This week was a challenging Poverty Week, when campaigners highlight the inequalities that people face and the obstacles they face in trying to overcome them.
Inequality is high and growing. There is a lot of blame for the epidemic, but poverty existed before and will continue to exist until serious steps are taken to eradicate it.
This is a week when those who work year-round to campaign for poverty alleviation and practical solutions highlight the seriousness of the situation and the need for radical intervention.
The problem can be complex and multifaceted, but the bottom line is simple.
People should have more money to live.
Whether they are employed, full time or part time, countless people need to pay more in this situation.
Those who are working, if the minimum wage legislation was working in their interests, will not have to rely on universal credit or any other state cooperation.
Work benefits are subsidized to employees who are paying less.
A start is raising the national minimum wage to real housing wages for all workers by age.
If people are not working or unable to work, then the social security system needs to be adequately adequate to provide basic services to the people. the meal, Heat, travel and the clothes they need to live.
Unfortunately, this is not the case.
If that were the case, there would be no real need to introduce a temporary 20-week increase in universal credit last year.
It was an acknowledgment that the level of universal credit offer is not enough to allow people to feed themselves, their families and warm their homes.
Growth should be sustainable, then there may be less reliance on food banks.
The Scottish Government is committed to doubling Scottish children’s pay from پون 10 a week to 20 20.
Earlier this year, it was promised that this would be done in the life of this parliament, which will continue till 2026.
The prime minister recently said it would be extended “sooner rather than later”.
Soon, a mother finds some relief in wondering if there is enough gas or electricity for a month, that at some point in the future, another 10 pounds a week could come, Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister will not help the father to walk to the food bank soon because he cannot afford the £ 4, it will be in the bus fares.
At a time when the challenge was becoming Poverty Week, a 20-pound growth not only draws more than 80 80 a week from the budget of the country’s poorest people, but also halves those who depend on it. Decent standard of living
The Prime Minister said that it was no longer appropriate.
“We want people to work, not on global credit,” he said.
Prime Minister, millions of people with global credit are at work.
Around 3.5 million families across the UK who have a job will be affected by the پون 20 a week reduction.
These are more than 2 million working families affected by work.
This shows how hollow the phrase ‘making work pay’ was, which was actually used to sell global credit to the nation.
Instead, Prime Minister, there are millions of jobs that are unsafe, exploitative and low-paying, resulting in inadequate and age-discriminating national minimum wage and employment laws that you can change, employees instead of employers. Work for
Food banks are worried that they are about to enter a new era of growing demand.
Those who are struggling will continue to struggle and the high tide of poverty that we have seen over the past decade is about to pull thousands more down.
Rising food costs in supermarkets, rising petrol prices and gas and electric suppliers are taking more money out of people’s pockets in jobs.
We need to ask our governments if they are doing their best to ensure that more people are not pushed further into poverty and that those who are already suffering are not punished more. ۔
Of the 5.5 million households affected by the cut, 2.6 million are children and 2.8 million are people with disabilities.
There doesn’t seem to be much hope for them to ‘equalize’, another hollow phrase.
Of course, the governments of Westminster and Hollywood received money to avoid a complete economic catastrophe during the epidemic.
And stable public financing will require reform.
But the answer should not and should not be the second round of brutal austerity measures taken by Cameron and Osborne when they came to power under the guise of deficit reduction.
Then, for years, the lowest-income people were forced to pay the price for the mistakes of others.
They should not be expected to pay the price for the fact that the government has had to dig deep to spend on dealing with the global epidemic.