Latest news with #poverty
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Tory council leader is criticised for posting Facebook picture of luxury steak dinner and bottle of red wine with message asking: 'Wonder what all the poor people are doing?' Headline goes here
A Tory council leader has come under fire after posting a Facebook picture of her luxury steak dinner with a message saying: 'Wonder what all the poor people are doing?' Kay Mason Billig, 61, who leads Norfolk County Council and is a former Tory parliamentary candidate insisted that she was making a self-depreciating joke about her circumstances rather than mocking people in poverty But opposition councillors criticised her comment as 'shocking' and she is now facing calls for her resignation. The post by Mrs Mason Billig who is also chairman of the Standards Committee of South Norfolk Council, appeared on one of her publicly visible Facebook accounts on Saturday evening and has since been deleted. One of her pictures showed a freshly-cooked Tomahawk steak ready to be carved on a board, beside a bottle of red wine, a bowl of salad and a potato dish in peppercorn sauce. Another image featured her husband Michael sitting at a table and grinning while holding up a glass of wine, alongside the words: 'Wonder what all the poor people are doing?'. Tomahawk steaks which are thick cut with a long rib bone attached so they resemble an axe are usually cooked in the oven after being pan fried, and are often sold by Waitrose and Tesco to mark special occasions such as Father's Day last weekend. Mrs Mason Billig's steak is believed to be from Tesco's Finest range which was last week selling Tomahawk steaks for between £25 and £32.50 depending on the weight, complete with star shapes of wild garlic butter. Tesco described its Tomahawk steaks online as being 'succulent and flavoursome' and 'matured on the bone for 30 days for maximum flavour and tenderness'. The wine in her picture is thought to be an award-winning bottle of Amarone Della Valpolicella. Similar bottles of the Italian red are currently priced at £21 in Morrisons. Mrs Mason Billig, who represents the Loddon division south of Norwich and reportedly gets allowances of more than £51,000 a year from the county council, failed to answer multiple emails and messages from MailOnline asking for her to comment on the post. But she told the Eastern Daily Press today: 'My husband and I have sometimes called ourselves 'the poor people'. 'It's a private joke as we live fairly modestly, so when we have a treat, we will sometimes post about it. This is asking if friends wonder what we (the poor people) are doing. 'It's not intended to be about anyone else and is no reflection on people who are less well off than ourselves. It's a bad state of affairs when I can't even joke about myself without it being twisted into something it isn't. Talking about her post being leaked, she added: 'I am deeply disappointed that someone has decided to be this horrible when they must certainly know it's actually self-deprecation. What a sad world we live in.' But Steve Morphew, leader of the Labour group at Norfolk County Council, said: 'People like to have council leaders who show they are in touch, care about the plight of others and show humility and pride in the public positions they hold. 'This is a nauseating example of the exact opposite. I find nothing amusing here.' Michael Rosen, the Labour group leader on South Norfolk Council, told MailOnline: 'It is quite a shocking thing to say when we are freshly out of the winter period when so many people in Norfolk had to make a choice between heating or eating. 'It 100 per cent calls into question her suitability to lead Norfolk County Council which has a number of the country's most deprived areas in its boundaries. A lot of Norfolk residents have to make careful choices about what they eat very night. She is really letting her own side down by posting things like this.' Dr Catherine Rowett, the Green Party group leader on Norfolk County Council, said: 'I find it really distressing that someone in public service could be so snobbish, so devoid of empathy. 'She surely needs to resign now! Norfolk is a county with extremes of inequality. People are struggling, with two or three jobs, wishing they could see their children for Father's Day. 'My thoughts would be on how we could help those families enjoy Father's Day too, rather than mocking people who are less fortunate.' A senior Norfolk Conservative, quoted by the Eastern Daily Press, said they believe Mrs Mason Billig, should quit over the post. They said: 'I think she should resign. We are entitled to a private life and to let our hair down, but I don't think anybody should degrade those less well off than others. 'Under Conservative party guidance, there's a case that she has brought the party into disrepute and the party should be carrying out an investigation. 'This falls well below the Nolan Principles for Public Life.' Another Tory said: 'Most politicians are wise to avoid social media. It's hard to win votes, but easy to lose them.' A furious source who forwarded a screenshot of Mrs Mason Billig's post to MailOnline said: 'I couldn't believe it when I saw it. 'Lots of people post pictures of their nice dinners, but her comment about poor people and wondering what they were eating was in incredibly bad taste.' The source who asked not to be named, added: 'I have had to deal with the county council on occasion and they have a reputation for being so righteous with the letters they send out and employment stuff you have to fill in. 'Yet you have the leader of the council writing silly comments like this. She must have realised it was a stupid remark because she deleted it.' Mrs Mason Billig stood unsuccessfully as the Conservative parliamentary candidate for the Norwich North constituency in 2001. She has been a South Norfolk district councillor since 2011, and was the council's deputy leader from 2018 until her appointment as the county council leader in May 2023. She was re-elected as a county council for the second time in 2021. Mrs Mason Billig is reported to have had a 'legal background' with a career in the marine sciences industry in Great Yarmouth which led to her becoming a Group Company Secretary. A spokesperson for Tory-run Norfolk County Council said they could not comment as Mrs Mason Billig's Facebook post was 'not relevant' to her council work. The spokesperson added: ''It is not posted on any council accounts or relevant to her (council) business so it is not one we can comment on at the council. It's certainly one she may be able to comment on. A message has been forwarded on to her.' Daniel Elmer, the leader of Tory-run South Norfolk Council, failed to respond to calls for comment. His council's communication team was also approached and did not comment. Mrs Mason Billig was criticised earlier this week for comments made during a debate over Norfolk County Council's vision for a single council for when all eight of the county's councils are abolished and new ones created. She said children could die should plans to abolish all eight Norfolk councils and create new ones result in two or three different councils delivering social services.
