Shelter: Thousands in Yorkshire can’t pay housing costs

Councillor Val Slater

Councillor Val Slater

First published in News
Last updated
Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , City Hall Reporter

One in 14 people in Yorkshire fear they will not be able to afford to pay the rent or mortgage this month, according to a housing charity.

A survey by Shelter shows a large number of people are starting the New Year worried about whether they will be able to keep their home, as the cost of Christmas is piled on top of rising household bills.

More than a third (39 per cent) of people in Yorkshire and the Humber said they were expecting to struggle or fall behind with their rent or mortgage in 2014, while 14 per cent admitted to not opening post if they thought it was a bill.

Liz Clare, a helpline adviser at Shelter, said: “We’re now seeing a stream of cases of families who’ve been unable to cope with mounting rent or mortgage bills and feel at breaking point.

“We all know how difficult it can be to face up to financial problems and we often hear from people who’ve been avoiding urgent post, but the reality is that not confronting it means things can spiral out of control.

“One caller to the helpline arrived home to her rented flat to find the locks had been changed. She hadn’t realised that a court hearing had even taken place because she hadn’t felt able to open her post after falling into arrears with her rent.”

The charity said families appeared to be having the greatest financial difficulties.

Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: “Unless they get help, some of the families struggling now could face the very real prospect of losing their home this year.

“Despite recent discussion of an economic recovery, we know that a combination of high housing costs, wage freezes, and rising food and energy bills has created a nightmare scenario for many families that’s pushing them to breaking point.”

Councillor Val Slater, executive member for housing at Bradford Council, said she was concerned about the survey’s findings.

She said: “This is quite worrying, particularly about people throwing bills away without opening them.

“I really would encourage people to open bills and not be frightened but to go and talk to their landlord or mortgage provider and see what arrangements can be made. Very often steps can be taken that can help people out in a difficult period.”

Anyone needing advice can call Shelter on 0808 800 4444.

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:06am Fri 3 Jan 14

Thee Voice of Reason says...

Well Val, they will no doubt be getting another bill to open soon, council tax which you and your cronies vote to increase.
Well Val, they will no doubt be getting another bill to open soon, council tax which you and your cronies vote to increase. Thee Voice of Reason
  • Score: 3

9:13am Fri 3 Jan 14

collos25 says...

Val Slater has yet another portfolio I see she is staying clear of commenting on Saltaire in the grand design they forgot about children crossing the road going to school.
I agree with the last post its her and her party that have put up most of these bills and they give nothing in return for these huge increases.
Val Slater has yet another portfolio I see she is staying clear of commenting on Saltaire in the grand design they forgot about children crossing the road going to school. I agree with the last post its her and her party that have put up most of these bills and they give nothing in return for these huge increases. collos25
  • Score: 2

9:23am Fri 3 Jan 14

Grumpygirl says...

collos25 wrote:
Val Slater has yet another portfolio I see she is staying clear of commenting on Saltaire in the grand design they forgot about children crossing the road going to school.
I agree with the last post its her and her party that have put up most of these bills and they give nothing in return for these huge increases.
No. The Government is deliberately restricting the benefits of the recovery to the already rich and privileged. They justify this be saying that poverty is a lifestyle choice made by people who, unlike them, are too thick to be rich.
[quote][p][bold]collos25[/bold] wrote: Val Slater has yet another portfolio I see she is staying clear of commenting on Saltaire in the grand design they forgot about children crossing the road going to school. I agree with the last post its her and her party that have put up most of these bills and they give nothing in return for these huge increases.[/p][/quote]No. The Government is deliberately restricting the benefits of the recovery to the already rich and privileged. They justify this be saying that poverty is a lifestyle choice made by people who, unlike them, are too thick to be rich. Grumpygirl
  • Score: 0

9:36am Fri 3 Jan 14

collos25 says...

Do not talk rubbish the increase in council tax is purely political scoring .I would agree with the rest Ian Duncan Smith wants shooting.
Do not talk rubbish the increase in council tax is purely political scoring .I would agree with the rest Ian Duncan Smith wants shooting. collos25
  • Score: -8

9:45am Fri 3 Jan 14

collos25 says...

Don`t forget its under VS portfolio that Saltaire which has cost millions to build with an ongoing cost of many thousands for the traffic lights for not a lot if any improvement in traffic flow, this is why council tax has gone up ill thought out schemes which cost the council tax payer dearly and the very people the labour party is supposed to be protecting are in fact been ground into the earth with increased bills..
Don`t forget its under VS portfolio that Saltaire which has cost millions to build with an ongoing cost of many thousands for the traffic lights for not a lot if any improvement in traffic flow, this is why council tax has gone up ill thought out schemes which cost the council tax payer dearly and the very people the labour party is supposed to be protecting are in fact been ground into the earth with increased bills.. collos25
  • Score: -3

10:19am Fri 3 Jan 14

Albion. says...

Then again, there are people in similar circumstances who DO manage.
As the sage of Ravenscliffe Avenue has decided to make this into a debate about Saltaire (presumably he has run out of relevant grumbles), Many people who live there (including traders) are quite pleased with the new junction.
Then again, there are people in similar circumstances who DO manage. As the sage of Ravenscliffe Avenue has decided to make this into a debate about Saltaire (presumably he has run out of relevant grumbles), Many people who live there (including traders) are quite pleased with the new junction. Albion.
  • Score: 6

10:19am Fri 3 Jan 14

bobby98007 says...

Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle.

Anyway... let me get this right....

People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads?

Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.
Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle. Anyway... let me get this right.... People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads? Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it. bobby98007
  • Score: 11

11:36am Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

bobby98007 wrote:
Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle.

Anyway... let me get this right....

People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads?

Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.
Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect.
[quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle. Anyway... let me get this right.... People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads? Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.[/p][/quote]Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect. RollandSmoke
  • Score: -4

12:25pm Fri 3 Jan 14

bobby98007 says...

RollandSmoke wrote:
bobby98007 wrote:
Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle.

Anyway... let me get this right....

People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads?

Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.
Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect.
Ive entered an agreement with my bank that i will repay my mortgage knowing full well that the interest rates will go up, but i have done some forward planning and have the ability to prioritise my money, and bills get paid before anything else. I live within my means.

The article said "A survey by Shelter shows a large number of people are starting the New Year worried about whether they will be able to keep their home, AS THE COST OF CHRISTMAS is piled on top of rising household bills."
[quote][p][bold]RollandSmoke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle. Anyway... let me get this right.... People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads? Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.[/p][/quote]Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect.[/p][/quote]Ive entered an agreement with my bank that i will repay my mortgage knowing full well that the interest rates will go up, but i have done some forward planning and have the ability to prioritise my money, and bills get paid before anything else. I live within my means. The article said "A survey by Shelter shows a large number of people are starting the New Year worried about whether they will be able to keep their home, AS THE COST OF CHRISTMAS is piled on top of rising household bills." bobby98007
  • Score: 3

12:51pm Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

bobby98007 wrote:
RollandSmoke wrote:
bobby98007 wrote:
Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle.

Anyway... let me get this right....

People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads?

Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.
Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect.
Ive entered an agreement with my bank that i will repay my mortgage knowing full well that the interest rates will go up, but i have done some forward planning and have the ability to prioritise my money, and bills get paid before anything else. I live within my means.

