Separating needs from wants

[Gob]

HOW do you cope if you suddenly don't have enough money to get by? The best advice from 48 Australians who know is not to borrow, not to save, and not to spend - even if that means avoiding coffee shops and friends.

"If I am in town I bring my lunch and my thermos," says ''Anna'', an aged pensioner in a survey released today by the Brotherhood of St Laurence.

"I just don't go out, you don't put yourself in a position where you know you'll be in trouble," says Luke, an apprentice living away from home.
Advertisement: Story continues below

The survey finds Australians on the edge are very good at separating needs from wants, even where that means enduring abuse and abandoning activities that give them support.

"These could be as simple as a coffee with a friend or a night out with mates. In some cases, people were coping with stressful situations and even with abuses because they believed that under their financial circumstances they did not have other options," says the report, Money Matters in Times of Change.

Almost all those interviewed shied away from borrowing. Some destroyed their credit cards, and others used them reluctantly.

Michael faced the loss of his car unless he handed over more than he had been quoted to repair his car. "I had to put that on the credit card, like 900 bucks," he says.

Although saving would help to build financial resilience, many found the government's rules forced them not to. Claire, a 20-year-old Melbourne mother of two, won't save because the Centrelink liquid assets test might cut off her benefit. Her partner saves, while she uses all of her income to pay bills.

Working is also regarded as risky. Jo, a single mother, worked extra hours to try to buy a fridge. When she told Centrelink of her extra income in a periodical report she ended up with no extra money and lived without a fridge for a year.

The report finds many of the coping mechanisms forced on vulnerable Australians by a sudden loss of income and Centrelink rules increase vulnerability rather than help to build defences against it.

It recommends changes in the rules to reward and encourage - rather than discourage - working and saving money.

A second report to be released at a Brotherhood of St Laurence conference on financial risk in Melbourne today finds that face-to-face, rather than computer or phone interaction, is the best way to give advice to stressed people.

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifemat ... 1d9d4.html

[loCAtek]

Old news for me. If I had dollar for every time a friend said quite miffedly, "When are you gonna a car!?"

...like my poverty is more inconvenient for them, when I say, Sorry I can't drive wherever/there, so I can't go. Funny, how rarely do I get the offer of a ride to wherever/there, because that's too much trouble for those folks-with-money-and-means.

[dgs49]

Needs:

Cell phone,

Second car,

Home computer,

Remote control for the tellie,

Microwave oven,

Multiple televisions in the household,

A dozen pair of shoes for casual, tennis, bowling, exercise, dress, beach, semi-casual, work, yardwork, you-get-the-idea,

Cable TV,

Gym membership,

Bottled water,

Subscription to Architectural Digest.

[Gob]

You raise an interesting point there dgs, things, such as computer access, cars, and phones, have entered the realms of "needs" whereas in the past they may have been "wants".

[The Hen]

They are still in my "wants" list as opposed to my "needs" list.

What do I need?

To be kept as a nice temperature. To have enough to eat and drink to keep me healthy. To have my family happy and healthy.

[Gob]

and an i-pad...

[The Hen]

[kristina]

I definitely need computer access, but I suppose that I could do without it at home, as long as I can use the one at work.

I absolutely hated my cell phone when I first got it, but now that I have finally figured out how to use it, I can't imagine being without one. I use it mostly the way I would a land line (usually while sitting at the kitchen table), but the convenience/safety of having it available is wonderful (except at my parent's place, which seems to have NO cell reception).

Cable TV -- dunno. I'd hate to have to give it up. A lot of the programming is dreck, but it's the only way I can listen to NPR in this part of NoCal. Radio reception is non-existent at my house except in the guest room, and only on alternate Thursdays when the wind is from the south.

Love my remote controls, but I could live without them.

Bottled water -- only kept on hand for the emergency kit.

Gym membership -- never

Microwave -- when the current one dies it won't be replaced.

