Can't afford a night out? You're poor!

fishy fishy · 14-02-2013 02:02PM

Orim wrote: »

5 chicken breasts would get you one meal?

I'd use 2. And no it's not doormice, it's 4 people. But having thought about a touch I was including days when something else would be done or on, I'll downgrade my estimate to 2 weeks (give or take) With the caveat that I am buying other things such as veg and what nots.

The point is that a lot of what's being bandied around as poverty is poor money management or ridiculous expectations.

Poverty is an extreme word and should be kept for extreme situations.

Change the roast dinner question to "Can you afford to eat everyday and pay your bills?"
Change the going out question to something "Can you afford return bus fare from your house?" (Extreme example but I can't think of a better one off the top of my head. I recognise that people need to socialise but this just going question is far too loose and open to spurious definetions. I wouldn't say I've gone out for a couple of weeks now because I would consider "going out" going on the lash and spending 100 to 150 quid but I've been to a couple of friends houses in the last few weeks and been to the pub for the rugby.)

i hope you drank tap water in the pub. or else looked through the window from the outside at your friends.

getting a bus twice per day will add up to a lot more than a couple of drinks in a pub. but then again I suppose if they used the "bus ticket" example in the survey there would be people on here saying "oh I remember I used to walk uphill to school everyday with a bag of coal on my back in me bare feet in two feet of snow". :roll eyes: the usual crap.

oh, and even with the "guesstimate" on the food items bring brought down to two weeks - still doesn't work.

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:03PM

Material deprivation in Irl is measured using the 11 item list.

Forced deprivation of 2 or more items on the list is the headline measure.

2008 = 13.8%

2009 = 17.1%

2010 = 22.6%

2011 = 24.5%

Percentage of the population.

See here:
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/silc/2011/silc_2011.pdf

strandroad · 14-02-2013 02:04PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

yes but according to the person on here who thinks 20K is fabulous, he/she also thinks that people are idiots for having kids - says it all really.

It's all about the lifestyle. I know a couple where one of them is a SPAR employee and the other SPAR "manager" (senior employee really). That's not far off 20k each I guess, but they have two kids and cope perfectly. No private schools or fancy cars that's for sure, but they are all fed, clothed, socialised and even go on an odd foreign holiday home swapping. Kids are well familiar with museums, parks and the coast.

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:06PM

The European material deprivation measure is somewhat different.

The severe material deprivation rate represents the proportion of people who cannot afford at least four of the nine following items:

1) (arrears on) mortgage or rent payments, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments

2) one week’s annual holiday away from home

3) a meal with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day

4) unexpected financial expenses

5) a telephone (including mobile phone)

6) a colour TV

7) a washing machine

8) a car and

9) heating to keep the home adequately warm.

See here:

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-009/EN/KS-SF-12-009-EN.PDF

8% of the EU pop are severally materiallt deprived, of 4+ items from that list.

fishy fishy · 14-02-2013 02:07PM

Aiyana Microscopic Sergeant wrote: »

That's not what they said.

i was being polite........this is exactly what he said

Did anyone put a gun to your head and told you: you have to have kids, huge stupid mortgage which makes no sence? NO! You wanted kids? Then think in advance how you will pay for that pleasure.

:rolleyes:

ahh if only life was so simple.

fishy fishy · 14-02-2013 02:09PM

mhge wrote: »

It's all about the lifestyle. I know a couple where one of them is a SPAR employee and the other SPAR "manager" (senior employee really). That's not far off 20k each I guess, but they have two kids and cope perfectly. No private schools or fancy cars that's for sure, but they are all fed, clothed, socialised and even go on an odd foreign holiday home swapping. Kids are well familiar with museums, parks and the coast.

the relevant words in this post is "I guess".

you are guessing right? the fact may be a lot different.

BraziliaNZ · 14-02-2013 02:11PM

CreepingDeath wrote: »

There's plenty of ways to socialise outside of the pub, including inviting people around for a cup of tea. If you're unemployed there might be walking groups / mother & toddler groups etc.

