[News] Food Poverty figures in Worthing

[SK1NT]

Some people think food banks are uplifting

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41264965

 

[BBassic]

Some people think food banks are uplifting

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41264965

View attachment 139773

He isn't a person.

He's a sentient mass of hatred wearing a skin suit.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

selling social housing didnt remove any housing stock, and ownership of assets has no bearing at all on whether people can afford food. higher taxes dont address anything either, how about starting from solutions instead? yes, political change is required to enable large scale building and overhaul welfare provision to address needs more directly. give people food vouchers, energy vouchers as needed, housing as needed and core problems are solved. why dont we do that?

The housing stock hasn't lowered but council house rents were affordable for low income families. When houses were sold off at ridiculous discounts (My mother bought her house, with help from my h/brother in 1986, in Woodingdean for £12K) there was nothing to replace them.
Low income families were then at the mercy of landlords with no restraints. To balance that, a few housing associations were formed to provide such homes, but there aren't nearly enough.

People who use food banks are given food vouchers. You cannot walk into a food bank to ask for help without vouchers. The energy companies provide key meters for those who cannot afford gas and electricity. Water companies never cut low income families off.

 

[beorhthelm]

Not a direct cause of food poverty, obvs, but an illustration of the inequality in our society: (story below from the BBC website today)

"Mike Ashley's Frasers Group has offered the retail tycoon's future son-in-law a £100m bonus - but only if he can more than double the share price. The Sports Direct owner has put forward the bonus plan for Michael Murray when he becomes chief executive in May 2022. However, he will only collect if its share price reaches £15 for 30 trading days in a row before October 2025, up from its current level of £6.50. The company described the target as "challenging but achievable". Mr Murray, 31, engaged to be married to Mr Ashley's daughter Anna, is currently "head of elevation" at Frasers and is in charge of modernising stores and transforming the business. The board of Frasers Group, which owns Sports Direct and House of Fraser, said it had also recommended £1m a year salary for Mr Murray."

Now, I'm not sure exactly how Mr Murray will be looking to double the share price for a minimum of 30-days and trigger his £100m windfall but I imagine the army of minimum wage workers on zero hours contracts in the retail outlets and the fulfillment centre will be instrumental in the strategy. The £100m bounty on offer is actually pretty distasteful but why I should be surprised at that? Out of laziness, I usually hold my nose and buy my son's football boots and astro boots for training from Sports Direct as he gets through about 2 to 3 pairs a season. I won't be doing this anymore. He can frig his share price without the help of my hard-earned.

dont double a share price from employing minimum wage workers. this target would mean substantial growth of the business, from £3.4bn to about £7.7bn. thats an awful lot more business to be done.

 

[Baldseagull]

The housing stock hasn't lowered but council house rents were affordable for low income families. When houses were sold off at ridiculous discounts (My mother bought her house, with help from my h/brother in 1986, in Woodingdean for £12K) there was nothing to replace them.
Low income families were then at the mercy of landlords with no restraints. To balance that, a few housing associations were formed to provide such homes, but there aren't nearly enough.

People who use food banks are given food vouchers. You cannot walk into a food bank to ask for help without vouchers. The energy companies provide key meters for those who cannot afford gas and electricity. Water companies never cut low income families off.

Water companies cannot legally stop your supply of water, it isn't because they are sympathetic. Key Meters charge more per unit than a Direct Debit customer would pay, it is just a prepayment way for the company to ensure they don't lose cash by allowing a customer to build up a debt, it is for their benefit and is to the customers detriment, as their electricity is more expensive.

However there are grants and assistance provisions from many of the energy companies if you beg for it.

 

[Change at Barnham]

View attachment 139762

1981 I was earning £6500pa as a newly qualified staff nurse and bought a house for £19 000. (3 x wage)

Today a newly qualified staff nurse earns £25655pa and that same house is for sale for £250 000. (10 x wage)

The odds are stacked against anyone without help from Mum & Dad.