Architectural Digest -- I actually bought that once (before thumbing through the pages) thinking it was going to have something to do with architecture...


ETA: I can't remember the last time we went out for a meal or even a drink at the local pub. My current waste of money is $2/day for a coffee to take to the shop with me ($1.50 for coffee plus $.50 tip). If I stopped that, I'd have $40 dollars extra in my pocket at the end of the month. Hmmm.......

[BoSoxGal]

Needs:

Roof over head for self and dog (dog is critical need)
Food for self and dog
Clothing/shoes adequate for work
Sleep apnea treatment supplies
Library card

Wants:

All else - I'm damned lucky I am able to fulfill many of them. I NEED to remind myself of my blessings more frequently!

[loCAtek]

Well, the net access was fulfilled at the library for quite a while. Cable TV, I still don't have, but haven't cared about it. Have VHS (yes, still ) and DVD but the remote departed this earthly realm years ago, never to return; so, I get up and punch the buttons as needed.

Pay as you go phone, that I can open email with but surfing takes too log and costs too many minutes. Posting? Fuggetaboutit!

I like Smartwater when I can get it, when I can't I have a reusable sportsbottle I refill at work.

Gym Membership - the bare basic under $20, Kickboxing is on hold.

Microwave, check.

Subscriptions, wot?

[Miles]

As far as needs I can't complain other than the replenishment of the way too many brain cells I have destroyed over the years.

Wants, well I have learned wanting and wishing are one in the same. If you use them seriously things usually work out. The trick is to know what you really want not just what you tink you want.

[alice]

Although saving would help to build financial resilience, many found the government's rules forced them not to. Claire, a 20-year-old Melbourne mother of two, won't save because the Centrelink liquid assets test might cut off her benefit. Her partner saves, while she uses all of her income to pay bills.

Working is also regarded as risky. Jo, a single mother, worked extra hours to try to buy a fridge. When she told Centrelink of her extra income in a periodical report she ended up with no extra money and lived without a fridge for a year.

The report finds many of the coping mechanisms forced on vulnerable Australians by a sudden loss of income and Centrelink rules increase vulnerability rather than help to build defences against it.

Warning: I have to rant. Apologies in advance and I will understand if you want to ignore this post ....
This is a bleeding heart survey, and although I am immensely supportive of the charity work done by the Brotherhood of St Lawrence, they do operate on the premises that everyone is a victim, everyone is genuinely in need, and that everyone is truthful, honest and good. That's just simply not true - and of course the participants are going to answer the survey in a manner that makes them look hard done by because they're so used to getting everything for nothing they honestly feel hard done by and chuck a tantrum if they can't have even more.

Centrelink benefits were never intended to be enough for people to be saving and setting themselves up comfortably on. They were always meant to be 'welfare' help - to allow people to have the basic necessessities of food, shelter etc if they were not able to work.
Australia is extremely lucky to have a welfare system that provides this ongoing direct financial assistance, along with additional benefits such as rent assistance, cheaper utility and vehicle registration bills, cheaper or free transport, cheaper entry to many entertainment events, charities such as the brotherhood and salvos assisting with clothing, furniture, blankets, food and many other things if they still can't cope (for example if they blow their welfare money on drugs, gambling or other things - they can turn up at these places, openly discuss what they blew their money on, be and be given sympathetic and practical assistance). They also get free counselling - financial, emotional and any other type required. And free legal assistance. And free medical, free or very cheap pharmaceutical, and free access to clean needles and methadone programs etc if they have drug problems. And free education programs - employment and retraining programs for them, and free funding and help with books, uniforms etc for any kids educational needs. Free University. etc etc etc etc etc
And there are other free government and non-government agencies, programs and organisations specifically available to help people- anyone - who can't read or write , can't speak English, have different cultures, can't get child maintenance from their ex-partner, have depression or other unspecified general mental illness or just overall sadness and want to talk, need someone to argue on their behalf to businesses or even other govt agencies ... etc etc etc etc etc.
The list of financial help and any other free 'help' services for people in Australia, and particularly for those on Government benefits/Centrelink just goes on and on. And the more that's given, the more people try to rort the system, and the more people whinge because they just want more and more.

