I NOTE the response from Duncan Macintyre (Letter, January 17) to my letter on poverty (January 16).
Poverty is relative, and one doesn’t need to be living in a hole in the ground eating neeps to be considered poor. I wonder just how many of those in full-time employment, often with multiple jobs, yet having to be given income support to survive financially feel that is an accurate description of them. Or those who have to attend food banks to keep their children fed; are they all slackers and junkies? What about those on zero-hour contracts because that’s all they can get, who are lifted and laid at their employers whim and don’t know from week to week what they will earn? What about the poor souls unfortunate enough to have been born in the shallow end of the gene pool, are they to be predestined to a life of penury?
At the other end of the scale there are people, some I know personally, where inherited wealth means nobody has needed to have what the rest of us would consider “a job” for generations and they live the life of Larry yet nobody calls them workshy layabouts. We live in a system with built-in bias, one where Carillion can collapse owing billions and nobody goes to jail, where workers' occupational pension funds can disappear and banks can be rescued at the tax-payers’ expense yet again nobody goes to jail; where oil companies can be given tax relief to exploit the North Sea oil resources we were told did not exist, one where tax evasion and tax avoidance is endemic and tacitly accepted as a fact of life yet benefit-fraud is pursued aggressively. The examples of bias are endless and in all the cases it’s you and me who foot the bill and it’s all money that could be used to help those most in need.
The system is rotten and deliberately so. Until members of the public stop accepting that “the poor are always with us” just thank your lucky stars you aren’t one of them as nobody further up the social scale gives a damn about them.
David J Crawford,
85 Whittingehame Court,
1300 Great Western Road, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel