Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
25 Jun 15
11:23
Joined:
Date Joined:
02 Mar 08
The number of children living in relative poverty in the UK remains 2.3 million, government figures show.
The Department for Work and Pensions said the proportion of children living in poverty - almost one in six - was also unchanged from 2011-12 to 2013-14.
A child is defined as being in poverty when living in a household with an income below 60% of the UK's average.
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said UK poverty levels were the "lowest since the mid-1980s".
The DWP said the percentage of children in relative low income households remained at 17%.
Mr Duncan Smith said government reforms of the welfare system were focussed on "making work pay" and getting people into employment.
'Deeply concerning'
He told the Commons he remained "committed" to dealing with the "root causes" of poverty.
But shadow chancellor Chris Leslie said the latest figures represented a "depressing slow-down in the progress we should be making as a country".
Javed Khan, chief executive of children's charity Barnardo's, said every child living in poverty was a child that was being "let down".
He said: "Government plans to cut struggling families' incomes further by changing tax credits is deeply concerning.
"So that every child gets the chances in life every child deserves, this government must ensure that change to the benefits system makes work pay for those on low incomes, and doesn't force families further into poverty."
Matthew Reed, chief executive of the Children's Society, said it was "a scandal that there are 200,000 more children who have been pushed deeper into poverty over the past year".
There has been a "steady rise" over the last five years in the numbers of children living in poverty in households where parents work, he added.
It comes as the government has said it wants to change the way child poverty is measured - as it believes the current measure is inadequate.
The latest figures also showed that 9.6 million individuals were on relative low incomes in 2013-14.
The average real terms household income - before housing costs - remained unchanged from 2012/13, at £453 a week.
bbc.co.uk
if average income was 1million then anybody struggling on 600k would be in poverty by these stupid rules
The Department for Work and Pensions said the proportion of children living in poverty - almost one in six - was also unchanged from 2011-12 to 2013-14.
A child is defined as being in poverty when living in a household with an income below 60% of the UK's average.
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said UK poverty levels were the "lowest since the mid-1980s".
The DWP said the percentage of children in relative low income households remained at 17%.
Mr Duncan Smith said government reforms of the welfare system were focussed on "making work pay" and getting people into employment.
'Deeply concerning'
He told the Commons he remained "committed" to dealing with the "root causes" of poverty.
But shadow chancellor Chris Leslie said the latest figures represented a "depressing slow-down in the progress we should be making as a country".
Javed Khan, chief executive of children's charity Barnardo's, said every child living in poverty was a child that was being "let down".
He said: "Government plans to cut struggling families' incomes further by changing tax credits is deeply concerning.
"So that every child gets the chances in life every child deserves, this government must ensure that change to the benefits system makes work pay for those on low incomes, and doesn't force families further into poverty."
Matthew Reed, chief executive of the Children's Society, said it was "a scandal that there are 200,000 more children who have been pushed deeper into poverty over the past year".
There has been a "steady rise" over the last five years in the numbers of children living in poverty in households where parents work, he added.
It comes as the government has said it wants to change the way child poverty is measured - as it believes the current measure is inadequate.
The latest figures also showed that 9.6 million individuals were on relative low incomes in 2013-14.
The average real terms household income - before housing costs - remained unchanged from 2012/13, at £453 a week.
bbc.co.uk
if average income was 1million then anybody struggling on 600k would be in poverty by these stupid rules
Show More
Agreed Donny, the word poverty has lost its meaning.
The figures are nothing to be concerned about at all.
I don't know why they bother publishing them.
Real poverty hasn't existed in the UK since the end of WW2 at least, except for a small number who fell through the safety net.
The figures are nothing to be concerned about at all.
I don't know why they bother publishing them.
Real poverty hasn't existed in the UK since the end of WW2 at least, except for a small number who fell through the safety net.
Hmmm. I think the correct definition is 'relative poverty'. Which is not poverty at all. Nowhere near.
The official description of being 'in poverty' is if your income is less than 60% of the National Wage.
Now you need to find out what the National Wage is....this week.
Now you need to find out what the National Wage is....this week.
I get your point! To be honest, I've been accused of all sorts on here 
.I'm a luvvie...I'm a leftie...I'm a McCann apologist...I'm an ISIS sympathiser...I'm a Moslem...and I can't remember the whole list, but there are more. And NOT ONE of these things is even nearly correct!!