The article said "A survey by Shelter shows a large number of people are starting the New Year worried about whether they will be able to keep their home, AS THE COST OF CHRISTMAS is piled on top of rising household bills."
It's easy to live within your means when you have the means with which to live within. You may have noticed the numerous debates on here about the living wage (implying a sufficient amount of money with which to live). Anyone receiving less than that for a period of time can only become progressively worse off over time. The Businesses have no interest in helping their employees have a reasonable standard of living and without the taxpayer funded top ups through the benefit system there would be no financial incentive what so ever for these employees to work. If work does not pay enough to enable people to be secure in the knowledge that they can keep a roof over their heads and food in their cupboards then what's the point. I know that you'll say people should work purely for a sense of pride but there is no pride in being exploited. This sort of pride will always come before a fall. You can only chip away so much before cracks start to appear. Keep chipping and there is a likely hood of things shattering. When those things are people there are costs involved in trying to put them back together and these costs are often things much more meaningful than money.
[quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RollandSmoke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: Mounting Rent and Mortgage payments! Interest rates are at an all time low! Its only gonna get more expensive from here, if people cant afford them now, your all up the proverbial without a paddle. Anyway... let me get this right.... People overspend, with money they cannot afford to spend on buying presents and food at Christmas, then expect sympathy from debt charities, government, and more importantly ME! because they decide that having luxuries is more important than the roof over their heads? Its easy, live within your means and pay your bills first or live with the consequences. The 13 out of 14 others manage it.[/p][/quote]Can you prove that these people have spent anything on Christmas or are you just letting the Daily Mail do your thinking for you yet again? Has anyone asked you for the sympathy that you are incapable of? I personally can't wait for the interest rates to rise as perhaps then the all right Jacks like yourself may wake up to the fact that they've been screwed, a fact that those a little lower down the income scale are only too aware of. when it does go up don't expect anyone to care. "First they came for .... But I was not .... so I said nothing" ect ect.[/p][/quote]Ive entered an agreement with my bank that i will repay my mortgage knowing full well that the interest rates will go up, but i have done some forward planning and have the ability to prioritise my money, and bills get paid before anything else. I live within my means. The article said "A survey by Shelter shows a large number of people are starting the New Year worried about whether they will be able to keep their home, AS THE COST OF CHRISTMAS is piled on top of rising household bills."[/p][/quote]It's easy to live within your means when you have the means with which to live within. You may have noticed the numerous debates on here about the living wage (implying a sufficient amount of money with which to live). Anyone receiving less than that for a period of time can only become progressively worse off over time. The Businesses have no interest in helping their employees have a reasonable standard of living and without the taxpayer funded top ups through the benefit system there would be no financial incentive what so ever for these employees to work. If work does not pay enough to enable people to be secure in the knowledge that they can keep a roof over their heads and food in their cupboards then what's the point. I know that you'll say people should work purely for a sense of pride but there is no pride in being exploited. This sort of pride will always come before a fall. You can only chip away so much before cracks start to appear. Keep chipping and there is a likely hood of things shattering. When those things are people there are costs involved in trying to put them back together and these costs are often things much more meaningful than money. RollandSmoke
  • Score: -1

1:38pm Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

Noticing a lot of thumbs down. I'll ask a couple of questions. Do you believe that those campaigning for a living wage are being greedy? When receiving a living wage they won't need to be subsidised by the taxpayer, why is it better that the taxpayer continues to contribute rather than the companies who employ them in order for them to make profit, some of whom will not contribute to UK taxes in the slightest.
Noticing a lot of thumbs down. I'll ask a couple of questions. Do you believe that those campaigning for a living wage are being greedy? When receiving a living wage they won't need to be subsidised by the taxpayer, why is it better that the taxpayer continues to contribute rather than the companies who employ them in order for them to make profit, some of whom will not contribute to UK taxes in the slightest. RollandSmoke
  • Score: -1

1:49pm Fri 3 Jan 14

bobby98007 says...

Thats crap, i know plenty of people who are paying a mortgage/rent and raising a family on minimum wage jobs.

At one point my girlfriend paid for a house, all the bills, provided 2 of us with food on a 15k salary, and with the changes to the 10k tax earnings now, will be the similar to a a minimum wage job now.

What we didnt have was contract phones, Sky TV, Internet, takeaways, nights out, kids or fancy clothes. We couldn't afford big Christmas presents, so it had to be small ones, or something you could make or do for another person.

None of these things are a right, they are a luxury. When you don't have money, you go without them.

Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made. If you want luxuries beyond that, take on evening work as well.

Nothing in this world is handed to you, it has to be earned. People think they are entitled to a living and they aren't.

