Why Don't Some People Like Charity?

[nigel1]

I doubt it was easy, but it probably was a lot easier than it is now.

and to summarize, it's all the fault of the collective earlier generation scum-sucking pigs.

 

[Moll Flanders]

I feel like I'm on the MoneySavingExpert forum as the boomers and the younger generation have this *ahem* discussion over and over on there. I'm not from either generation but I can see why some younger people are frustrated.

I'm just speaking for the UK but the cost of housing/renting here is one of the main factors that is creating a two tier system in society. I don't think it was easy for all boomers obviously but there are factors that made a lot of people from that generation quite wealthy including rocketing house prices and a lot of boomers are sitting on cushions of house equity whereas young people are struggling to even get on the property ladder.

I had a "free" uni education as I had a grant as I was considered poor coming from a single parent family but my brother who is about 7 years younger than me is in about £20-£25K in debt from his uni education as he had to get into debt for it. He is still living at home at age 30 as his salary is too low to even buy a one room studio flat in that part of London. My husband left school at 16 and he was on a higher wage at ago 30 than my brother is now and my brother has a Master's degree.

For the original point of the thread there has been a rise of the use of food banks over here after the welfare reforms and I have read that some people are deeply ashamed to have to use them. I think a lot of people rely on their family for support, especially people I've known who have children, but if a lot of people are being squeezed financially and benefits are being cut then food banks are being used instead. I think having to ask for a bag of food at a food bank must be humiliating and I think it is disgraceful that it is even needed in such a wealthy country.

 

[nigel1]

I feel like I'm on the MoneySavingExpert forum as the boomers and the younger generation have this *ahem* discussion over and over on there. I'm not from either generation but I can see why some younger people are frustrated.

I'm just speaking for the UK but the cost of housing/renting here is one of the main factors that is creating a two tier system in society. I don't think it was easy for all boomers obviously but there are factors that made a lot of people from that generation quite wealthy including rocketing house prices and a lot of boomers are sitting on cushions of house equity whereas young people are struggling to even get on the property ladder.

I had a "free" uni education as I had a grant as I was considered poor coming from a single parent family but my brother who is about 7 years younger than me is in about £20-£25K in debt from his uni education as he had to get into debt for it. He is still living at home at age 30 as his salary is too low to even buy a one room studio flat in that part of London. My husband left school at 16 and he was on a higher wage at ago 30 than my brother is now and my brother has a Master's degree.

For the original point of the thread there has been a rise of the use of food banks over here after the welfare reforms and I have read that some people are deeply ashamed to have to use them. I think a lot of people rely on their family for support, especially people I've known who have children, but if a lot of people are being squeezed financially and benefits are being cut then food banks are being used instead. I think having to ask for a bag of food at a food bank must be humiliating and I think it is disgraceful that it is even needed in such a wealthy country.

Thanks for getting it back on point.

Do you find, in England, that poor people in London, Portsmouth, Brighton and such are more reluctant to accept assistance than their counterparts in the north?

 

[Moll Flanders]

Do you find, in England, that poor people in London, Portsmouth, Brighton and such are more reluctant to accept assistance than their counterparts in the north?

Hmm, I'm not sure as I've lived in London most of my life. Do you mean because Northerners are meant to have more tight knit communities?

 

[nigel1]

Hmm, I'm not sure as I've lived in London most of my life. Do you mean because Northerners are meant to have more tight knit communities?

I was as sarcastically referring to the OP. Curious if we could call southern backwardness a global phenomenon.

 

[ledboots]

Let's see. $3.25/hr. Say that's near minimum wage.

If it's 1980, when the minimum wage was $3.10/hr, then $3.25/hr would be equivalent to $9.24/hr today.

If you're going to an average priced college in 1980, then you're paying $1,679/year in tuition and fees (about $4771 today).

You'd have to work 540 hours @ $3.25/hr, or 10.5 hrs/week to pay it.

Now, the minimum wage is $7.25/hr. If we add an inflation-adjusted $0.10/hr to that, we get about $7.50/hr. The average college cost is $12,467 for tuition and fees. You'd have to work 1662 hours @ 7.50/hr to be able to pay that. Or 32 hrs/week.

I think the numbers speak for themselves. If the people of "your generation" had to double up in crappy apartments without heat just to be able to afford college, how can you expect today's generation to be able to afford it without going deeply in debt?

I'm no math whiz (to say the least) but don't you think that you should have added more than a dime to the $7.25 an hour? The percentage earned over the minimum wage of $3.25 seems like it would be the right figure.

 

[das_nut]

and to summarize, it's all the fault of the collective earlier generation scum-sucking pigs.

Well, we have to blame someone!

I'm no math whiz (to say the least) but don't you think that you should have added more than a dime to the $7.25 an hour? The percentage earned over the minimum wage of $3.25 seems like it would be the right figure.

Whoopsie. I should have added $0.43 if we're going with an inflation-adjusted $0.15 over minimum wage. Rounding that to $0.50, we have a rate of $7.75. So it's 1609 hours @ $7.75/hr, or 31 hrs/week.

If we were going just by the percentage over minimum wage, it would be $7.60/hr. Or 1640 hrs @ 7.60/hr, about 31.5 hrs/week.

It's a minor mistake, and doesn't change the result much.