Sunday, 18 November 2012

Wrong priorities

Now here's something that boils my piss:
Nicola Probert and Tony Hodge, 28 and 30, live in Bristol with their two sons, Finlay, four and Bobby, seven months.
I try to buy fresh food but costs are going up so much that our fortnightly shop – which costs about £80 – is getting smaller, almost every time. I make big sacrifices to buy Bobby the fresh peppers he likes so much but we simply can't afford to eat fresh stuff every day. Too often, it's frozen chips and processed chicken. The problem is that when you start buying less fresh food, you stop wanting it. My little boy tends not to go for it so, if I buy it, it tends to be wasted.
I sympathise about the cost of things increasing as I don't think that anyone keeping an eye on their spending could not have failed to notice their food bill going up. But I have two problems with this story; the first is the claim that child won't eat fresh food. From my experience as a parent, and I'm far from perfect in this regard, children soon learn to eat their fruit and veg if the other option is to go hungry. The key is persistence and not giving in, I'm the boss not them. The second is this:
We have the most basic Sky TV deal – £24 a month. I would get rid of that entirely if I had to but Tony would have a problem with that, because the sport is important to him. Getting rid of Sky would create problems in our relationship, and that's the last thing we need.
Tough shit. There are four Aldis in Bristol who do a weekly selection of fruit and veg for 39p/69p an item. Eggs are £1.35 a dozen, milk is £1 for four pints, a box of cereal is less than £1 as is 1kg of carrots. If you want meat then 1kg of frozen chicken breasts is £3.99 and a big pack of beef mince is around £2.50. You need to get rid of Sky so that you can feed your children properly.

1 comment:

  1. It's very hard to know what to make of these articles without being given a full explanation of what their income is from all sources (jobs, benefits, friends, etc) and what *all* their expenses are.

    The Guardian article wants to make out that we're all heartless bastards because they're struggling so much. But there would be quite a bit of help available through welfare benefits. The article completely ignores that.