Its forgotten that Men would work down a mine for a pittance, because it brought in what was needed. Were they exploited? **** right, more than anyone is exploited these days, was that an excuse for them to stop? No. That sort of work ethic is dying.
Thats crap, i know plenty of people who are paying a mortgage/rent and raising a family on minimum wage jobs. At one point my girlfriend paid for a house, all the bills, provided 2 of us with food on a 15k salary, and with the changes to the 10k tax earnings now, will be the similar to a a minimum wage job now. What we didnt have was contract phones, Sky TV, Internet, takeaways, nights out, kids or fancy clothes. We couldn't afford big Christmas presents, so it had to be small ones, or something you could make or do for another person. None of these things are a right, they are a luxury. When you don't have money, you go without them. Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made. If you want luxuries beyond that, take on evening work as well. Nothing in this world is handed to you, it has to be earned. People think they are entitled to a living and they aren't. Its forgotten that Men would work down a mine for a pittance, because it brought in what was needed. Were they exploited? **** right, more than anyone is exploited these days, was that an excuse for them to stop? No. That sort of work ethic is dying. bobby98007
  • Score: 7

2:04pm Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

bobby98007 wrote:
Thats crap, i know plenty of people who are paying a mortgage/rent and raising a family on minimum wage jobs.

At one point my girlfriend paid for a house, all the bills, provided 2 of us with food on a 15k salary, and with the changes to the 10k tax earnings now, will be the similar to a a minimum wage job now.

What we didnt have was contract phones, Sky TV, Internet, takeaways, nights out, kids or fancy clothes. We couldn't afford big Christmas presents, so it had to be small ones, or something you could make or do for another person.

None of these things are a right, they are a luxury. When you don't have money, you go without them.

Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made. If you want luxuries beyond that, take on evening work as well.

Nothing in this world is handed to you, it has to be earned. People think they are entitled to a living and they aren't.

Its forgotten that Men would work down a mine for a pittance, because it brought in what was needed. Were they exploited? **** right, more than anyone is exploited these days, was that an excuse for them to stop? No. That sort of work ethic is dying.
So the businesses cannot afford to pay? "Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made". But you seem a fairly intelligent bloke so for you it may be difficult but not impossible. Being realistic rather than disrespectful not everyone is as clued up as you or I and the margin for error is near enough none existent. Should people's reward for working be to struggle from one pay day to the next with no realistic hope of ever getting a little bit in front in order to take some of the stress off? Who are we making these sacrifices to? Have we just celebrated his Birthday in which case is he never happy or is the sacrifice to someone else? Can't we just lop the head off a chicken?
[quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: Thats crap, i know plenty of people who are paying a mortgage/rent and raising a family on minimum wage jobs. At one point my girlfriend paid for a house, all the bills, provided 2 of us with food on a 15k salary, and with the changes to the 10k tax earnings now, will be the similar to a a minimum wage job now. What we didnt have was contract phones, Sky TV, Internet, takeaways, nights out, kids or fancy clothes. We couldn't afford big Christmas presents, so it had to be small ones, or something you could make or do for another person. None of these things are a right, they are a luxury. When you don't have money, you go without them. Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made. If you want luxuries beyond that, take on evening work as well. Nothing in this world is handed to you, it has to be earned. People think they are entitled to a living and they aren't. Its forgotten that Men would work down a mine for a pittance, because it brought in what was needed. Were they exploited? **** right, more than anyone is exploited these days, was that an excuse for them to stop? No. That sort of work ethic is dying.[/p][/quote]So the businesses cannot afford to pay? "Its difficult to do, 1 person earning minimum wage £945 a month. But its not impossible, sacrifices have to be made". But you seem a fairly intelligent bloke so for you it may be difficult but not impossible. Being realistic rather than disrespectful not everyone is as clued up as you or I and the margin for error is near enough none existent. Should people's reward for working be to struggle from one pay day to the next with no realistic hope of ever getting a little bit in front in order to take some of the stress off? Who are we making these sacrifices to? Have we just celebrated his Birthday in which case is he never happy or is the sacrifice to someone else? Can't we just lop the head off a chicken? RollandSmoke
  • Score: -1

3:36pm Fri 3 Jan 14

bobby98007 says...

I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle.

I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it.

Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly.

However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work.

Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.
I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle. I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it. Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly. However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work. Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have. bobby98007
  • Score: 9

4:36pm Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

bobby98007 wrote:
I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle.

I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it.

Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly.

However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work.

Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.
Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about.
[quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle. I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it. Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly. However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work. Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.[/p][/quote]Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about. RollandSmoke
  • Score: 0

5:20pm Fri 3 Jan 14

bobby98007 says...

RollandSmoke wrote:
bobby98007 wrote:
I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle.

I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it.

Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly.

However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work.

Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.
Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about.
An employer will determine where in the business you can be placed to make them the most money. If you are doing an unskilled job, and you can make them more money in a skilled role, you will be moved.

Dont forget that its these profit margins that are providing employment, without it there's no jobs. If business pay higher wages there will be less jobs going around. Would you rather have 1000 people on a manageable yet unspectacular wage or 500 people on an above average one?

As a person you are not pigeon holed into a certain role, you can always improve yourself, and your earning potential. If your happy in your checkout job, good, Im pleased for you. You don't deserve to be handed more just because your settled where you are. If you want more, go out and get it. It wont find you.

I dont have a problem with the amount of money a company makes, Shell make an unimaginable amount of money every year. Why should that be redistributed to others? They dont take the risks, why should they be rewarded?
[quote][p][bold]RollandSmoke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle. I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it. Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly. However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work. Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.[/p][/quote]Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about.[/p][/quote]An employer will determine where in the business you can be placed to make them the most money. If you are doing an unskilled job, and you can make them more money in a skilled role, you will be moved. Dont forget that its these profit margins that are providing employment, without it there's no jobs. If business pay higher wages there will be less jobs going around. Would you rather have 1000 people on a manageable yet unspectacular wage or 500 people on an above average one? As a person you are not pigeon holed into a certain role, you can always improve yourself, and your earning potential. If your happy in your checkout job, good, Im pleased for you. You don't deserve to be handed more just because your settled where you are. If you want more, go out and get it. It wont find you. I dont have a problem with the amount of money a company makes, Shell make an unimaginable amount of money every year. Why should that be redistributed to others? They dont take the risks, why should they be rewarded? bobby98007
  • Score: 4

5:47pm Fri 3 Jan 14

RollandSmoke says...

bobby98007 wrote:
RollandSmoke wrote:
bobby98007 wrote:
I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle.

I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it.

Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly.

However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work.

Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.
Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about.
An employer will determine where in the business you can be placed to make them the most money. If you are doing an unskilled job, and you can make them more money in a skilled role, you will be moved.

Dont forget that its these profit margins that are providing employment, without it there's no jobs. If business pay higher wages there will be less jobs going around. Would you rather have 1000 people on a manageable yet unspectacular wage or 500 people on an above average one?

As a person you are not pigeon holed into a certain role, you can always improve yourself, and your earning potential. If your happy in your checkout job, good, Im pleased for you. You don't deserve to be handed more just because your settled where you are. If you want more, go out and get it. It wont find you.

