eastbank Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 There are far more that are quite happy and very well off, out of your lot of struggling people, how many of them don't have a tv, mobile phone, don't smoke, don't drink, don't do drugs, don't have computers, don't have computer games consoles? Take away any that have any of the above then tell me how many are left living in poverty because if you can still afford ANY of the above out of your weekly income then AFAIAC they are NOT living in poverty. Just take a look at any of the charity/news items from the African countries, you know, the ones where the kids faces are covered with flies! THAT IS LIVING IN POVERTY! I don't think I have ever seen anyone in this country looking like that. So, it really IS THAT SIMPLE! no because our kids eat the flies.....quite tasty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted August 8, 2012 Share Posted August 8, 2012 You never will see anyone looking like that in a cold country, just as you will never see an African dieing of hypothermia. It doesn't mean they aren't poor. Poverty in this country is more comparable with a country like Rumania. We have people on a very poor diet, and going hungry. As for your comment about TVs, mobile phones, games consoles etc, some may have them from before they were out of work, but when they break can't afford to have them mended or replaced. As for suggesting they all smoke, drink and do drugs: well there's nothing like stereotyping is there? Says more about your attitude than theirs... Says a lot about you that you can't read a post, I did not say anyone smoked etc, I asked you of they did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybare Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 I think that the concept of poverty has changed and the idea of how many things one needs to live has changed too. As far as I'm concerned if I've got money to buy food and I've also got a TV, the funds for an internet connection, phone and to pay the basic bills too, then I'm not in poverty even if I do need to budget to buy everything that's not an everyday essential (clothing is bought mostly second hand etc). If I didn't have a very small mortgage and was paying for rented accommodation then I would be in much worse situation though, so I would be in the position of having to forego some of the things that others may consider essential. For the record, I don't smoke and rarely drink. I don't go out in the evenings except for a pub meal every month or two. Well that sounds far more depressing than actual poverty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 The official definition is relative poverty. It doesn't always have to exist, it's a measure of income inequality. If there wasn't such a large gap between rich & poor then there wouldn't be any relative poverty. You're right that it's not the same as absolute poverty. If you're in relative poverty it doesn't mean you're starving. It just means that you're poor relative to the people around you. It's not an ideal measure though, the current accepted formula doesn't take into account any accumulated wealth. A retired millionaire living off their savings may come into the definition. Only if he's invested it very badly. Just a single million should even at the rates you can find in high street banks be generating a 2.5% return, which is a 25k income, and well invested it could be generating twice that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansheff Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 "Are we living in poverty", he asks on the internet from his computer. Could be using an I Pad/Phone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.