All I've ever tried to do is to get some of the forumites to just try to look at things with a more rational eye rather than just forming the opinion of the crowd. It doesn't work because they won't deviate from their comfortable mob-opinion.
For example...Luke Fitzgerald's murder wasn't a racist crime. ISIS troops were obviously going to use the death of the enemy pilot to great propaganda effect, and Madeleine McCann could not have been killed by her parents...but there are some VERY serious questions that need to be answered by a certain foreign policeman.
Dare to be different! Ask yourselves 'why were that gang of black youths attacking the people in that pub?' Was that ISIS film even genuine footage, or was it computer-generated?' 'If they killed Madeleine...HOW and WHEN did they hide the body? What did the cadaver-dog indicate and WHY was it important that it was a British dog'
Stand up for your right to think for yourself.
All I've ever tried to do is to get some of the forumites to just try to look at things with a more rational eye rather than just forming the opinion of the crowd. It doesn't work because they won't deviate from their comfortable mob-opinion.
FYI, my opinions have been the same since the days long before Betfair, or any other forum.
I was a one man mob?
When forums were invented, people of similar views got on one side, and those of opposite views on the other side.
Yet you describe the proverbial 'right wing' as 'a mob'.
What are proverbial 'left wingers?'
Merely a 'group' and not a mob?
I think they're a 'bunch of c*nts'
It describes them much better than a 'group', but of course, that's my personal opinion, unless one more 'right winger' agrees, then we become a 2 man 'mob'.
FYI, my opinions have been the same since the days long before Betfair, or any other forum.
I was a one man mob?
When forums were invented, people of similar views got on one side, and those of opposite views on the other side.
Yet you describe the proverbial 'right wing' as 'a mob'.
What are proverbial 'left wingers?'
Merely a 'group' and not a mob?
I think they're a 'bunch of c*nts'
It describes them much better than a 'group', but of course, that's my personal opinion, unless one more 'right winger' agrees, then we become a 2 man 'mob'.
I will have you know us lefties are very cuddly nice sandal wearing real ale drinkers. ps c*nt$ are useful!!!!
Poor old bbc devoted newsnight on the labour assumption that the figures would be higher, have they apologised the the viewers yet ?
Spellingandgrammarchecker. I haven't a clue what you are on about. You seem to think that my remarks are directed at you, personally. They are not. They are a general observation intended for those to whom they apply.
In the case of the McCanns that would include, although not be limited to, the people who simply repeat that 'I wouldn't leave MY children alone' or 'why was he playing tennis the next day?' or 'what about the DNA?' or 'there is no evidence of an abduction'.
I have never referred to you as a mob...although you DO appear to be one of a group of individuals with an unusual view on petitioning.
What 'right wing' do I describe as a mob? In fact what Right OR Left wing have I ever referred to? I tend to agree with most of what you say...until you insist on calling some events in over-simplified terms, as in your over-use (in my opinion) of the 'racially-motivated crime' description.
In the case of the McCanns that would include, although not be limited to, the people who simply repeat that 'I wouldn't leave MY children alone' or 'why was he playing tennis the next day?' or 'what about the DNA?' or 'there is no evidence of an abduction'.
I have never referred to you as a mob...although you DO appear to be one of a group of individuals with an unusual view on petitioning.
What 'right wing' do I describe as a mob? In fact what Right OR Left wing have I ever referred to? I tend to agree with most of what you say...until you insist on calling some events in over-simplified terms, as in your over-use (in my opinion) of the 'racially-motivated crime' description.
I don't overstate 'racially-motivated crime' at all.
How can I?
White against white isn't racist.
Black against black isn't racist.
Asian against asian isn't racist.
And one particularly stupid judge in a murder trial in east London, actually said that asian against black isn't racist either.
I can't make the colour of their skin up.
I merely point out that when the BBC give out descriptions of criminals, they are usually white, and when they give no descriptions, they are usually non-white.
When I see a bit of news with no description, I take into account the area, the age of the criminals. the type of crime, put two and two together, search other news sites, and generally, but not always, make 4.
Then I post about it.
If the BBC didn't try to continually cover up black and asian crime, I'd have nothing to look for, would I?
It would be there for all to see.
How can I?
White against white isn't racist.
Black against black isn't racist.
Asian against asian isn't racist.
And one particularly stupid judge in a murder trial in east London, actually said that asian against black isn't racist either.
I can't make the colour of their skin up.
I merely point out that when the BBC give out descriptions of criminals, they are usually white, and when they give no descriptions, they are usually non-white.
When I see a bit of news with no description, I take into account the area, the age of the criminals. the type of crime, put two and two together, search other news sites, and generally, but not always, make 4.
Then I post about it.
If the BBC didn't try to continually cover up black and asian crime, I'd have nothing to look for, would I?
It would be there for all to see.
Spelling. I'd like you to just consider this: The police adopt a policy of stop-and-search designed, primarily, to clamp down on knife-carrying and the deaths and injuries that this causes. They naturally target the section of community that their records show to be the main offenders...namely black and Asian youths.
However, before long they have local leaders and politicians complaining about what they infer is 'disproportionate numbers of black/Asian harassment'. And so, the police become severely restricted with regard to stopping knife crime.
These same people would soon restrict the BBC's freedom to report the ethnicity of offenders...so, they come up with a system that is hilariously amusing in its simplicity. They don't mention the colour or race of ethnic offenders! Even the local Imams can't complain about something that WASN'T said!
So, there you have it. A beautifully simple system (whether intended OR not) that tells you all you need to know without fear of being gagged. I like it.
However, before long they have local leaders and politicians complaining about what they infer is 'disproportionate numbers of black/Asian harassment'. And so, the police become severely restricted with regard to stopping knife crime.
These same people would soon restrict the BBC's freedom to report the ethnicity of offenders...so, they come up with a system that is hilariously amusing in its simplicity. They don't mention the colour or race of ethnic offenders! Even the local Imams can't complain about something that WASN'T said!
So, there you have it. A beautifully simple system (whether intended OR not) that tells you all you need to know without fear of being gagged. I like it.
think knife crime is the country's biggest issue.
yet its treated like its a minor issue.
yet its treated like its a minor issue.
everywhere you look black asian and immigrants out of all proportion to their actual population feature in many awful crimes yet no one will recognise it
if the immigrants were not here we wouldn't have such a crime rate
if the immigrants were not here we wouldn't have such a crime rate
they pulled back on street searches - you could have predicted the result - go soft on black street gangs - in fact I think it was
these are those wonderful gangs who rape young girls as part of their initiation to their lovely world
Spelling. I'd like you to just consider this: The police adopt a policy of stop-and-search designed, primarily, to clamp down on knife-carrying and the deaths and injuries that this causes. They naturally target the section of community that their records show to be the main offenders...namely black and Asian youths.
However, before long they have local leaders and politicians complaining about what they infer is 'disproportionate numbers of black/Asian harassment'. And so, the police become severely restricted with regard to stopping knife crime.
IT'S... ALL.. UTTER... BOLLOCKS!!
The BBC and other media sources have no problem whatsoever reporting on the lack of ethnics in certain jobs.
Why do they publish it?
I'd say it's a sly dig at what they perceive as racism.
I've posted twice about it in the last week or so.
Both from BBC news pages.
There are no black headteachers in Scotland. Over 600 black teachers though. Surely racism would keep them out of the teaching profession in Scotland.
There are not enough ethnic minorities in the Civil Services (as well as women and disabled) Numbers unavailable, but there must be plenty in there as 'none have senior positions'
Let's go for a third one, there are hardly any black bookmakers on racecourses in the UK.
It gets totally stupid if you follow it through and appoint a black person to a post simply because his race are under represented in the position, albeit not a civil servant, headteacher or bookmaker. I've seen it, it didn't go well.
However, before long they have local leaders and politicians complaining about what they infer is 'disproportionate numbers of black/Asian harassment'. And so, the police become severely restricted with regard to stopping knife crime.
IT'S... ALL.. UTTER... BOLLOCKS!!
The BBC and other media sources have no problem whatsoever reporting on the lack of ethnics in certain jobs.
Why do they publish it?
I'd say it's a sly dig at what they perceive as racism.
I've posted twice about it in the last week or so.
Both from BBC news pages.
There are no black headteachers in Scotland. Over 600 black teachers though. Surely racism would keep them out of the teaching profession in Scotland.
There are not enough ethnic minorities in the Civil Services (as well as women and disabled) Numbers unavailable, but there must be plenty in there as 'none have senior positions'
Let's go for a third one, there are hardly any black bookmakers on racecourses in the UK.
It gets totally stupid if you follow it through and appoint a black person to a post simply because his race are under represented in the position, albeit not a civil servant, headteacher or bookmaker. I've seen it, it didn't go well.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539