I dont have a problem with the amount of money a company makes, Shell make an unimaginable amount of money every year. Why should that be redistributed to others? They dont take the risks, why should they be rewarded?
Royal Dutch Shell plc to give it it's full title makes it's money mining a resource that comes from the earth that they do not own. Before Maggie destroyed the industry the Coal Miners also mined a resource from the earth that they do not own but at the time it was a nationalised industry so therefore any profits made went to the country as a whole. I think that is the way it should be with such resources. What happens when no-one below say a supervisor level can afford to survive? Are you expecting these workers to just keep turning up for work after they've lost their homes? The cost of living is going up at a rapid rate and has been for this entire government. Wages have been frozen or 1% if your lucky although management wages aren't doing so bad and whatever percentage you get means more the bigger the sum it's a percentage of.
They're already concerned about the mental health implications for a generation of young unemployed. How bad does it have to get before businesses take a little social responsibility? I know Thatcher said there was no such thing as society but she was a lying scumbag, just ask any miner.
[quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RollandSmoke[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bobby98007[/bold] wrote: I meant personal sacrifice, you cant have everything you want, you have to choose or settle. I mean you can try killing a chicken, but that kind of proves my point, you want the easy road given to you from a gesture, instead of earning it. Business pays as little as it possibly can, that much i agree with. But Market forces dictate salaries, if you are a supermarket checkout person, anyone can do it, so your going to be paid the minimum. If your a marine biologist, there's not many of them about, so you pay them accordingly. However, if you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job, you wont stay for long, there's always progression at the company your at, to supervisor, or manager. Alternatively someone will always take a risk in another line of work if they know that person is capable and willing to work. Hard work can get you very far, but again, that requires a work ethic, that most just don't have.[/p][/quote]Hang on a minute. We are talking about working people here so how can you make the accusation that they lack a work ethic? If you are the best supermarket checkout person you can be and you are good at your job it would be a foolish employer that took you off that job and put you on something that may not be something you are good at whilst requiring them to train someone else to do the job that you did so well which this person may not. For some a checkout person may be their ideal job and something they enjoy. Should they be condemned to a life of poverty despite them not lacking in ability or willingness to work? Do you not see any societal problems from the growing levels of poverty? Are societal concerns not as important as the profit margins of big business? There are obscene amounts of money being paid out to individuals in this country. I don't begrudge them although struggle to see what they could possibly be doing to justify such mind blowing sums of money, but those who put in the graft to make those wages possible are probably already knackered when they get to work from the lack of sleep worrying if they can keep a roof over their heads. This is not a fair society and it makes for a very depressing country that you wouldn't want to live in if you could afford not to. If we are a poor country who's businesses are cash strapped I must say we hide it well. It is cheaper in the long run to enable people to adequately look after themselves rather than to pick up the pieces when they fail or rather are set up to fail as there are payday lender profits to think about.[/p][/quote]An employer will determine where in the business you can be placed to make them the most money. If you are doing an unskilled job, and you can make them more money in a skilled role, you will be moved. Dont forget that its these profit margins that are providing employment, without it there's no jobs. If business pay higher wages there will be less jobs going around. Would you rather have 1000 people on a manageable yet unspectacular wage or 500 people on an above average one? As a person you are not pigeon holed into a certain role, you can always improve yourself, and your earning potential. If your happy in your checkout job, good, Im pleased for you. You don't deserve to be handed more just because your settled where you are. If you want more, go out and get it. It wont find you. I dont have a problem with the amount of money a company makes, Shell make an unimaginable amount of money every year. Why should that be redistributed to others? They dont take the risks, why should they be rewarded?[/p][/quote]Royal Dutch Shell plc to give it it's full title makes it's money mining a resource that comes from the earth that they do not own. Before Maggie destroyed the industry the Coal Miners also mined a resource from the earth that they do not own but at the time it was a nationalised industry so therefore any profits made went to the country as a whole. I think that is the way it should be with such resources. What happens when no-one below say a supervisor level can afford to survive? Are you expecting these workers to just keep turning up for work after they've lost their homes? The cost of living is going up at a rapid rate and has been for this entire government. Wages have been frozen or 1% if your lucky although management wages aren't doing so bad and whatever percentage you get means more the bigger the sum it's a percentage of. They're already concerned about the mental health implications for a generation of young unemployed. How bad does it have to get before businesses take a little social responsibility? I know Thatcher said there was no such thing as society but she was a lying scumbag, just ask any miner. RollandSmoke
  • Score: -3

8:53pm Fri 3 Jan 14

Alhaurinrhino says...

So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state.
So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state. Alhaurinrhino
  • Score: 3

9:54pm Fri 3 Jan 14

allinittogether says...

Alhaurinrhino wrote:
So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state.
I'm alright Jack!
[quote][p][bold]Alhaurinrhino[/bold] wrote: So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state.[/p][/quote]I'm alright Jack! allinittogether
  • Score: -3

8:19am Sun 5 Jan 14

K.Y.E. says...

Alhaurinrhino wrote:
So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state.
so people on minimum wage jobs don't work hard?
[quote][p][bold]Alhaurinrhino[/bold] wrote: So just over 7% of people are struggling? After the wasteland left by the Labour party I think 93% doing OK is a remarkable achievement for the government. I know I'm doing well under this regime, but then again, I work hard and don't rely on the state.[/p][/quote]so people on minimum wage jobs don't work hard? K.Y.E.
  • 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