Struggling families ‘will never afford essentials’, says Joseph Rowntree Foundation report

Struggling families ‘will never afford essentials’, says report

Struggling families ‘will never afford essentials’, says report

First published in News
Last updated
by

FAMILIES on low wages are unlikely to ever afford what many of us now regard as “essentials”, according to new research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

The findings have underlined a dramatic shift in attitudes over the past six years - with the list of “must haves” in better-off homes draining more out of the household budget.

Spending on what most of us now regard as necessities has soared by 28 per cent during the period - while average earnings have risen only 9 per cent.

So researchers fear that even as incomes start to increase again the poor are unlikely ever to close the gap between what they earn and paying for things most now take for granted. Attitudes to internet access have gone through one of the biggest sea changes since the public was last asked about it in 2008.

It is now seen as a basic necessity by, all including pensioners, whereas most of us would be happy to go without a landline provided we have a mobile phone.

Family meals around a restaurant table are also becoming a thing of the past. Many of us still enjoy eating out but regard it as a luxury .

Public spending cuts have also led to changes. Whereas we were once happy to lug children around on buses, services reductions have made a car indispensable in a busy family life.

The report, A Minimum Income Standard for the UK, aims to provide a barometer of what has happened to living standards for low income families since the downturn and during the recovery.

For the first time, pensioners say that having the internet at home is essential to allow them to participate in society.

Working age people without children, on the other hand, say that a landline is no longer an essential, according to the research by Loughborough University.

The researchers have underlined that the jump in spending on essentials is due to things costing more, not because of increased expectations.

Report author Abigail Davis said: “Throughout the past few difficult years, the people we talk to have held a consistent view of what it means to live at an acceptable level in the UK. It means being able to afford to feed your family and heat your home properly, but also having enough to buy a birthday present for your children, and to spend time with your family away from home, such as the occasional meal out.”

Comments (14)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:31am Mon 30 Jun 14

andyjon12 says...

And who's going to anything about it - nobody, not the government nor the opposition. We have a government that even denies there's a problem, whilst the opposition are too fixated worrying about the so called squeezed middle. Of course, it all boils down to wanting to look after prospective voters and not worry about "Others". Unless something radical happens to our political system, things will not get better - and only poverty will prosper. Politicians know that the poor (bottom 20% of the income scale), proportionately, do not cast votes in the same numbers as their more affluent and priviledged neighbours.

Well done to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation for highlighting this probem. Sadly, things are going to get much worse for the vulnerable and poor, after the next swaithe of cuts come in - under so called welfare reform. Tax Credits are going to be slashed yet again and eventually done away with all together, to be replaced by an ill thought through Universal Credit system that will force millions of low paid workers and their partners, having to explain themselves to callous Job Centre Staff. Eight million people will have to agree to an unfair and unrealistic conditionality that is likely to make the whole situation even worse.
And who's going to anything about it - nobody, not the government nor the opposition. We have a government that even denies there's a problem, whilst the opposition are too fixated worrying about the so called squeezed middle. Of course, it all boils down to wanting to look after prospective voters and not worry about "Others". Unless something radical happens to our political system, things will not get better - and only poverty will prosper. Politicians know that the poor (bottom 20% of the income scale), proportionately, do not cast votes in the same numbers as their more affluent and priviledged neighbours. Well done to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation for highlighting this probem. Sadly, things are going to get much worse for the vulnerable and poor, after the next swaithe of cuts come in - under so called welfare reform. Tax Credits are going to be slashed yet again and eventually done away with all together, to be replaced by an ill thought through Universal Credit system that will force millions of low paid workers and their partners, having to explain themselves to callous Job Centre Staff. Eight million people will have to agree to an unfair and unrealistic conditionality that is likely to make the whole situation even worse. andyjon12
  • Score: 20

12:08pm Mon 30 Jun 14

Art Baker says...

The above post should be immediately deleted by the Press.

It is a balanced, reasoned comment with no blame attached to CYC, Labour, Travellers, Jews, Poles or Romanians. Furthermore there is no reference to how UKIP will make all the problems magically disappear.

Comments like this have no place in the York Press.
The above post should be immediately deleted by the Press. It is a balanced, reasoned comment with no blame attached to CYC, Labour, Travellers, Jews, Poles or Romanians. Furthermore there is no reference to how UKIP will make all the problems magically disappear. Comments like this have no place in the York Press. Art Baker
  • Score: 8

12:14pm Mon 30 Jun 14

York2000 says...

andyjon12 & Art Baker

Good to have some sensible, balanced and sane comments on here. More please!

(I am breaking my self imposed ban on commenting on the story here. I got bored of the abuse, moaning and political posturing a while ago.)
andyjon12 & Art Baker Good to have some sensible, balanced and sane comments on here. More please! (I am breaking my self imposed ban on commenting on the story here. I got bored of the abuse, moaning and political posturing a while ago.) York2000
  • Score: 6

12:17pm Mon 30 Jun 14

andyjon12 says...

