assure you their DLA pays for essentials, not luxuries. The point of disability benefits like PIP, DLA and AA is that they are universal and paid in recognition of the significant cost disability brings. You are generalising, and you know it - otherwise you wouldn’t have anticipated being ‘screamed down’ for commenting as you did. Means testing doesn’t work, it’s a race to the bottom and it leaves people who miss the thresholds by a few pence or a pound or two, struggling just the same. If you were at the pointy end of that kind of injustice, you wouldn’t be advocating for more of it, and especially not aimed at people whose lives are already more difficult than you can imagine.

betts

There is an old fashioned concept called 'living within ones means' that is no longer considered important.

I think it is considered important - it's just easier for some than for others.

Someone without a large house in the South to sell would be in a very different position though. If you found it tough with a leg up like that, how do you think it feels for those starting from scratch with student loans to pay off and having paid rent for years? Most people pay bills on monthly DD, and struggle with things like roof repairs, but they are also paying a mortgage, which your post suggests that you were not? You are really not comparing like with like.

At times I'm not surprised so many young people complain about 'Boomers' being out of touch.

There is an old fashioned concept called 'living within ones means' that is no longer considered important.

During my 30's and 40's it was impossible to save as a single parent even though I had a full time job. luckily I decided to sell my large house in Essex (part of divorce) , pay off the mortgage and move 250 miles away in order to buy a newly built house in a region I had never lived before, and knew no one ! My daughter had to move from a private school to a state school ....luckily she loved it and as it turned out, three other girls from different areas joined the same September ..so she instantly had new friends ! I got a full time job in the NHS ...I had to run a car in order to get to work .......it was HARD even then ....had meals in the hospital canteen at subsidised rates, and daughter had main meal of the day at school. I always cooked at weekends...oven full, and slow cooker full, to freeze for the week ...limited budget of about £20 per week for food ! Paid for gas, water and electricity by monthly direct debit ......made sure daughter could go on school trips and not go without ! Fortunately where we lived was a 'returns catalogue shop' so I was able to keep up with her friends and their trainers, coats, etc etc .....but no savings (the new house cost just about what I had left from the other one ) ...repairs if needed (roof tiles slipping, etc etc ) were a blow but overall we managed. She went to Uni with a grant, (which had to be repaid when she went to work) had to find money for her bus fares, etc .............I was bought up in the 50s when you never HAD ANYTHING on the 'never never' ! everything had to be saved for ...bills, repairs, clothes etc ....we suvived !

crazyH

I’m going to be screamed down for this. Disability Benefit should be means tested. If you can afford to fly abroad on holiday twice a year and pay for your family (abroad) to live comfortably, paying for your grand-nieces’ education, then you can surely pay for your own cleaners etc or whatever DLA is meant for,

DLA is in the process of being replaced by PIP - but I know many families with disabled children and I can assure you none of them are leading anything like that kind of lifestyle. It's very easy to sit up there on some kind of moral high ground when you have no idea of people's individual circumstances. Are you suggesting that disabled people - or families with disabled children - don't deserve holidays?

I live in a really deprived area, and I see none of that type of thing.

It must be perhaps only certain sections of society who behave like that.

I have a friend who says she won’t be able to afford food soon and yet she is happy to pay £50 every 3 weeks to get her nails done and regularity spends over £100 on hairdressing.

I’m going to be screamed down for this. Disability Benefit should be means tested. If you can afford to fly abroad on holiday twice a year and pay for your family (abroad) to live comfortably, paying for your grand-nieces’ education, then you can surely pay for your own cleaners etc or whatever DLA is meant for,

Of course it's sod all to do with anyone else, but when has that ever stopped anyone?

No reason why not what, MissA?

Buy a coffee, do you mean? If so (and apologies if not) then IMO if people earn their money and choose to buy takeaway coffee that is up to them, and not anyone's place to judge them for it, any more than if they buy bibles or spend it on gin.

Acceptable standards of living have increased with generations. What seemed like luxuries when the first people owned them are often considered necessities. Most folk have mobile phones and the internet. We had one house phone as kids, but a couple with 2 teenagers probably need 4 phones. They are not considered luxuries. Also Sky. And many of us take a holiday abroad for granted. I think people do save for holidays, but not sure there's much left to put away for a rainy day. I really feel for people who are struggling with cost of living and fuel bills.

There is absolutely no reason why not.
Except that others will judge it and you'll be found lacking in some way.

For me, I resent being put into the bracket of people who can even do that - a bit like those in Blackpool, spending their universal credit money.

For some people money is a highly emotional issue. Usually caused by experiences in the early days. Some folk feel they have to reject money and keep it out of their lives. Push it away.

They say no to it all their lives unless they find help in places like Debtors Anonymous where they will meet others who have lost it all.

There are grandiose debtors and pauper debtors. No one really understands this unless they have lived with someone with this awful condition.