Independent Singapore
5 hours ago
- General
- Independent Singapore
'Do Singaporeans think that giving money to the poor makes them lazy?' Redditor asks
Photo: Reddit screengrab/u/michuang74 SINGAPORE: When a local Reddit user asked if Singaporeans disapprove of giving money to the poor as it sends the wrong message, it sparked a lively discussion, with many commenters bringing up important points for and against such a scheme. In a post on r/askSingapore on Thursday (June 19), u/AjaxCooperwater wrote, ' Generally, do Singaporeans think it is a bad idea to give money to the poor because it encourages laziness and de-incentivises job hunting?' They added that they personally do not believe that giving money to the poor 'encourages any form of stereotype behaviour,' but genuinely wanted to know the reason behind such perspectives, asking also if anyone has personally seen such a case occurring. The post was somewhat similar to another one from u/AjaxCooperwater earlier this week, when they asked how Singaporeans feel about Universal Basic Income . 'If you see a very old lady or an old man who is handicapped with one leg or one arm, do you think that even if they try hard looking for a job, any boss would want them? So, try to give them some money whenever you come across them. Sometimes, due to dignity, they refuse to accept your money without you taking something from them, such as a packet of tissues or a lottery ticket. Just take it, and say thank you,' one wrote. 'Just help if you want and in a position of being able to afford to.. most importantly, from the heart. Even one word of kindness is a type of charity,' commented another. A Reddit user outlined the reasons why a person may be hesitant to give money to the poor, which have nothing to do with being encouraged to be lazy. People are afraid of getting scammed, or are concerned that the money they give will end up in the pockets of crime syndicates. Another reason is that people from neighbouring countries might end up coming to Singapore to beg. This is why they prefer for social workers to reach out to people in need instead. 'Meritocracy can drive us to be unkind and elitist. When we work hard and land a good education and job, we believe it's our hard work that led us to be successful, and those who are poor are poor because they did not work as hard as us. But reality is never as simple as that. Success requires connections, hard work, and luck. If you're born well off, it's easier to focus on your studies, easier to build good connections,' another observed. /TISG Read also: 'JB businesses will be happy' — Singaporeans debate pros and cons of Universal Basic Income
Mail & Guardian
a day ago
- Health
- Mail & Guardian
A grandmother is a library: Support for their caregiving role is vital
About one in three children in South Africa is brought up by a grandparent.. Photo: Delwyn Verasamy/M&G) In the heart of communities across South Africa, there exists a quiet, unrecognised force holding families together: Gogo. Grandmothers are the true heroes of our nation, bringing up millions of children in the face of hardship, loss and poverty, often without support and recognition. With HIV, unemployment and other socio-economic issues having torn through the fabric of many South African households, it is frequently Gogo who steps in to care for the youngest members of the family. In fact, an estimated one in three children in South Africa is brought up by a grandparent. These women are pillars of strength, love and resilience. They nurture children with wisdom passed down through generations, instilling values, providing meals with their limited resources and ensuring their grandchildren are safe and cared for. In many cases, they are doing this while grappling with their own health problems, financial strain and the trauma of having lost their own children. Nowhere is their influence more evident than in the critical early years of a child's life. In early childhood development (ECD), the role of a caregiver is central. Studies show that the quality of interaction and stimulation a child receives in their first five years directly affects their cognitive, emotional and physical development. Gogos, though often lacking formal training, naturally embody the foundational principles of ECD through storytelling, song, structured routines and consistent emotional support. There is an African proverb that honours grandmothers: 'A grandmother is a library.' This proverb speaks to the wisdom, stories, traditions and life lessons that grandmothers carry and pass down through generations. They are living repositories of knowledge and culture. But many of these grandmothers face immense difficulties in getting formal support systems or ECD resources. Too often, they are excluded from training opportunities and community programmes because they do not fit the typical profile of an ECD practitioner. Recognising and empowering gogos is vital to the success of any community-based ECD strategy. Programmes that include grandmothers in training, provide access to parenting resources and connect them to early-learning centres can significantly boost early-learning outcomes for vulnerable children. As a nation, it is time we celebrated gogos not just as caregivers, but as educators, nurturers and community builders. They should be empowered as key partners in bringing up the next generation. Theresa Michael is the chief executive of Afrika Tikkun Bambanani, which recognises grandmothers as primary caregivers, offering them parenting resources, training and access to early learning tools.
Washington Post
a day ago
- General
- Washington Post
Is the American Dream still alive today?
Whether a person grew up in a crowded tenement building, at the end of a dusty road in farm country, or traveled over land and sea to get there, the promise of America was always a better life for its striving workers — and especially their children. That was the dream. Today there is widespread skepticism among the public that the American Dream — however they personally define it — is still possible. For many, the notion that hard work can reliably lift people up and that the next generation will be financially better off is simply a relic of the past. But what's the reality? Take our quiz and test your knowledge of the facts. ✓ Check Yourself The Post partnered with Gapminder, a Swedish nonprofit, to survey 600 people ages 18 to 65. The sample was balanced to reflect U.S. demography. 1 of 5 In the U.S. in 1970, around 90% of 30-year-olds earned more money than their parents had at about the same age. What is that number for the 30-year-olds of today? Around 30% Around 50% Around 70% Story continues below advertisement Advertisement 2 of 5 Around 40% of Black children born into poverty in the U.S. in 1978 remained in poverty as adults. What was this number for Black adults born in 1992? Around 30% Around 50% Around 70% 3 of 5 What factor do researchers think is the top predictor of whether a person who is born into a low-income family becomes middle class in the U.S.? Working close to home Having high-income friends More available jobs Two chairs in Hawthorne — a quiet, suburban-feeling neighborhood that sits north of Friendship Heights and Chevy Chase — on June 21, 2019, in D.C. (Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post) 4 of 5 What share of adults under 50 in the U.S. say they have either achieved the American Dream or on their way to achieving it? Around 25% Around 45% Around 65% 5 of 5 Where in the U.S. are children born into poor families more likely to be upwardly mobile and earn more than their parents as adults? Northeast (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania) Midwest (Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska) Pacific West (California, Oregon, Washington) 0 of 5 Your score:
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
President Donald Trump Broke His Vow Not to Tax Social Security Benefits -- and Retirees Are Being Given This Concession Instead
Getting as much as possible out of Social Security isn't a luxury for most retirees -- it's a borderline necessity. Though President Trump's pledge to end the tax on Social Security benefits had overwhelming support from retirees, it would have been a fiscally irresponsible move. Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill offers a concession directed at low to mid earners aged 65 and up. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › In May, the average monthly Social Security benefit for retired workers hit an important milestone by crossing above $2,000 for the first time in the program's history. Though this is a fairly modest monthly payout, Social Security income plays a foundational role for most retirees in helping make ends meet. Based on an analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Social Security helped pull more than 22 million people above the federal poverty line in 2023, including roughly 16.3 million adults aged 65 and above. What's more, the poverty rate for retirees would soar to an estimated 37.3% if Social Security didn't exist, compared to the 10.1% poverty rate with Social Security income, as of 2023. For many retirees, getting as much out of Social Security as possible isn't a luxury -- it's a borderline necessity to ensure a rock-solid financial foundation. When Trump campaigned on the idea of eliminating the taxation of Social Security benefits, which would allow select recipients to hang onto more of the benefits they receive, his idea garnered overwhelming support from current retirees. But with Trump's One, Big, Beautiful Bill working its way through Congress, it's become clear that the president's vow to shelve the taxation of benefits has been broken and replaced by a concession instead. On July 31, then-candidate Donald Trump posted on his social media platform Truth Social that "Seniors should not pay tax on Social Security." This message was followed up just months after his Jan. 20 inauguration with a speech during a town hall event that proclaimed: In the coming weeks and months, we will pass the largest tax cuts in American history -- and that will include no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, and no tax on overtime. It's called The One, Big Beautiful Bill. Based on an informal poll from nonpartisan senior advocacy group The Senior Citizens League, well over 90% of retired survey-takers believe Social Security benefits shouldn't be subject to federal taxation. Taxing a portion of Social Security benefits for select individuals and jointly filing couples was implemented following the signing of the Social Security Amendments of 1983 into law. Beginning in 1984, up to 50% of benefits could be subject to the federal tax rate if provisional income -- adjusted gross income + tax-free