Thanks for joining us and contributing to an interesting and varied conversation below. You can continue the discussion of Christmas films, fake news, “social sickies” and more below – we’ll be back with another Guardian Social soon. In the meantime we’re always happy to hear your feedback or suggestions for what you’d like to talk about to matthew.holmes@theguardian.com or sarah.marsh@theguardian.com

Millions of households (7.5 million to be exact) waiting for Universal credit are at risk of falling into debt, the Equality Trust has warned. That’s thanks to the perverse “built in delay” in the new benefit that means claimants have to go at least six weeks before receiving their first payment.

In one of my Hardworking Britain columns, I spoke to Kayleigh – a single mum in Lancashire – who, after being transferred to Universal credit this month, will now have to go through Christmas struggling to feed her two children.

When you consider there’ll be families like hers all over the country this winter, it feels like Conservative welfare reform is sliding into Dickensian parody. Even Scrooge may have found Universal credit hard to swallow.

Irene Baqué’s beautiful film documents the journey of women searching for their daughters, who have been lost, kidnapped, imprisoned or murdered while making the treacherous journey from Central America to the US. Mexico is the most dangerous leg of the voyage for these women, with cartels systematically killing any female who will not fulfil their criminal or sexual aims. Rape is so commonplace, many women resort to injecting contraceptives to prevent them becoming pregnant on the migrant route.

But what they are escaping, in countries like el Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala, is, for them, worth it. As one mother, Anita, puts it, the violence in these countries “can’t be called organised crime anymore. We consider it to be authorised crime.”

An article I really enjoyed recently came from the New York Times (although given the legal chatter I had to read it twice). It’s a long-read looking at wealthy businessman Robert Oesterlund. When he set out to divorce his wife, their fortune vanished. Journalist Nicholas Confessore follows the quest to find it, revealing the depths of an offshore financial system bigger than the US economy. It’s an absolutely fascinating read if you have the time.

Imagine being given just 72 hours to deposit your country’s most widely-used banknote before it becomes officially worthless.

In a bid to stem the flow of illegal currency trading – which is largely responsible for his country’s 500% inflation rate – and halt the profiteering of state-subsidised goods, Venezuela’s president Nicholas Maduro recalled every one of the country’s 100-bolivar notes (£3.93).

“To the people of Venezuela, especially pensioners, drivers, business people, housewives and workers … I tell you that you don’t need to worry,” said Maduro on Tuesday. “The measures are in your interests.”

But the Venezuelan’s I spoke to after we asked them to share their views said the move would only disrupt an already chaotic situation, making the lives of the most vulnerable even worse.

“The 100-bolivar note represents almost half of all the notes we have ... the first four notes – 2, 5, 10, 20 – are useless,”

“Yet the banks said they have not received [the new notes] ... we have almost no cash in our hands. After people changed the notes, they went to ATMs ... they received new 100 notes and had to make the line again to deposit those!”

The interior minister, Nestor Reverol, says criminals are hoarding 100-bolivar bills outside the country. But Loretta, an administrator, who lives in Caracas, isn’t convinced: “They should use the police and the intelligence services, not mess up the economy even more. It is madness! Many people don’t have bank accounts, many ... don’t have a way to pay with cards. And pensioners prefer to use cash because it is easier”

For many, the move has come too late. Carlos, 38, an accountant from Lara state, says criminals have already prospered, leaving the economy beyond repair.

“Now the government wants to appear as a saviour, concealing the fact that it let thousands of crooks enrich themselves.

“If you are a Venezuelan with US dollars, you take $10 and buy $45,” he says. “A heaven for the rich, a lot like Dante’s Inferno for the rest of us who live in concentric circles of suffering.”

You can read more about the situation in Venezuela here.

Our colleague James Walsh is looking for the most underwhelming Christmas stories as part of his series exploring the average in life ... Get involved and see the contributions so far with the GuardianWitness buttons, or by clicking below

What was your album of the year? Do you agree with the Guardian’s list which has Beyoncé at the top? Maybe you have another pick? Let us know below – or share your review here.

Every week we ask our team of moderators to tell us about a comment thread they’ve found particularly interesting – this week, they wanted to highlight the conversation you’ve been having on an article about the prime minister’s trousers ...

RoscoBoyle

12 December 2016 7:06pm

It isn't the gender, it's the Prime Minister "just about managing" to be clad - informally, for an 'off duty' interview - for about £1,300 (trousers and shoes).
Anyone who can't grasp that disconnect - in a society where the working poor and disabled members of society struggle to subsist while prisons fall apart and libraries are shut - is part of the problem.

RabBurnout

13 December 2016 1:16am

Well, May is very rich compared to most of the population, so it's no surprise to me that she spends so much on clothes, as I'm sure she does on her home, car, etc.

I don't care about her personal wealth, or that of Morgan- I know we live in a vastly unequal society, and that the Tories are mostly from wealthy backgrounds, and they don't feel guilty about this because they believe that their status represents their innate superiority.

What I care about is government policies that further inequality and reduction in the living standards of the most disadvantaged in society - of cutting benefits to people who can barely afford a couple of tins of baked beans and a pint of milk to feed their families.

Anyway, back to the trousers row - Hadley is right to say that this is sexist in the coverage it's generated.

FenryHlower

12 December 2016 7:51pm

At first I thought it was misogynistic to focus on the cost of her trousers considering Dave wore suits at 4 times the cost.

Then I thought that if he had worn a leather suit it would have attracted media criticism.

But then I thought that he ran away from being PM after taking the UK out the EU. Then he ran away from being an MP the day before his leadership was questioned into an inquiry about Syria. Yet the press still paint him as a jolly nice chap.

