Originally Posted by
The One Who
You know nothing about me or my life or my history. I think the only ones being judgmental are those assuming I know nothing about that sort of life. I may not have lived every single scenario, but I sure as hell know poverty and desperation.
Zero hours contracts can, in some cases, be very useful. It ultimately depends on the type of contract (they aren't all the same!) and the sector you are in, as well as your own circumstances. I have a friend paying a mortgage who works on a zero hours contract, she makes about the same as me in a month on full-time. It'd be better if she was in a guaranteed-income role, but she makes it work for her.
The benefits can be a hassle, I agree, but so is not getting Tax Credits until you are twenty-five. The world isn't perfect
You don't need to take it personally unless you want to. I never suggested that you didn't know poverty; heck you may well have been in poverty yourself; but this doesn't mean you can automatically understand all poverty from a personal perspective 'on the ground'. Knowing poverty is one thing, living each and everyone's individual lives is impossible. I am not going to say because I 'know' mental ill health I can empathise with everyone; I can't; I can attempt to, but I wont know what a person's life is like and the options running through their mind; so I wont judge them for their actions when it comes to basic survival. I am not talking about stealing non-essential items; food, water and shelter are basic human needs and that is what this thread was about.
I'm glad it works for her, I never said they [zero hour contracts] couldn't work, but they do mean income can be unpredictable [as do a lot of 'trades'] what I am trying to demonstrate is that life is not predictable and income is the same. Not everyone has reserves built up, or people who can lend them money.
When it comes to stealing food due to eating disorders I am not sure what to comment; from the perception of the sufferer, they may not feel they have a choice. I would hope common sense would prevail and that a person would get help rather than be prosecuted immediately. I can understand however that repeat offences could well result in prosecution; its hard because in the instance that there were risk of prosecution, one would hope this would be factored into deciding if the person has capacity to understand the ramifications of their behaviour and thus if they should be treated in a secure environment.
If someone cant afford a TV licence then surely they should get rid of the TV?