interest + one-half of benefits -- surpassed $25,000 for single filers and $32,000 for couples filing jointly. A second tax tier allowing up to 85% of Social Security benefits to be subject to the federal tax rate was added a decade later for individuals and joint filers topping $34,000 and $44,000 in provisional income, respectively. Aside from the common misconception that this represents a form of double taxation, the reason the tax on benefits is so disliked is because these income thresholds that were introduced in the mid-1980s and mid-1990s haven't once been adjusted for inflation. Due to rising wages and salaries over time, coupled with near-annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), the percentage of senior households subject to this tax has grown from around 10% four decades ago to approximately 50% of all senior households today. The president's One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which was narrowly passed by the House of Representatives and is currently being discussed by lawmakers in the Senate, covers a laundry list of tax changes. It would make the personal income tax brackets under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (which are on track to sunset on Dec. 31, 2025) permanent, increase the state and local income tax deduction, and provide temporary tax relief for overtime pay and tips for four years to qualified individuals. But one key provision that's missing is Trump's vow to eliminate the tax on Social Security benefits. If you're wondering why this promise failed to pass muster, look no further than the economics supporting America's leading social program. Social Security has three sources of funding: The 12.4% payroll tax on wages and salary up to $176,100 (as of 2025). In 2023, the payroll tax accounted for north of 91% of the income collected. The interest income earned on the asset reserves of the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund (OASI) and Disability Insurance trust fund. This excess capital is required by law to be invested in special-issue, interest-bearing government bonds. The taxation of Social Security benefits. The OASI's asset reserves are forecast to run dry by 2033. Though the OASI is in no danger of bankruptcy or insolvency, it does mean most of Social Security's interest income will go away over the next eight years. Furthermore, depleting the OASI's asset reserves would result in sweeping benefit cuts of up to 21% in eight years for retired workers and survivor beneficiaries, according to the 2024 Social Security Board of Trustees Report. Removing the tax on benefits at a time when Social Security is financially challenged would be a fiscally poor decision that can expedite the OASI's asset reserve depletion timeline and potentially result in steeper sweeping benefit cuts. Additionally, President Trump may not have wanted to risk the passage of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill on his "no tax on Social Security" provision. Amending the Social Security Act requires 60 votes in the upper house of Congress, and it's not even clear if all 53 members of his party in the Senate would vote in favor of such a measure. Rather than risk the potential embarrassment of defeat, the president left this provision out of his flagship bill. Although retirees aren't going to be getting rid of the hated tax on Social Security benefits anytime soon, the president and/or lawmakers did throw a concession into The One, Big, Beautiful Bill that's designed to help retirees who need it most. Donald Trump's original plan to shelve the tax on benefits would have padded the pocketbooks of Social Security's highest earners -- i.e., the roughly 50% of senior households whose provisional income surpassed the thresholds that trigger federal taxation on a portion of their Social Security income. The concession placed in The One, Big, Beautiful Bill is designed to reward low- and middle-income retirees who need the financial boost. Keeping in mind that bills are subject to change in Congress, one of the key provisions for retirees in the current bill would temporarily increase the standard deduction for single filers aged 65 and above by $4,000 (and $8,000 for qualifying couples filing jointly) from 2025 through 2028. The catch is that single filers and joint-filing couples would need to have modified adjusted gross incomes below $75,000 and $150,000, respectively, before a phase-out would kick in. This ensures that low- to mid-income retirees are the ones who'd receive the boost in their standard deduction. This enhanced deduction would come atop the extra $2,000 single filers and $3,200 married filers are already able to deduct if aged 65 and above. While this beefed-up standard deduction for seniors aged 65 and older is far less, in nominal dollar terms, than what would be seen if the taxation of benefits was eliminated, it does direct the benefit to those who need it most and likely rely on Social Security as a necessary source of income. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. President Donald Trump Broke His Vow Not to Tax Social Security Benefits -- and Retirees Are Being Given This Concession Instead was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