Art Baker wrote:
The above post should be immediately deleted by the Press.

It is a balanced, reasoned comment with no blame attached to CYC, Labour, Travellers, Jews, Poles or Romanians. Furthermore there is no reference to how UKIP will make all the problems magically disappear.

Comments like this have no place in the York Press.
I agree - there is no place in the Press for your bigoted and hate fuelled comments. At least try to present an alternative argument you moron.
[quote][p][bold]Art Baker[/bold] wrote: The above post should be immediately deleted by the Press. It is a balanced, reasoned comment with no blame attached to CYC, Labour, Travellers, Jews, Poles or Romanians. Furthermore there is no reference to how UKIP will make all the problems magically disappear. Comments like this have no place in the York Press.[/p][/quote]I agree - there is no place in the Press for your bigoted and hate fuelled comments. At least try to present an alternative argument you moron. andyjon12
  • Score: -15

4:21pm Mon 30 Jun 14

mike.......durkin says...

am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw
I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits.
am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits. mike.......durkin
  • Score: 8

5:14pm Mon 30 Jun 14

ColdAsChristmas says...

And we certainly can't afford Green energy either!
And we certainly can't afford Green energy either! ColdAsChristmas
  • Score: -8

7:25pm Mon 30 Jun 14

redbluelion says...

If your single on benefits trying to find and willing to do any kind of work you can get and for no real reason they decide to sanction you for nothing you don't just lose jsa benefit but housing benefit to,now how if that helping anyone find work.its just putting people one the street and driving them to dispare and in some cases even suicide. we need the sanctions to be stopped its unjust and a disgrace that this government is being allowed to do what ever mr cameron thinks is a good idea. end poverty now for everyone.
If your single on benefits trying to find and willing to do any kind of work you can get and for no real reason they decide to sanction you for nothing you don't just lose jsa benefit but housing benefit to,now how if that helping anyone find work.its just putting people one the street and driving them to dispare and in some cases even suicide. we need the sanctions to be stopped its unjust and a disgrace that this government is being allowed to do what ever mr cameron thinks is a good idea. end poverty now for everyone. redbluelion
  • Score: 7

7:32pm Mon 30 Jun 14

redbluelion says...

Any other country would be kicking off against this Government by now. why do everyone just sit back and do nothing.But for the grace of God next time it could be you.how would you like it.
Any other country would be kicking off against this Government by now. why do everyone just sit back and do nothing.But for the grace of God next time it could be you.how would you like it. redbluelion
  • Score: 11

11:19pm Mon 30 Jun 14

redbluelion says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw
I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits.
See what this country has come too .do we really have to just put up with it or when are we going to start to hit back at the very people who caused all this .the day is coming . End all poverty and put our own countrys people first..
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits.[/p][/quote]See what this country has come too .do we really have to just put up with it or when are we going to start to hit back at the very people who caused all this .the day is coming . End all poverty and put our own countrys people first.. redbluelion
  • Score: 1

7:04am Tue 1 Jul 14

Guy Fawkes says...

FAMILIES on low wages are unlikely to ever afford what many of us now regard as “essentials”...


And they are unlikely ever to need to, because state redistribution of wealth is such a huge component of the British economy. It works essentially as follows:

1. Middle class, middle income, middle educated private sector workers, most of them in the south-east of England, are taxed what is effectively one of the highest rates in the world (once you take into account everything - council tax, petrol duty, VAT and all).

2. That money is spent essentially on two things: creating vast numbers of public sector non-jobs, most of them in Wales, the north of England and Scotland, to take care of lower educated people who are unemployable in the private sector (largely as the result of automation, IT and globalisation making it cheaper for their jobs to be done by machines and/or in Chindia), and on providing benefits to those who can't or won't get those jobs.

3. The taxpayers described in 1 above get some of that money back through subsidised service sector labour (for example, there wouldn't be anyone to serve them at the supermarkets of Islington if the UK didn't have almost unregulated immigration and many of the lower skilled workers in the south east didn't receive vastly subsidised housing).

This has gone way beyond a traditional left vs. right debate. If you were to remove any one component of this racket, the whole house of cards would come tumbling down. And eventually it will anyway. Either the developed world is going to have to accept that for the first time since the Industrial Revolution, its standard of living is going to decline, or we're going to have World War III, or both.
[quote]FAMILIES on low wages are unlikely to ever afford what many of us now regard as “essentials”...[/quote] And they are unlikely ever to need to, because state redistribution of wealth is such a huge component of the British economy. It works essentially as follows: 1. Middle class, middle income, middle educated private sector workers, most of them in the south-east of England, are taxed what is effectively one of the highest rates in the world (once you take into account everything - council tax, petrol duty, VAT and all). 2. That money is spent essentially on two things: creating vast numbers of public sector non-jobs, most of them in Wales, the north of England and Scotland, to take care of lower educated people who are unemployable in the private sector (largely as the result of automation, IT and globalisation making it cheaper for their jobs to be done by machines and/or in Chindia), and on providing benefits to those who can't or won't get those jobs. 3. The taxpayers described in 1 above get some of that money back through subsidised service sector labour (for example, there wouldn't be anyone to serve them at the supermarkets of Islington if the UK didn't have almost unregulated immigration and many of the lower skilled workers in the south east didn't receive vastly subsidised housing). This has gone way beyond a traditional left vs. right debate. If you were to remove any one component of this racket, the whole house of cards would come tumbling down. And eventually it will anyway. Either the developed world is going to have to accept that for the first time since the Industrial Revolution, its standard of living is going to decline, or we're going to have World War III, or both. Guy Fawkes
  • Score: -1