If your "friends" will only ever meet you in the pub, then they're not very good friends at all.

It's bad enough that the middle class/coping class have to financially carry all the unemployed, without having to pick up their bar tab as well.

What about those of us that can't have fun without alcohol????

Quin_Dub · 14-02-2013 02:14PM

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/a-quarter-of-population-cant-afford-winter-coat-or-night-out-with-friends-29068735.html

Is not being able to afford a night out really 'deprivation'?

Does anybody know how they calculate "Disposable Income" in these kinds of reports?

What included/excluded?

When I think of "disposable" income, it's what's left after all bills and general expenses are paid up.

I wouldn't consider myself to have anything like the "disposable income" figures they are talking about in the article..I also wouldn't consider my self deprived of anything that I really need or want either.

So obviously there are some weird definitions going on here (either mine or theirs).

Anyone with insight?

Gmol · 14-02-2013 02:16PM

awec wrote: »

"Anti-poverty groups have warned that one in four of the population are unable to afford at least two items generally considered necessary, including a warm winter coat, a night out, a roast once a week or home heating."

Only 2 things on that list could be considered necessary, a winter coat and home heating.

The others are luxuries, pure and simple.

It's pretty essential if you're a footballer

strandroad · 14-02-2013 02:17PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

the relevant words in this post is "I guess".

you are guessing right? the fact may be a lot different.

Downwards though, as one of them is not full time I think.
Huge numbers families are in that range if you read household income stats.

j8wk2feszrnpao · 14-02-2013 02:17PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

i was being polite........this is exactly what he said

Did anyone put a gun to your head and told you: you have to have kids, huge stupid mortgage which makes no sence? NO! You wanted kids? Then think in advance how you will pay for that pleasure.

:rolleyes:

ahh if only life was so simple.

No that wasn't what he said.
He was stating that you were in difficulty, then don't add to it by having kids.
He did not say "that people are idiots for having kids."
Big difference between the two.

Capt'n Midnight · 14-02-2013 02:21PM

mike65 wrote: »

The definitions of poverty become more "wussie" by the year. Soon not being able to afford a 12 pack of Dutch Gold will be proof of penury.

Tell me all about it, if things get any worse I might have to put some of the gardeners on a three day week

mark renton · 14-02-2013 02:24PM

summerskin wrote: »

nope. 500g of mince for a spag bol, or lasagne, or meat and potato pie.

therefore 2 meals from 1kg.

How many pounds in a kilo?

summerskin · 14-02-2013 02:29PM

mark renton wrote: »

How many pounds in a kilo?

2.2 Pounds per kilo. So a whopping 1.1lb in my spag bol.

Orim · 14-02-2013 02:31PM

fishy fishy wrote: »

i hope you drank tap water in the pub. or else looked through the window from the outside at your friends.

getting a bus twice per day will add up to a lot more than a couple of drinks in a pub. but then again I suppose if they used the "bus ticket" example in the survey there would be people on here saying "oh I remember I used to walk uphill to school everyday with a bag of coal on my back in me bare feet in two feet of snow". :roll eyes: the usual crap.

oh, and even with the "guesstimate" on the food items bring brought down to two weeks - still doesn't work.

Nope I drank a couple of pints of cider. But I'm not the on claiming that I'm poverty stricken.

And I'm certain the meat would last, the cost of veg, rice etc. might be expensive for the full family, I've only ever cooked the occasional meal for my family so I can't say for certain.

I was going to go back on the bus fare but it's too pedantic. My point is that povertry should describe fairly extreme situations and certainly shouldn't be bandied about after such a wishy-washy study.

mark renton · 14-02-2013 02:33PM

summerskin wrote: »

2.2 Pounds per kilo. So a whopping 1.1lb in my spag bol.

You cant put 1.1 pound of mince into spag bol - thats a mince mountain your making

summerskin · 14-02-2013 02:36PM

Orim wrote: »

Nope I drank a couple of pints of cider. But I'm not the on claiming that I'm poverty stricken.

And I'm certain the meat would last, the cost of veg, rice etc. might be expensive for the full family, I've only ever cooked the occasional meal for my family so I can't say for certain.

I was going to go back on the bus fare but it's too pedantic. My point is that povertry should describe fairly extreme situations and certainly shouldn't be bandied about after such a wishy-washy study.

ok, i've a family of 4, and a standard chicken meal(curry, or pan-fried breasts etc) would require a minimum of 4 breasts. do you really think half a breast each would be enough for a meal?

a simple way to look at it is that each person needs at least 1/4lb of meat on the plate of a normal meat dinner, making 1lb (approx 4) chicken fillets. Same principal for a pound of mince, or for pork chops etc.

And no, you can't "fill up on veg or bread", we need then protein, kids especially.

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:37PM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Does anybody know how they calculate "Disposable Income" in these kinds of reports?

What included/excluded?

When I think of "disposable" income, it's what's left after all bills and general expenses are paid up.

I wouldn't consider myself to have anything like the "disposable income" figures they are talking about in the article..I also wouldn't consider my self deprived of anything that I really need or want either.

In economics, disp income is after tax and social transfers.

It's before you spend on anything, or save.

summerskin · 14-02-2013 02:37PM

mark renton wrote: »

You cant put 1.1 pound of mince into spag bol - thats a mince mountain your making

haha, for a family of 4 you could never put less than a pound in or everyone would go hungry. even if you used a jar of sauce, it recommends 500g of mince.

do you ever cook for a family of 4? if you cook for yourself would you really expect to use less than 125g of mince for yourself? come on.....

awec · 14-02-2013 02:39PM

mark renton wrote: »

You cant put 1.1 pound of mince into spag bol - thats a mince mountain your making

You can put 1.1 lbs in there - that's about the amount of mince you'd use to feed about 6 people.

Personally, when I make pasta, 400g of mince is more than enough for 4 servings. Could easily get 5 out of it.

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:40PM

Household disp incomes, after paying direct tax and rec'd social transfers

2009 = 45,959 = 884 pw

2010 = 43,151 = 830 pw

2011 = 41,819 = 804 pw

Big falls!!, severe drop in incomes.

Disp income per household are back to 2005-2006 levels.

summerskin · 14-02-2013 02:41PM

awec wrote: »

You can put 1.1 lbs in there - that's about the amount of mince you'd use to feed about 6 people.

you'd use about 80g of meat per person???

jesus, my kids are young, we're a fit healthy family and we use a minimum of 450g for a spag bol, chilli or anything with mince really.

Quin_Dub · 14-02-2013 02:41PM

Geuze wrote: »

In economics, disp income is after tax and social transfers.

It's before you spend on anything, or save.

That explains it - That's not Disposable income , that's just INCOME !

No wonder I was confused....

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:44PM

Yes, the language used in various disciplines can be different than the day to day use.

Direct earned income

plus

social transfers

= gross income

less direct taxes

= disposable income

So three possible measures of income.

awec · 14-02-2013 02:46PM

summerskin wrote: »

you'd use about 80g of meat per person???

jesus, my kids are young, we're a fit healthy family and we use a minimum of 450g for a spag bol, chilli or anything with mince really.

I cook for myself. I buy 400g of mince from Superquinn and that does me for 4 servings of pasta easily. And that's a bowl full serving.

But it's a bit of a moot argument, everyone has their food different and some people will have their pasta meatier than others.

Geuze · 14-02-2013 02:49PM

Here are the averages, in case you're interested:

Direct earned income 728.69

plus social transfers 286.06

= gross income 1,014.75

less direct taxes 213.31

= disposable income 801.43

A few points

Note that on average each household pays 213 in direct tax, but receives 286 in social transfers. So, on average, each household is a net beneficiary of 73 pw or 3796 pa. Of course this ignore indirect taxes.

Many would argue that situation can't continue.

Note that social transfers are 28% of gross income.

Also, not enough households in Irl have direct income.

strandroad · 14-02-2013 02:52PM

summerskin wrote: »

ok, i've a family of 4, and a standard chicken meal(curry, or pan-fried breasts etc) would require a minimum of 4 breasts. do you really think half a breast each would be enough for a meal?

a simple way to look at it is that each person needs at least 1/4lb of meat on the plate of a normal meat dinner, making 1lb (approx 4) chicken fillets. Same principal for a pound of mince, or for pork chops etc.

And no, you can't "fill up on veg or bread", we need then protein, kids especially.

Actually this is way over what an average person needs in terms of protein. A teen or average weight adult needs maybe 50g. Meat is full of it, a quarter pounder or equivalent every day for dinner alone? What about protein in other meals? Do you not eat eggs, cheese, milk, butter etc on top of it, not to mention plant protein? People need much less protein that is commonly believed and practiced. If you look back a generation or two people would not have such meals every day, one chicken and some beef would go a long way during a week. The fact that it is accepted as every day standard these days is just one more factor saying that we're far away from poverty.

Annasopra · 14-02-2013 02:54PM

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/a-quarter-of-population-cant-afford-winter-coat-or-night-out-with-friends-29068735.html

Is not being able to afford a night out really 'deprivation'?

Not quite

http://www.socialinclusion.ie/documents/2011_WebInfoPovertyInIreland_nte.pdf

Material Deprivation
This measures when people are deprived, through lack of income, of basic items or activities taken to be the norm in Irish society. People are considered materially deprived when they are unable to afford two or more basic necessities from an 11 item list, which includes two pairs of strong shoes; a warm waterproof overcoat; buy new not second-hand clothes; eat meal with meat, chicken or fish (vegetarian equivalent) every second day; have a roast joint or its equivalent once a week; had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money; keep the home adequately warm; presents for family or friends at least once a year; replace any worn out furniture; have family or friends for a drink or meal once a month; and have a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight, for entertainment.

Material deprivation is enforced deprivation as distinct from elected deprivation i.e. the situation where a personal choice is made not to have the items.

Orim · 14-02-2013 02:55PM

summerskin wrote: »

ok, i've a family of 4, and a standard chicken meal(curry, or pan-fried breasts etc) would require a minimum of 4 breasts. do you really think half a breast each would be enough for a meal?

a simple way to look at it is that each person needs at least 1/4lb of meat on the plate of a normal meat dinner, making 1lb (approx 4) chicken fillets. Same principal for a pound of mince, or for pork chops etc.

And no, you can't "fill up on veg or bread", we need then protein, kids especially.

You want protein? Get some high protein veg, I believe that broccili and aubergines are good examples. Use nuts and seeds when making meals. Use eggs when making dinners, I'm a big fu yung fan myself.

Half a breast wouldn't be enough for pan fried chicken or chicken in pastry or whatever. But I think it's enough for curry, stir fry or similar. I've made dinners for the family using 2 chicken and it's been great. But I have admitted that I don't know my overall cost.

But to get back to the issue, the stuff listed there is not poverty or at least is not specific enough to indicate poverty. The European material deprivation measure posted above is a far better indicator in my eyes.

Annasopra · 14-02-2013 02:58PM

pmcmahon wrote: »

The poverty line is,if an unexpected NECESSITY arises (shoes for the kids etc) and you can't afford it,then you're in poverty.

No

The poverty line is anything 60% below the median wage

At-risk-of-poverty
This measure is also known as relative poverty or income poverty. It measures individuals who have an income that is below 60 per cent of the median income (the median is the midpoint on the scale of incomes in Ireland). In 2010, that was an income of below €207.57 a week for an adult.

Can't afford a night out? You're poor!

Comments