**** the poor
Apr 14th 2014, 4:41 am
#61
Account Closed
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 0
Re: **** the poor
This was written 20 years ago. By a claimant of social security.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...are?CMP=twt_gu
Sue Townsend. You might have heard of her.
Nothing much has changed since then. This article does still describe poverty.
What's changed since then? Except, perhaps, your views.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...are?CMP=twt_gu
Sue Townsend. You might have heard of her.
Nothing much has changed since then. This article does still describe poverty.
What's changed since then? Except, perhaps, your views.
A fat lot of good it did me; my social security payment took nine days to arrive, but by then I had taken three part-time jobs and employed two young girls as baby-sitters, and the system had beaten me. I became a working mother.
Apr 14th 2014, 5:37 am
#62
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 208
Re: **** the poor
My eyebrows shot up too when I read that. Geez - poor cow - imagine having to be a working mother in order to escape relative poverty!
I wonder what she thought she was entitled to in order to make her write that?
Apr 14th 2014, 5:43 am
#63
Account Closed
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 0
Re: **** the poor
The other bit that stood out was this (someone in the comments section highlighted it - suggesting she thought she was better and deserved more. I don't really agree with it but get their point);
I wanted to tell him that I was a literate and intelligent person, not just the young mother of those crying children – for Christ's sake, I had read every page of War and Peace. When I could afford it I read the Guardian. I was a Bessie Smith fan. I had won several prizes for verse speaking. I could read a menu in French. A poet had been in love with me. I knew how to spell and pronounce Dostoevsky. I had worked hard since I was 15.
Apr 14th 2014, 6:32 am
#64
...---...
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 484
Re: **** the poor
This was written 20 years ago. By a claimant of social security.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...are?CMP=twt_gu
Sue Townsend. You might have heard of her.
Nothing much has changed since then. This article does still describe poverty.
What's changed since then? Except, perhaps, your views.
http://www.theguardian.com/books/201...are?CMP=twt_gu
Sue Townsend. You might have heard of her.
Nothing much has changed since then. This article does still describe poverty.
What's changed since then? Except, perhaps, your views.
What a low point of her life, having to work to put food on her table and provide for her own kids. I especially liked the bit where she was encouraging her younger kid to lie in order to steal. But that's ok of course as she was stealing from a faceless corporation that could afford it
Apr 14th 2014, 7:10 am
#65
Knee deep and rising
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,007
Re: **** the poor
I like what she wrote, it didn't read as being entitled to me more as somebody in a tough place doing what she had to survive, and looking for a little bit of empathy from the system. Which she didn't get obviously and in the end she had to be more resourceful to manage.
Whether that can be judged as the system working depends on your point of view, other people in the same situation may have not managed. Personally I could not imagine bringing young kids on a bus from office to office, and finally collecting cans on the street in order to eat.
It doesn't strike me as the actions of someone avoiding work to luxuriate on a life of benefits.
Whether that can be judged as the system working depends on your point of view, other people in the same situation may have not managed. Personally I could not imagine bringing young kids on a bus from office to office, and finally collecting cans on the street in order to eat.
It doesn't strike me as the actions of someone avoiding work to luxuriate on a life of benefits.
Apr 14th 2014, 7:41 am
#66
Bored liberal
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Over there ----->
Posts: 13,713
Re: **** the poor
I like what she wrote, it didn't read as being entitled to me more as somebody in a tough place doing what she had to survive, and looking for a little bit of empathy from the system. Which she didn't get obviously and in the end she had to be more resourceful to manage.
Whether that can be judged as the system working depends on your point of view, other people in the same situation may have not managed. Personally I could not imagine bringing young kids on a bus from office to office, and finally collecting cans on the street in order to eat.
It doesn't strike me as the actions of someone avoiding work to luxuriate on a life of benefits.
Whether that can be judged as the system working depends on your point of view, other people in the same situation may have not managed. Personally I could not imagine bringing young kids on a bus from office to office, and finally collecting cans on the street in order to eat.
It doesn't strike me as the actions of someone avoiding work to luxuriate on a life of benefits.
I note that she gets berated but why is no one asking why the father of these children is not supporting them? She was with the father when they were born so he has equal responsibility. Obviously Sue Townsend didn't intend to be on benefits but life sometimes throws curve balls at you. Like many people she just needed some help to get back on her feet which she duly did, and very successfully.
Apr 14th 2014, 7:49 am
#68
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Disneyland, Dubai
Posts: 15,887
Apr 14th 2014, 7:55 am
#70
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Disneyland, Dubai
Posts: 15,887
Apr 14th 2014, 8:18 am
#71
N/A
Joined: Oct 2011
Location: 53 miles West of Venus
Posts: 703
Re: **** the poor
Exactly.
I note that she gets berated but why is no one asking why the father of these children is not supporting them? She was with the father when they were born so he has equal responsibility. Obviously Sue Townsend didn't intend to be on benefits but life sometimes throws curve balls at you. Like many people she just needed some help to get back on her feet which she duly did, and very successfully.
I note that she gets berated but why is no one asking why the father of these children is not supporting them? She was with the father when they were born so he has equal responsibility. Obviously Sue Townsend didn't intend to be on benefits but life sometimes throws curve balls at you. Like many people she just needed some help to get back on her feet which she duly did, and very successfully.
Anyway the real point that I want to bring to the table is that I would like the word 'lease' adding to the end of the thread title. TIA.
Apr 14th 2014, 8:52 am
#72
Bored liberal
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Over there ----->
Posts: 13,713
Re: **** the poor
It's in the public domain and she refers to an ex-husband in the article.
Your negative statement about the woman rather proves the point though.
Apr 14th 2014, 9:05 am
#74
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 208
Re: **** the poor
In the article she states that her maintenance money, presumably from her ex-husband and consisting of nine quid, didn't come through.
In 1989 would nine pounds have been enough to keep a family of four going?
In 1989 would nine pounds have been enough to keep a family of four going?
Apr 14th 2014, 9:05 am
#75
Bored liberal
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Over there ----->
Posts: 13,713
Re: **** the poor
Not hers as has been documented. It's easy to check facts in this case before making unfounded, and unfair, accusations. At the time of the story Sue Townsend had three small children, all from her ex-husband. He was not providing any financial support for HIS OWN children, so he should be as castigated as she has been in this thread.
Disappointing how many posters are quick to blame people for their misfortunes rather then looking at the full story.
Disappointing how many posters are quick to blame people for their misfortunes rather then looking at the full story.