Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Amaya wrote:
Didn't I just state that it's the lazy people turning down extra hours?

You did, but I've learned over the years not to trust what people say.

Joey wrote:

marv335 wrote:what city do you live in?
Best I found locally when I was looking for somewhere to live was £350/month, unfurnished not including bills, in an area you wouldn't want to live in.

http://www.gumtree.com/p/flats-houses/single-room-in-modern-refurbished-house-sharing-with-professionals-inc-bills/94206323
£180pm. There's much cheaper than that, though.
Even cheaper when i lived in Leicester.
You did know that not everywhere in the Uk is rich, right?

So on JSA you can 'afford' to live in a flat that isnt a shoe box in a bad area. You cannot get £40 a week outside of hell holes or hen houses in the Hebrides.

corpsesarefun wrote:If you have $100 a month to pay for unneeded things you are surviving quite nicely...

You're kidding right?

$100 equates to something like £60. That's £15 a week! Working your arse off all week for that kind of disposable income must be really difficult and I sympathise with the OP.

Iv'e been really broke before and it really rankles with me when I hear someone moan about how broke they are because they've only got £300 in the bank to spend on going out when they usually have twice that!

If I say I'm skint I mean I'm skint. Iv'e got like 26p in mybank account. What do other people mean when they claim brokemanship?

Muhr wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:If you have $100 a month to pay for unneeded things you are surviving quite nicely...

You're kidding right?

$100 equates to something like £60. That's £15 a week! Working your arse off all week for that kind of disposable income must be really difficult and I sympathise with the OP.

Iv'e been really broke before and it really rankles with me when I hear someone moan about how broke they are because they've only got £300 in the bank to spend on going out when they usually have twice that!

If I say I'm skint I mean I'm skint. Iv'e got like 26p in mybank account. What do other people mean when they claim brokemanship?

If you have any money spare at all you are surviving quite nicely, emphasis on surviving rather than enjoying your survival.

Back in the day I pulled it off. Rent was 325 for a two bedroom on the edge of the ghetto. Had a roommate that covered half of the rent/utilities. I was driving a 10 year old car that didn't have payments on it, insurance was $70 for liability, no health insurance, two part time jobs. I did a lot of cheap cooking back then.

Luxuries included a six pack of beer once a week, and pipe tobacco. It's survivable, provided you have no dependents and you don't get hurt.

Of course, it was during this time I cut my hand, and had to go about two months waiting for the wound to close while keeping it wrapped in gauze and tape. Wonder the damn thing didn't fall off.

Joey wrote:

marv335 wrote:what city do you live in?
Best I found locally when I was looking for somewhere to live was £350/month, unfurnished not including bills, in an area you wouldn't want to live in.

http://www.gumtree.com/p/flats-houses/single-room-in-modern-refurbished-house-sharing-with-professionals-inc-bills/94206323
£180pm. There's much cheaper than that, though.
Even cheaper when i lived in Leicester.
You did know that not everywhere in the Uk is rich, right?

I live in Kent at the moment, and the average is about £90 a week not including bills for rent. London is worse.

No doubt you can get better deals when living shacks off on the various Scottish isles, but I doubt you'll find anywhere under £70 a week worth living in in any major town or city.

christ almighty, reading things like that makes me go "America, leading the free world, huh?"

I mean, if that happened here, you'd be down to emergency and get stitched up free of charge. Even if you were a tourist.

Hey bud, we like our freedom to die of gangrene.

dogma wrote:Hey bud, we like our freedom to die of gangrene.

*cough* health tourist to Cuba or Canada *cough*

Cuba is better, the Canadians expect health tourism and frown, Cubans like it when Yanks turn up from their backward country and say 'comrades please heal me!' or words to that effect. Cuba has a good health service.

Da Boss wrote:christ almighty, reading things like that makes me go "America, leading the free world, huh?"

I mean, if that happened here, you'd be down to emergency and get stitched up free of charge. Even if you were a tourist.

You say that, but I'm torn. On one hand (pun) it was a really gakky couple months, and changing the bandages, not to mention the wound reopening continually while I'm trying to keep working, was outright miserable. On the other hand, I've been to the emergency room before, especially now that I have my big boy job with insurance, and I see the people there abusing the system for headaches/stomachaches/drugs in spite of the fact that it's life-alteringly expensive. And then I think to myself, "If it was 'free' for them, they'd abuse it even more." I don't know how often that kind of stuff happens elsewhere, but Americans culturally, have a hard time stopping themselves when the word "free" gets bandied around, even when it's not free. ESPECIALLY when it's other people paying for it. My end conclusion is that while I certainly don't think people should be in a situation where they're severely injured and left in the cold because they can't afford it, it would be sheer madness if they all of a sudden nationalized health care here, at least for the first several years. There's no obvious "right and easy" answer, at least, in my mind.

Of course, that betrays my gakky world view, and now I've derailed the thread. I apologize for both.

Orlanth wrote:
Cuba is better, the Canadians expect health tourism and frown, Cubans like it when Yanks turn up from their backward country and say 'comrades please heal me!' or words to that effect. Cuba has a good health service.

To be fair, you have to go to Cuba via Mexico, or some other country, which increases the cost.

This is, of course, something I've never done.

I can't speak for other areas' minimum wages, but at least in San Diego, California where I live within America the costs of living are fairly astronomical relative to minimum wage. At $8.00/hr, most jobs will hire on for ~32 hours a week, allowing for a yearly income of ~$11,200. Given that the average rent for a small 1-2 bedroom apartment is $1,000 a month around here...

I suppose the answer to the original question is 'not very well'.

Joey wrote:

Orlanth wrote:

Slarg232 wrote:

KingCracker wrote:The dumb ones with credit cards get into debt.

Fixed.

I'm trying to stockpile money for College, to cut down my debt, on minimum wage. It's nice living with my parents.

I know what its like to be on benefits and on very low wages, its easier on benefits. Low wages supposedly give you more money, indeed government calculations guarantee that, but expenditure is not the same, once you have accounted for travel and eating at lunchtime away from home you have already blown any saving you have from having a job. wage earners need more money to live, especially if any form of commuting is involved. I remained solvent on low wages by only taking jobs I could get to by bike and not eating at lunchtime and having no berr money. A lot of people find that hard month in month out, year in year out, and credit is too easy to get.

Were it not for my loathing of credit culture I would be there too, and even then I got into debt anyway, heavy rent arrears due to cashflow problems. I am also lucky in that tobacco and alcohol has no hold on me, and I do not run a car.

£55 a week on unemployment benefit, £240 a week for a minimum wage job.
It's a myth that it "pays to be unemployed".

Well the problem there is, at least over here, most people on unemployment (I say most because my state is a former big shop state, so most unemployed were paid MAX 9 bucks an hour) can qualify for state benefits as well, like food for example. So yea, those "free" checks pay just enough to keep the lights on and watch some TV, and the state pays for your food. So really, free money and free food is a nice gig. Sign me up, because ANYONE would be lying if they said they wouldnt want that. Go ahead and try to tell me you would turn down a "free" paycheck and free groceries for a year or longer

Necroshea wrote:I really would prefer to go the military regardless of job situation, but a childhood of poor nutrition and limited play in sports left me with something of a gut. Been doing a lot of extreme sports post high school, but I'm not catching up to where I should be at all. I've heard different stories how they'll take you in if you think you can cut it, but I've also heard they'll just tell you to gtfo if you don't meet the requirements. I'd prefer to go marines btw.

the requirements for the Marines are two full pull ups, arms locking out, running a mile and a half in 13:30 and 50 cruches in less than 2 min.
my recurters are cool with out of shape people and would have you start coming to pt. belive me when i say the weight just melts away