 

[beorhthelm]

The housing stock hasn't lowered but council house rents were affordable for low income families. When houses were sold off at ridiculous discounts (My mother bought her house, with help from my h/brother in 1986, in Woodingdean for £12K) there was nothing to replace them.
Low income families were then at the mercy of landlords with no restraints. To balance that, a few housing associations were formed to provide such homes, but there aren't nearly enough.

so the solution is to build more housing, social or general. not argue around who owns the existing stock, or vilify those that do offer property for rent. high prices and rents have the same root cause, insufficient supply for the demand.

People who use food banks are given food vouchers. You cannot walk into a food bank to ask for help without vouchers. The energy companies provide key meters for those who cannot afford gas and electricity. Water companies never cut low income families off.

that would suggest the problems are solved. as they evidently arent, these schemes need expansion to be offered to more.

 

[Bry Nylon]

dont double a share price from employing minimum wage workers. this target would mean substantial growth of the business, from £3.4bn to about £7.7bn. thats an awful lot more business to be done.

I expect a significant part of the growth strategy is based on growing online sales, both in the UK and across Europe. The fulfillment centres are staffed by agency workers on zero hours contracts earning minimum wage, so yes I expect they will be instrumental in achieving this target. Alongside sales expansion, the other parts of the strategy will most likely be identifying operational efficiencies (ie staff terms and conditions) plus achieving lower cost product sourcing. And we all know what the current pay and conditions of people making sports gear for the major brands is like.

So to double the share price in 4 years I expect he will be looking to grow online sales, reduce operational costs and buy stuff cheaper. Trebles all round for the shareholders but perhaps not so great for the workforce both in the business and the supply chain, unless of course they will all be sharing in the bonus scheme - but I don't know about that as the article didn't mention it.

 

[zefarelly]

£10k in 1992 is equivalent to £21k now.

With a (let's say) 10% deposit paid by BOMAD, that gives a budget of £93k for your flat today. It just about buys a flat - just about.

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/propert...aredOwnership,newHome&furnishTypes=&keywords=



Presumably you bought the record player, and also some records to play? The guitar(s!) and maybe an amp or two, some effects / cables / cases / strings / picks...?



That's true for me today. What would be higher - perhaps a car loan?

Picks? how very dare you, no discerning bass player uses a pick! TBH my record player and guitar were gifts/inherited . . .been buying records since I was 10 . . . . sold my car, then my scooter got nicked and I cycled to work for a few years after buying a flat . . . . it wasn't that easy. didn't get a car again as a permanent feature until 1998.

After 18 months and a promotion/payrise September '93 (found the receipts recently) I remortgaged for 'home improvements' and invested in hi-f- at Jeffries and a Rickenbacker . . . £1200 well spent . . . I still have it all today and in perfect working order.

 

[stewart12]

Water companies cannot legally stop your supply of water, it isn't because they are sympathetic. Key Meters charge more per unit than a Direct Debit customer would pay, it is just a prepayment way for the company to ensure they don't lose cash by allowing a customer to build up a debt, it is for their benefit and is to the customers detriment, as their electricity is more expensive.

However there are grants and assistance provisions from many of the energy companies if you beg for it.

yes I used to work for a debt advice charity. As you can imagine I dealt with utilities providers a LOT

Southern Water, British Gas and a few other energy providers have a few schemes/grants to help people who are struggling with paying their water bills, it's just not widely advertised so most people probably don't know about them

but the fact that these schemes even need to exist suggest that utilities prices are too high for low income people

 

[Randy McNob]

selling social housing didnt remove any housing stock, and ownership of assets has no bearing at all on whether people can afford food. higher taxes dont address anything either, how about starting from solutions instead? yes, political change is required to enable large scale building and overhaul welfare provision to address needs more directly. give people food vouchers, energy vouchers as needed, housing as needed and core problems are solved. why dont we do that?

We need PR voting and break the current undemocratic FPP system where the ruling class are mostly people of wealth and privilege who do not resonate with ordinary folk or represent the demographic, and who's only purpose is to maintain the modus operandi of plutocracy. It won't solve all our problems but it's a first step

 

[portslade seagull]

My working week used to be 48hrs and I'd easily do 20-30 hrs OT back in the 80s just to pay our bills. Due to the rise in house prices its put owning a home out of reach for the vast majority because they have to pay obscene rents and cannot afford to save.
What puzzles me is if someone can afford to pay 1000+ in rent and can give proof of payments over a period of time is why can they not get a mortgage. Seems odd

 

[Thunder Bolt]

so the solution is to build more housing, social or general. not argue around who owns the existing stock, or vilify those that do offer property for rent. high prices and rents have the same root cause, insufficient supply for the demand.

There are plenty of empty office blocks, and trade premises which can be converted. Look how long it’s taken for Anston House to be sorted out.

In Newhaven a couple of shops have been converted into residential use, and look quite smart.

 

[Commander]

My working week used to be 48hrs and I'd easily do 20-30 hrs OT back in the 80s just to pay our bills. Due to the rise in house prices its put owning a home out of reach for the vast majority because they have to pay obscene rents and cannot afford to save.
What puzzles me is if someone can afford to pay 1000+ in rent and can give proof of payments over a period of time is why can they not get a mortgage. Seems odd

I've often wondered that. Why can't you get 100% mortgages? Surely that would be a better option than renting?

 

[beorhthelm]

We need PR voting and break the current undemocratic FPP system where the ruling class are mostly people of wealth and privilege who do not resonate with ordinary folk or represent the demographic, and who's only purpose is to maintain the modus operandi of plutocracy. It won't solve all our problems but it's a first step

so changing the system is more important than providing practical solutions. viva la revolution comrade.

 

[Guinness Boy]

We need PR voting and break the current undemocratic FPP system where the ruling class are mostly people of wealth and privilege who do not resonate with ordinary folk or represent the demographic, and who's only purpose is to maintain the modus operandi of plutocracy. It won't solve all our problems but it's a first step

Boris seems to resonate with ordinary folk just fine. All he needs to do is utter a certain word beginning with "B" and they're round him like flies round a

 

[BBassic]

My working week used to be 48hrs and I'd easily do 20-30 hrs OT back in the 80s just to pay our bills. Due to the rise in house prices its put owning a home out of reach for the vast majority because they have to pay obscene rents and cannot afford to save.
What puzzles me is if someone can afford to pay 1000+ in rent and can give proof of payments over a period of time is why can they not get a mortgage. Seems odd

Something like this happened to me when I came to re-mortgage my last flat.

I'd gotten the initial mortgage with my then girlfriend. We broke up and I paid the mortgage and all bills etc. on my own for the best part of three years. But when the mortgage term was coming up for renewal I had to jump through several hoops before the mortgage company would accept me as the sole holder.

At one point I was on the phone to their underwriters saying "Look, I've been paying this mortgage by myself for three years now and I've never missed a payment, what more proof of income do you need?!"

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

I've often wondered that. Why can't you get 100% mortgages? Surely that would be a better option than renting?

Because there is no cushion for the lenders if the borrower moves into negative equity. The consequence is that either homeowners are unable to afford to move (as cannot repay their mortgage from house sale proceeds) or their homes are repossessed if they cannot meet mortgage payments. They still owe the negative equity. This has happened enough times for the regulators to make sure it is no longer allowed. See eg early 90s and 2008. Banks would be very keen to lend 100 % and sod the consequences. This is why we need strong regulators to ensure the mistakes of past generations are not repeated.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

I've often wondered that. Why can't you get 100% mortgages? Surely that would be a better option than renting?

Negative equity. 100% mortgages are fine as long as the market doesn't go down. 100% mortgage at 4 or 5x someone's salary is a precarious position as we found out in 2008.

2001 you could get a 100% mortgage PLUS cashback if you wanted to do any work on the place!

 

[brightn'ove]

Believe it or not but food is cheaper today that it was 20 years ago.

IMO it's technology that fuels poverty as everyone seems to have a phone,data and the other shite that comes with life today.

Absolute category A bollocks right there