8:30am Tue 1 Jul 14

julia brica says...

Whoever you are ARTBAKER you have gone too far with your insults and disgusting sexist innuendos. You should apologise to other posters or just leave.
Your sort are not wanted on here.
Whoever you are ARTBAKER you have gone too far with your insults and disgusting sexist innuendos. You should apologise to other posters or just leave. Your sort are not wanted on here. julia brica
  • Score: -1

9:40am Tue 1 Jul 14

CommonSense!! says...

mike.......durkin wrote:
am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw
I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits.
With respect, look at how that is written, then think if you were an employer receiving a CV written in that style, would you be rushing to offer a job?
[quote][p][bold]mike.......durkin[/bold] wrote: am a famly man my self and its so hard 6 years am so depresst when i lost my job from remploy then got in to park time work there no good jobs in york..and hard to bet hellp.am out of job naw I went to the council i bet thay wont give me mutch benfits.[/p][/quote]With respect, look at how that is written, then think if you were an employer receiving a CV written in that style, would you be rushing to offer a job? CommonSense!!
  • Score: -2

7:20pm Tue 1 Jul 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

julia brica wrote:
Whoever you are ARTBAKER you have gone too far with your insults and disgusting sexist innuendos. You should apologise to other posters or just leave.
Your sort are not wanted on here.
Well, fancy that.
I posted a perfectly valid comment here earlier but what do you know? It's gone now.

That comment was in reference to one user here - "julia brica" - and the quote above in which "julia brica" doesn't appear to like freedom of speech. Apparently if you can't understand someone's words, be they parody or whatever, it's ok to say things like "your sort are not wanted on here"
I would say *that* is up to the owners of the website. Namely The Press.
Anyone else is getting a bit above themselves, surely?

Conversely (or not), "julia brica" thinks it's ok to troll and goad other users of this site - chucking insults and jibes at, um... oh yeah! *me* for example, even on threads I've not commented on. That's ok, that sort are welcome here apparently.

As has been shown so many times in the past with the oft-banned Paul Thorn Duck Scarlet Crabtree Rocking Badger Cordock, any attempt to debate, show fact, or criticise the regular bad form, poor behaviour or weak arguments from this couple of people and their multiple fake IDs (and who funnily enough set out a grand stall of being big supporter(s) of Matthew Laverack) and well, we all know what you get...
You are attacked, lied about, your comments are removed and debate is shut down quickly.

There's a word for that.

The first removal proves me right already.
Have this one removed and you sign the confession.

#screenshot
[quote][p][bold]julia brica[/bold] wrote: Whoever you are ARTBAKER you have gone too far with your insults and disgusting sexist innuendos. You should apologise to other posters or just leave. Your sort are not wanted on here.[/p][/quote]Well, fancy that. I posted a perfectly valid comment here earlier but what do you know? It's gone now. That comment was in reference to one user here - "julia brica" - and the quote above in which "julia brica" doesn't appear to like freedom of speech. Apparently if you can't understand someone's words, be they parody or whatever, it's ok to say things like "your sort are not wanted on here" I would say *that* is up to the owners of the website. Namely The Press. Anyone else is getting a bit above themselves, surely? Conversely (or not), "julia brica" thinks it's ok to troll and goad other users of this site - chucking insults and jibes at, um... oh yeah! *me* for example, even on threads I've not commented on. That's ok, that sort are welcome here apparently. As has been shown so many times in the past with the oft-banned Paul Thorn Duck Scarlet Crabtree Rocking Badger Cordock, any attempt to debate, show fact, or criticise the regular bad form, poor behaviour or weak arguments from this couple of people and their multiple fake IDs (and who funnily enough set out a grand stall of being big supporter(s) of Matthew Laverack) and well, we all know what you get... You are attacked, lied about, your comments are removed and debate is shut down quickly. There's a word for that. The first removal proves me right already. Have this one removed and you sign the confession. #screenshot Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: -1

7:22pm Tue 1 Jul 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

That was the comprehensive answer.

Concise answer - What's the Italian for "get over yourself, bro?"
That was the comprehensive answer. Concise answer - What's the Italian for "get over yourself, bro?" Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: -2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree