European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.

Cost of Living

by In Wales
Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 09:31:12 AM EST

We are all well aware of the increasing cost of living due to rising food prices, credit crunches, peak oil, biofuels, unfair tax and anything we wish to blame but the underlying issue of poverty in a developed country is one that there is no justification for.

There have been diaries on this topic before - on UK's target to halve child poverty by 2010 which isn't anywhere near being met, other diaries on living costs, reusing, cutting down on what we need to live on and essentials vs non-essentials.

BBC Online Living standards quiz asks us what items people said they could not live without.

A fairly comprehensive article on BBC online discusses a report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation which tells us,

A single person in Britain needs to earn at least £13,400 a year before tax for a minimum standard of living, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) says.
A couple with two children need to spend £370 a week and a pensioner couple need £201 excluding housing and childcare costs, the charity says.
Film tickets, a bottle of wine and a bird feeder were on the list of goods people need to participate in society.
The JRF's figures are higher than some government estimates.

The report has taken 2 years to put together so it is entirely possible that the cost could be higher now. This could lead to debate on whether some items that people list are really essential or not, but people's perceptions about what they need in order to participate and not be excluded from society can be quite telling.

JRF press release states:

"Naturally, people's circumstances and preferences vary, and this research does not dictate how people should spend their money. But it does start to pin down how much people think is needed to be able to afford basic opportunities and choices that allow proper participation in society."

So it is a cultural and social question that is being asked rather than an attempt at defining what the basic minimum needs are in terms of providing warmth food and shelter. There is more to standard and quality of living and avoiding poverty of opportunity in addition to meeting these basic needs.

Providing an arbritary figure or measure of relative income doesn't tackle the issue of what is needed for meeting basic needs and allowing a certain level of access to participate in society.

The JRF's report took in the views of people from a variety of social groups, in rural and urban areas, before coming up with an average for a cross-section of society.
It concluded that a car was not required by any social group, nor were cigarettes, but some alcohol consumed at home was acceptable.
The JRF accepted that it could not be shown that everyone living below its minimum income standard would be in "hardship".

Some interesting moral judgements played a part here, for example alcohol was acceptable but cigarettes were seen as a luxury that families did not need. Very interesting was the view from all groups that a car was a luxury which has promoted much criticism in the comments on this page.

And before I get back to work, have a nice graph!

. Home
. About
. Contact
. New User Guide
. FAQ
. Search
. Search (Google)
. Archives (Wiki)
Art, Economics, Energy, Environment, EU Politics, Mech & Tech, By Country

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Cost of Living | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Cost of Living (none / 1)

Do not question the car ...

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 09:49:51 AM EST

Re: Cost of Living (none / 1)

I can live without a car since I'm in the middle of a city but having lived a rural existence for most of my childhood, not having access to decent public transport was hugely detrimental in terms of access to opportunities. (We had a car but I was never taken anywhere.)

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 09:53:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cost of Living (4.00 / 2)

Part of the problem with the bicycle option is that much of the rural infrastructure isn't designed to be bike friendly ; but that could change. My father still lives at the limit between suburbia and rural land, and can bike to work...

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 10:03:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Rural roads (4.00 / 2)

much of the rural infrastructure isn't designed to be bike friendly

Yup, on many rural roads there is barely enough room for two cars to go past one another safely, adding cyclists to the mix usually ends with dead cyclists.

...but that could change.

True, but they cost money and people don't like paying taxes. Plus wider roads still are dangerous to cyclists. What really is needed for safety is dedicated cycle roads or lanes separate from automobile traffic.

by Magnifico on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 02:43:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rural roads (none / 1)

Yup, on many rural roads there is barely enough room for two cars to go past one another safely, adding cyclists to the mix usually ends with dead cyclists.

You could always subtract the cars from the mix.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 02:54:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Road maintenance (none / 1)

True enough... peak oil is doing that now. However, how will the roads be maintained? A return to steam-powered construction equipment?

by Magnifico on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:02:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Road maintenance (none / 0)

Synthetic hydrocarbons from renewable electricity?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:10:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Road maintenance (4.00 / 2)

A more serious concern than the machinery is that presumably the tar used for road building is a byproduct of oil refining for fuels. If you don't have oil, where do you get the tar from? What other materials are good for road surfacing?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:12:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Road surfacing (4.00 / 3)

If you don't have oil, where do you get the tar from? What other materials are good for road surfacing?

