"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 18/11/2017 12:14, Mark wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 18/11/2017 09:47, Mark wrote:
Yellow wrote:
On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 15:39:21 +0000, Mark wrote:

[ ... ]

Or maybe the pay rates for skilled people is too low? If benefits
are
really too high this creates a poverty trap if wages are low.
However
I very much doubt that benefits are 'generous' now, if they ever
were.

Define "generous". To me, if you can live on it long term without the
need to ever work then it is "generous".

What if you can't live off it or a job paying minimum wage?

Does that mean living at a higher living standard than our parents were
able to expect (still on money just handed out to you)?

It may mean living on what is considered a minimum standard for
nowadays. For example, in the past, many people lived in houses with
no heating. I did. Would you expect people to do this nowadays?

I have never seen a house with no heating. The Georgian house I lived in
in the 1950s had a fireplace in every room except the bathroom and the
kitchen.

Perhaps you meant central heating, which I never had until I was just on
40 years old. It ought to be clear that I cannot agree that it is in any
way essential.

It isn't credible that people cannot live on it.

The benefits available don't sound too generous to me.
Although I cannot speak from experience, since I have never received
benefits, although I have been poor.

It's important to have some perspective on this. Looking back at recent
economic and social history, there was a time, within easy living
memory, when a phone (of any sort), washing machines, refrigerators,
carpets, frequent home-redecoration, meals out, an alcohol-based "social
life" and (especially) a motor vehicle were way outside the expectations
of the majority. And that was people who were on earnings greater than
social security benefits.

Things have changed. Nowadays you need a phone, washing machine,
fridge, and a motor vehicle. And, if you don't know why, I can
explain it to you.

No, you don't need any of those things so much that your fellow taxpayers
should provide you with the means to get them (and the word "need" is so
often misused in any case). They're nice to have, but you have to get them
by your own efforts.

Also, bear in mind that many things are much more expensive than they
were, like accomodation, food etc.

I don't know that food is dearer in real terms than it has ever been. What
is commonly agreed is that it has fallen - a lot - as a proportion of
household income.

That must also mean that food now accounts for a smaller proportion of
benefit income.

Not necessarily if the level of benefit income has changed, and it has.

I agree tho, the real cost of food, particularly at the
cheap end of food, has dropped dramatically in real terms,
essentially due to the industrialization of agriculture.