Even the beggars and homeless in Australia are all getting ongoing benefits - unemployment or disability or some other one. And access to all the above. It puts them in a different perspective to beggars and homeless people in other countries that are less 'generous' with the public purse.

Regarding the examples in the article:
1/ Centrelink was never meant to be enough for people to have good savings and investments - it's only meant to be for day-to-day basic needs. However - the liquid assets test does allow for a reasonable amount of savings and investments before it begins to affect the pension/benefit, and then there is a proportional scale before it cuts the pension/benefit out altogether- the allowable levels are more than enough to allow for savings in relations to budgeting for future needs, and build up a reasonable level of 'financial resilience'.
If she's in a position to be able to pay all the bills with her taxpayer funded benefit while her partner is able put aside money for savings, then they're not doing too badly and she shouldn't be whining.

2/ Centrelink allows people to work, and there is a proportional scale - you can earn up to so much before it affects the benefit, then there is a decrease of so many cents in the dollar for each dollar earned, gradually increasing. So that if single mum Jo worked extra hours to buy a fridge, she would absolutely have extra money in her pocket at the end of the day and could get her fridge. Unless she's on a pretty reasonable ongoing full time wage, in which case she shouldn't be claiming benefits anyway. And as a single mum on benefits she wouldn't have had to live a year without a fridge - the brotherhood, or salvo's or other organisation would organise one for her, even if it was on some sort of a loan for a secondhand one. Or she could get a no-interest advance from Centrelink on her family allowance benefits (which is a fortnightly allowance just for having the kids, and wouldn't get cut off unless she was earning more than $80,000 or maybe even higher per year), and use that to buy a second-hand fridge.

3/If 'vulnerable Australians' don't want the Centrelink 'rules', then go move to a country that doesn't have benefits. Or don't bloody apply for Centrelink. We have a very low employment rate and jobs getting farmed out to overseas workers because they can't get 'locals' to fill the positions (and not just skilled jobs - some jobs that just need old-fashioned hard work).
Maybe the grizzlers in the survay should experience living in a country that doesn't provide them with so much constant and ongoing help, and then maybe they would - maybe- appreciate what a bloody good wicket they're on here in Australia.

The only really 'disadvantaged' group in Australia, just in the context of the survey, is the middle income bracket - the bracket that earns too much money to get most of the free benefits thrown at the low income and welfare groups, but not enough for it not to matter to them. They may be not much over the cut-off thresh-hold, but as soon as they're over, the extra free 'help' stops - so that they actually end up having to pay full price for everything, and don't have access to all the assistance and services etc, and ironically end up with less disposable income and a lower 'living ability' than the low income groups.
But they still have enough to provide all the basic necessities, because they're living in a very lucky environment compared to some other countries.
End of rant and thank you for suffering or ignoring it....

[Sean]

Well said Alice.

Bloody well said!

I would love to add to it but you summed it up beautifully.

[@meric@nwom@n]

I need comfortable shoes. The rest is just dessert.

[Crackpot]

isn't that lesbian code?

[BoSoxGal]

If it is, I'm a lesbian, because I'd agree that is a need - bunions run in my maternal family, so despite avoiding heels most of my life, I'm developing them and comfortable footwear is a priority.

[Crackpot]

SO you're saying if it came down to men or shoes. Shoes would win. Eh?

[BoSoxGal]

Oh, HANDS DOWN.

There is a fairly lengthy list of things that would win over men, if my hand were forced. No man who would force my hand is worth my time.

[Crackpot]

I never said forcing hands.

I was picturing something like being offered comfy shoes but in return having to give up men.

[BoSoxGal]

Luckily I've not been forced to make such a Sophie's Choice.