Possibly Sugar or vegetable oil (links via Wikipedia's Asphalt article). Brick, cobblestone, or cement could also be used, but uneven road joints are a pain to cyclists' joints. Plus they don't do well in freezing/heating environments.

by Magnifico on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:25:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Road surfacing (4.00 / 3)

Building a flat cycle path is much, much cheaper and easier than a road that has to accommodate vehicles weighting a few tons ; indeed, asphalt is not all that necessary for a good enough for biking path.

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 05:26:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rural roads (4.00 / 2)

Magnifico:

Yup, on many rural roads there is barely enough room for two cars to go past one another safely, adding cyclists to the mix usually ends with dead cyclists.

Rural roads are a lot safer for cyclists, from my experience. Frequently there isnt even space for one and a half cars to pass each other, and rural drivers are generally aware that round the next corner there's likely to be sheep/cows/someone on a horse/deer/tractors covered in implements that don't mix with cars. I've known of far more people killed/injured in urban areas than are on Rural roads.

Interviewer: What do you believe is behind this recent increase in terrorist bombings? Helpmann: Bad sportsmanship

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:25:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Drivers on rural roads (4.00 / 2)

I wonder if the cyclist accidents on rural roads are higher or lower when density is factored in?

From my experiences on rural roads as a cyclist is that drivers in America seem to believe that neither tractors and farm equipment nor bicycles belong on their roads. Farm animals are rarely on the roads at all and deer are roadkill.

by Magnifico on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:29:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drivers on rural roads (4.00 / 4)

Appears that that is true, and lack of density is hiding serious risks.

Safety of Cycleways | Cycles of all sorts

Direct rear impacts with cyclists are a more prominent collision type in arterial/rural road type situations. When they occur in such circumstances they are also associated with significantly increased risk of fatality. Data collated by the OECD indicates that rural locations account for 35% or more of cycling fatalities in Denmark, Finland, France, Great Britain, Japan, the Netherlands and Spain.^[7] UK police-recorded cycling collision data indicates that at non-junction locations, where a cyclist was struck directly from behind, there was an overall fatality rate of 17%. The risk of fatality increases with speed limit of the road. Where such collisions occurred on 30mph roads a 5% fatality rate was recorded, climbing to 13% at 40mph, 21% at 60mph and a fatality rate of 31% on 70mph roads.

Cycle paths arent safe either.

Safety of Cycleways | Cycles of all sorts

In Helsinki, research has shown that cyclists are safer cycling on the roads mixed in with the traffic than they are using that city's 800 km of cycle paths See Finnish Research. The Berlin police reputedly came to a similar conclusion in the 1980s. In Berlin 10% of the roads have cycle paths but these produce 75% of the cycling casualties Overview of Berlin situation (in German). In the UK town of Milton Keynes it has been shown that cyclists using the "off-road" cycleway network have, on a per journey basis, a significantly higher rate of fatal car-bicycle collisions than cyclists who simply cycle on the ordinary unsegregated roads Milton Keynes Redway study.

Interviewer: What do you believe is behind this recent increase in terrorist bombings? Helpmann: Bad sportsmanship

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 03:48:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drivers on rural roads (4.00 / 2)

In the UK town of Milton Keynes it has been shown that cyclists using the "off-road" cycleway network have, on a per journey basis, a significantly higher rate of fatal car-bicycle collisions than cyclists who simply cycle on the ordinary unsegregated roads Milton Keynes Redway study.

How is that possible, where do the collisions happen?

Anyway, this is another data point for the theory that making roads "safer" actually makes them more dangerous.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 05:56:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drivers on rural roads (4.00 / 2)

I suppose its not all cycleways, and that cyclists when they get onto your actual roads don't ride as safely, and drivers are not expecting them to be there as much.

Interviewer: What do you believe is behind this recent increase in terrorist bombings? Helpmann: Bad sportsmanship

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 11:09:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drivers on rural roads (none / 1)

Also, cars are evil and like to hunt in packs for stray cyclists after dark.

I did a run to Milton Keynes a few weeks ago, I can understand how it might not be cycle-helmet paradise. Traffic management is just plain weird compared to most of the UK. It would be useful to get some replication for that research in London and - say - Bristol.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 08:19:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Drivers on rural roads (4.00 / 2)

Intersections. Partly because visibility is poorer than on properly designed intersections, partly because drivers don't bother to look. One reason I preferred cycling in Paris to Munich was the lack of compulsory bike paths. In the U.S. their use is usually optional, so I could chose to use them when I thought they were safe, and avoid them otherwise.

by gk (g k quattro due due sette "at" gmail.com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 01:15:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rural roads (4.00 / 2)

But people who know their local rural roads really well drive at stupid speeds since they know how to take all the bends etc. Unless certain roads are particularly known for cyclists.

There's also the additional 'road rage' factor of being frustrated by a cyclist you need to overtake and cutting too close to them.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 04:44:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rural roads (none / 0)

I spend most of my time on local rural roads. The only way to keep cyclists safe would be to drive at cyclist speeds. I'm all for segregation - cycling on the main local road here is madness. There's a nearby canal which would be perfect as an alternative, but it doesn't seem to be used much.

Cars are useful for more than personal transport. The minivan angle is under-appreciated. I regularly do recycling runs which completely fill the car. And I'm taking some prints to a gallery tomorrow. It would be impossible to transport them on a bike, and it would need multiple trips with serious inconvenience and possible glass breakage by public transport. Even a regular shopping run would be a struggle on a bike.

I suppose these are all optional, or the community horse and cart service would be a realistic alternative. Which might be true. But while oil is a very stupid idea, that's not inherently a given for cars. There are non-trivial costs associated with moving some things very slowly, moving them without protection from the weather, or not being able to move them at all.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 08:13:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (none / 1)

I know this is about Britain, but in suburban America — if you have younger children, giving up the car means giving up (or doing significantly fewer) extracurricular and enrichment activities such as sport practices and meets, music lessons, and art classes. I guess that would increase overall money saved, but at what long term cost to the children's development? I don't have a good answer to that.

by Magnifico on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 02:40:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (4.00 / 3)

That was the situation I was in due to living with family who refused to do anything with me or take me anywhere or give me money for the bus. The extra curricular stuff I did was on Tuesdays and thursdays when school ran a free late bus home (can't keep kids in detention otherwise) but I couldn't join any teams or clubs that would have needed my parents to take me anywhere on weekends or evenings. It cut off so many opportunities for me and I really need those opportunities to mix with my peers, develop confidence, new skills, especially social skills.

I'm lucky I was resilient enough to plough on and make the most of everything (a free education at) university offered and more or less made up for it all there without any bloody encouragement from immediate family.

But I'd guess that even with willing and supportive parents, if they just can't provide that kind of access for their children then they lose out big time.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 04:41:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (none / 0)

But in areas where there is public transportation, you can do it without owning a car. I've been doing it for the last four years: accompanying my daughters to various activities (or their friends' homes) and picking them up late, either to take the bus or walking back home. It's a little more time-consuming, but it's feasible (but we live in the city).

"Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char

by Melanchthon on Wed Jul 2nd, 2008 at 06:59:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (4.00 / 2)

In the community where I was a teenager, which is a pretty distant suburb of a large city, you can take public transport toward the city, but not to get around within the actual suburban community. So if I lived there today (which thankfully I don't and never will again) I could take a bus to the subway and the subway into the city (a journey that takes an hour and a half each way) but I couldn't take the bus to the grocery store or to the mall or to the library.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 05:37:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (none / 0)

Was biking practical?

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 05:52:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (4.00 / 2)

For some things, yes, but the distances were quite far, there were some formidable hills and most of the main roads had no bike lanes. Eventually, there was a bike trail connecting my suburb to the next one, which made the library accessible by bike, but the grocery store was within my own suburb and hard to do on a bike because there was a major hill that I struggled with even as a very fit 16-year-old athlete.

The whole region was designed for people with cars. I think it's a bit more bikeable now, with the addition of new bike trails, but it seems that the bike trails are built around the idea of people cycling long distances for exercise, not to commute from place to place within the community. There's a lot more asphalt dedicated to parking lots than to cycle trails or lanes.

by the stormy present (stormypresent aaaaaaat gmail etc) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 06:13:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Do not question the car ... (none / 1)

It's a pathetic shame that art, music, and sports are extra-curricular activities. There is no reason why these things should not be part of normal school life.

For all of its various faults, that is one thing I have to say about Japanese public schools - they do a really excellent job of offering a comprehensive arts, music, and sports component to school life.

by Zwackus on Sun Jul 6th, 2008 at 07:41:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Cost of Living | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]