Then I thought it must be really difficult to run away if you're wearing a leather suit.

And then I thought about David Cameron lunging in a tight leather suit. And that's when I started drinking.

What do you think? Tell us in the comments.

As we charge into the final weeks of the year, we’re drowning in best-of lists – but why resist? With Rogue One just in UK cinemas and Passengers still to come, making an absolutely definitive assessment of the best films of the year may have to wait just a little. On the Guardian’s film desk though, we’ve been totting up our own scores – read the results here if you need a discussion-starter. And there’s plenty to choose from: you might go for Ken Loach’s searing I, Daniel Blake, or the swoony melodrama The Light Between Oceans; one-shot German thriller Victoria or Andrea Arnold’s road-trip American Honey. (The picture is a bit more confusing if you include all the films being talked up for Oscar contention, such as Martin Scorsese’s Silence or Hollywood musical homage La La Land, that aren’t actually out in the UK until next year). Still, there’s plenty to be going on with, so let battle commence …

What are your favourites? Share in the comments

The office Christmas party – a great time to relax, chat about things other than work and get to know your colleagues over mince pies and mulled wine ... Or, a series of awkward conversations while you look at the door and wish you could go through it, head to another pub and hang out with your real friends?

Have you had yours yet? We enjoyed the conversation beneath this article which suggests a third of us dread ours – with many pulling a “social sickie” to get out of it.

‘Drinking my weight in free wine’

LeftySpurs

12 December 2016 3:49pm

I quite enjoyed mine this year. Highlights were flouting the dress code and then trying to drink my weight in free wine to make up for all the unpaid overtime they've had out of me this year.

‘It was March before I could look my self in the eye’

stratblue

12 December 2016 2:59pm

Im self employed so it's just me at my Xmas party. I'm banning the booze this year, it's quite amazing how a few bottles of cheap plonk can lower the inhibitions, it was March before I could look my self in the eye while shaving.

‘Half the office looked at me in horror’

imaloserbaby

12 December 2016 12:47pm

This comment has been chosen by Guardian staff because it contributes to the debate

I'm not going to ours this year, and when people asked why I told them I didn't really feel like it. Half the office looked at me in horror, the other half with a mixture of admiration and envy. It made me feel strangely alive.

Why can’t you just say ‘Thanks, but I’m not coming’?

Langside

12 December 2016 12:44pm

Why can't you just say 'Thanks, but I'm not coming.' That's what I always did. There was some talk of making it compulsory, and whenever that happened I was quite forward about saying that I would be looking for another job then.
Later, when I was the boss, I asked she-who-must-be-obeyed (my secretary) to canvas opinion of whether to have one or not. Sometimes a majority did want one. The answer was to set a budget, divide it by the number of staff, and ask each if they wanted the cash or a party...... Never, ever, had a taker, and no day of sickie handovers after either.

What do you think? Do you look forward to the occasion? Perhaps you’ve already had your do and are filled with regret about what was said after one too many drinks? Share your views below in the comments.

How we’ve needed Planet Earth II. David Attenborough’s latest jaw-dropping journey into the natural world has provided much-appreciated respite from what has been a turbulent 2016.

Attenborough himself has noted that the show is a form of “two-way therapy” for those who “are reconnecting with a planet whose beauty is blemished”. Those restorative qualities are being widely embrace. Up to 10.6 million viewers have tuned in to witness, among other highlights, a flamingo parade, a nail-biting snake attack, and a bobcat faceplanting into snow which seemed to sum up how many of us have been feeling throughout this tumultuous year.

Have you been watching? Where else have you turned for pop-culture solace in the most uncertain of times? Let us know in the comments below.

The Sunday Times published an article claiming that students had been “told to use gender-neutral pronouns such as ‘ze’ rather than ‘he’ or ‘she’”. It was quickly reported almost verbatim by other outlets including the Huffington Post (since modified), Metro, the Independent and even Pink News.

It soon became clear that the story was at the very least an exaggeration. It had been written in vague terms, referring to “a students’ union leaflet” as the source of the claim, but the union quickly came out with a denial, saying that their advice had only ever been that people should identify their preferred pronoun when speaking at meetings. The Guardian reported on the OUSU statement and also published a comment piece by Jane Fae referring to the incident.

In recent weeks, talk of “fake news” has been the subject of much media discussion, and it’s worth considering our options when a false or misleading story starts doing the rounds.

• Should we take the high road and ignore it completely? Perhaps, but if it’s become a talking point, we may have a responsibility to our readers to report on it.

• Or should we publish a Snopes-style debunking? They can be very useful, but if we took that approach every time we were confronted with false or exaggerated claims that would quickly take up all our resources, as well as risking unhelpfully bringing attention to things (cf Pizzagate).

• Another option is not to treat it as news and approach it through a comment piece or a Pass Notes, where it’s easier to explain the situation without giving it too much weight.

Even more tricky is how to deal with stories that are only revealed as false much later on – for example, the Intercept reporter who months later admitted he had fabricated messages or Rolling Stone’s notorious A Rape on Campus story. The Guardian has also recently had to retract articles after sources said they had not spoken to the reporter who quoted them.

From deliberately false stories to misleading exaggerations to honest mistakes, there’s no one-size-fits-all answer. I’d be interested to know how our readers feel about these stories and how they think the Guardian should treat “fake news” in its various forms.

Happy Friday and welcome to our weekly social, where we discuss the week’s best news and comment with readers. We have lots of great topics coming up today (join us from 12pm until around 4.30pm) – look forward to getting started.