It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

1.6 Million UK Children now live in adverse poverty

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
Not having lived in the UK for over 10 years now, I was shocked to read this on the BBC site this morning:

www.bbc.co.uk...

What the hell is happening over there? With all the cuts in spending, defence, policing, health care and so on, the UK apears to be drifting away from a First World Country status.
Is this how the governments intend to subdue the population before exerting more control, or is the Country really in such a mess?
edit on 23/2/2011 by TheLoneArcher because: Spelling spelling and............................spelling




posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:40 AM
link   
The cuts havn't even kicked in yet, things are going to get a lot worse before they get better. They are talking about the biggest cut in living standards since the 1920's. But hey as long as the bankers still get their bonus's and the corporations get their tax break, who gives a damn about the kids?



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


So it is that bad. My goodness, people will soon be starving to death over there. I mean, you read of people dying due to no heating. If this is the shape of things to come, God help us all. Who needs 2012 when the government can cull you?



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLoneArcher
 


I have been working in a homeless centre for a few months in a reasonably affluent town. We are giving out food parcels everyday to young people who cant find housing or work. I predict crime is going to rocket in the next few years. When people dont feel like they belong in the society and that society is working against them, then they have nothing to lose. A prison cell with 3 meals a day is more attractive than sitting on the streets wondering where your next meal will come from
edit on 23-2-2011 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TheLoneArcher
 


How much blame can we really put on the government here?

Are they the ones that make people who can't afford to raise a child, have a child?

The responsibility falls back to the would be parents in my opinion, I mean hell, if people can't afford to live comfortably without a child, who in their right mind would bring one into the world to live in poverty??



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 

I weep for the UK, I really do. I gave 20 years of my life in service to that nation, my boys are currently serving, and for what? To watch people loose theit liberty, jobs, pride and sense of National pride.

Those looking to move to the UK seeking a better style of life would be better off staying where they are.
The British Lion has been declawed, starved, poked, proded, denied its freedom and ridiculed.

God Save Britain.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


I hear what you say, I really do, and in some cases, you are 100% spot on. However, there are those that have lost jobs (already with families) that has got stuck in a rut and just cannot get out. It is those I feel for. Others simply cannot get jobs.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


I guess we have had a massive problem with teenage pregnancy in the UK, it has been a failure by successive governments to get to grips with this problem, governments have felt too prudish to implement the sex education that youngsters get in europe. Governments fear the medias response to wanting to teach kids about sex in schools.

This though is not to hide the fact that we are one of the most unequal societies in the western world, with opportunities for social mobility reducing rapidly.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
I agree that there is a problem with homelesness here in the UK but these type of headlines make me sick.

No child need go hungry, we have a generous benefits system, for those out of work or on low pay. Mis-management of money is probably more of a factor, that and many of these parents will be spending their money on drugs, drink or a plasma tv.

I found myself on benefits for a while after my divorce, with three children it wasn't easy but my kids never went hungry, were well dressed and warm.
To change the situation I got a job, did anything until the right one came along.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
The uk is really in a bad state and ill tell you why....because as a country we are to dam soft! We burden ourselves with other peoples worries and other peoples wars. We ship all our main money making industries to countries with far cheaper labour like India leaving the rich owners getting richer and thousands without jobs. Were happy to let anyone and everyone through our borders and pay for them to set up home here. We have a population of 64 million and that's not including the illegal. Australia which is about 50 times the size of the uk has a population of 45 million and with less people working,less tax being paid means a lot less money to go around. When they do decide the money its aimed at the minority because of fear of civil unrest. Or even better we give aid to other countries. The rich get richer and the poverty line gets worse. For all those who leech of the government well done. You played the system and won, but think on one day the government will not be able to cover your lazyness and you will drop to the very bottom of the poverty scale.

The great island of the uk is a world joke and is sinking fast !

Helgas



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by dizzylizzy
 


Again, you are probably right. I cannot honestly say I know as I have not seen this first hand. I now live in a very rural part of France, where most people are farmers. They learn to live on a shoestring and maintain a good quality of life.

However, you displayed the attitude that more people should adopt.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:11 AM
link   

It defines severe poverty as those living in households with incomes of less than 50% of the UK median income (disregarding housing costs).


Is that genuine poverty though?

If you define severe poverty in this way then you will almost always find a large amount of severe poverty. What does "poverty" actually mean and does it take into account benefit entitlements.

Not that I'd like to suffer it but poverty in the UK is not like poverty in India or Somalia.
edit on 23-2-2011 by Mike_A because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by dizzylizzy
 


£65 a week on JSA is not much to live on, the reason why the benefit system is generous in your eyes is because the private sector pays such poor wages for living standards.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 


no but the UK is meant to be one of the richest nations on the earth, so we shouldnt be comparing with Somalia. Once you get in that mindset it becomes a race to the bottom.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


No but there's a tendency to hear poverty and think "starving people" where in reality we may actually be talking about not being able to afford a holiday once a year or the latest games console.

If the state, and therefore everyone else, is being asked to step in and ensure these people are brought out of poverty I'd like to know whether this means giving people things they genuinely need (food, housing) and not things that are actually luxuries (like TV and broadband).

That's why I don't like these seemingly arbitrary income cut-off points.



edit on 23-2-2011 by Mike_A because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Ahh they'll grow out of it! /end sarcasm.

Its just a shame in these modern times that people are still being made to live in poor housing without proper clothes, food or education. I apply that statment globaly. I see no reason what so ever for ANY human being to live in poverty on this earth so i find articles like this a real shame.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A

It defines severe poverty as those living in households with incomes of less than 50% of the UK median income (disregarding housing costs).


Is that genuine poverty though?

If you define severe poverty in this way then you will almost always find a large amount of severe poverty. What does "poverty" actually mean and does it take into account benefit entitlements.

Not that I'd like to suffer it but poverty in the UK is not like poverty in India or Somalia.
edit on 23-2-2011 by Mike_A because: (no reason given)


Exactly. Before we all get our little panties in a twist over the "Government", the cuts or whose to blame, lets actually look at what is being reported. The definition for "poverty" in the UK is actually pretty high in standards terms. It certainly doesn't mean we are "losing our 1st World status" or that people are going to starve to death, that is just slightly overreacting.

People can be declared to be in poverty even if they work! I was offcially "poverty stricken" when I was on £15k a year as a single man! I was down the pub every night, well fed and had money to burn, yet I was "below" some arbitrary poverty line that some Whitehall Civil servant had probably drawn up as part of his 6 monthly review with his manager....



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join