They are viewed as wasters, greedy, lazy etc but the condition is as real as Covid or pneumonia. And it is possible to recover or at least to manage it. With effort.

I worked out that NOT buying coffee for £3.50 for five days a week for a 48 week working year would allow you to save £840. It's too hot to work out how many years it would take to save even a 10% deposit for a £100k house, but it would be a long wait.

Yes, that was my point. It's difficult to compare now with the 70s and 80s but anything we could save went towards the deposit on our house, and you could see the total growing. It was tough, but it was achievable so we did it, like countless others. Coffee 'to go' wasn't available then, but if it had been I wouldn't have bought it as it would have kept the deposit out of reach, and we wanted it as soon as possible so that we could get married and have a place of our own.

For young people now, even in cheaper parts of the country you are looking at a minimum of £200k for a starter home, so they need to save £20k as a deposit whilst also paying high rent and student loans. I can understand the thinking that this is so far our of reach that it seems unachievable (and of course it's a higher mountain to climb in more expensive areas). Why not buy a coffee a day, or have a gym membership or nice soap) to make life pleasanter while you wait the many years it will take to save up?

Good post Dickens and HousePlantQueen.
I find some of the posts on here quite smug. How many people through no fault of their own have found themselves unable to save. It’s not a moral failing.
It would only take an unforeseen disaster for any of us to be living in a precarious situation, savings or not. I’d rather live in a compassionate non judgemental society than an obsessively acquisitive one.

I wouldn't dream of paying that for a coffee.
Unnecessary expense, particularly daily.

I worked out that NOT buying coffee for £3.50 for five days a week for a 48 week working year would allow you to save £840. It's too hot to work out how many years it would take to save even a 10% deposit for a £100k house, but it would be a long wait.

But you have to start somewhere don't you?

I'm self-employed so have no occupational pension to look forward to.
I started saving into a personal pension by investing just £20 a month as that was all I could spare at the time, with a mortgage and three children to support.
I index-linked the premium so it gradually crept up, and as my finances have improved I've increased the amount I save each month.

It's grown into a pot that I hope will be a reasonable supplement to my state pension?

It is not a governments job to keep bailing swathes of the population out all the time.

I agree - they should not be bailing out businesses that refuse to pay their workers a living wage.

Food hubs, food banks etc are a modern version of what has always existed the better off helping out the less well off.

Thank goodness for food banks. If the less-well-off had to rely solely on the whims of the better-off (who might decide they were not what they considered "deserving") they might never know where their next couple of day's food was coming from. From my own experience, many of those that contribute towards food banks are often only a bit better off than the less-well-off. My low-waged (but not by me) cleaning-lady struggles to make ends meet on many occasions, but feels honour bound to buy something extra each shopping session for the food bank. As do her adult children who also have little left over at the end of the month.

'The poor will always walk among us.'

Yes, they have - for centuries - what a sad reflection on the way humanity has organised itself that they still do.

Money is power and control. And those that have the most of it are going to make damned sure they are not relieved of either.

There are more of us - the many - than there are of them - the few, and the danger is that if we, the many, form a cohesive movement, we could completely change the status quo.

So we must be encouraged to divide ourselves into factions and fight among ourselves. And accept that the poor will always be with us because, well, that's just the way of the world, isn't it?

Adelaide66: Private housing is a huge obstacle to saving

Why?

Perhaps the people being "funded by the state" were on the breadline and couldn't afford to squirrel away enough to fund £40,000 a year. But we live in a country that (until now, mostly) doesn't value a person by how much they have in the bank, but by the fact that they are a human being.

People in the same nursing home as my relative have no savings and are funded by the state. My relative has worked hard, has savings and owns their house. They receive the same care but my relative is self funding to the tune of approx £40,000 per year. I don’t know the circumstances of those being state funded but how on is this system fair? My relative would have been better off spending all they earned and qualifying for state funded care.

I have never had enough income to save. On t he other hand I have never owed any money or bought anything on hire purchase. I have paid credit card in full each month.
My husband used to say I was economical to the point of meanness.

Doodledog

My two both rent, and are both paying back student loans, so buying somewhere of their own is nowhere near as easy as it was for us, even though we bought at a time when prices were rising and interest rates very high.

I don't think it's fair to blame young people for not doing what we did - times are different. I also think that castigating them for buying little luxuries is unfair when they work so hard. We didn't buy fancy coffee* as it wasn't available, and also because saving the £3.50 every day might have moved us closer to the deposit for a house. It would be a drop in the ocean these days, so it's really not comparing like with like.

*insert 'frivolous' spending of choice.

I worked out that NOT buying coffee for £3.50 for five days a week for a 48 week working year would allow you to save £840. It's too hot to work out how many years it would take to save even a 10% deposit for a £100k house, but it would be a long wait.