Forums
Off Topic Chat Lounge
Quick find code: 23-24-312-63626936
Niyah
said
:
I wonder what Philip Hammond's definition of poverty is? What is your definition of poverty? What is the UK's definition of poverty? How is poverty measured?
I assume you guys have all read the report which the article is based on, right?
Didn't think so. I don't blame you. It's 145 pages.
Apparently you can have hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, and still be considered "in poverty". Apparently there are 1.4 million people "in poverty" that own their own homes outright.
Anyone with very low or no personal available resources would be judged to be in poverty,
despite the fact that they could be being supported by a partner, parent or other family member. So even if you're living in a million dollar mansion, driving a BMW, with thousands of dollars of spending cash in your pocket, if you personally aren't making any money because all of your needs are paid for by someone else, you're considered "in poverty".
Think about that. That means all children and all nonworking partners in a one-earner household are considered as being "in poverty".
If you're simply drawing a line at the bottom 35% of wages in the country, and claiming anything below that is "in poverty" regardless of how well those people are living, is that really an accurate representation of "poverty"?
If you're basing "poverty" as not having much money left over after paying debts, mortgage, bills, and household expenses, etc., is that really an accurate representation? Is someone who earns $200k a year, but spends the majority of it without saving anything actually "in poverty"?
Perhaps Phil simply disagrees with the changes to how poverty is now measured,
If you change how poverty is measured, you can drastically increase or decrease the percentage of people "in poverty". I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!
I wonder what Philip Hammond's definition of poverty is? What is your definition of poverty? What is the UK's definition of poverty? How is poverty measured?
I assume you guys have all read the report which the article is based on, right?
Didn't think so. I don't blame you. It's 145 pages.
Apparently you can have hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, and still be considered "in poverty". Apparently there are 1.4 million people "in poverty" that own their own homes outright.
Anyone with very low or no personal available resources would be judged to be in poverty,
despite the fact that they could be being supported by a partner, parent or other family member. So even if you're living in a million dollar mansion, driving a BMW, with thousands of dollars of spending cash in your pocket, if you personally aren't making any money because all of your needs are paid for by someone else, you're considered "in poverty".
Think about that. That means all children and all nonworking partners in a one-earner household are considered as being "in poverty".
If you're simply drawing a line at the bottom 35% of wages in the country, and claiming anything below that is "in poverty" regardless of how well those people are living, is that really an accurate representation of "poverty"?
If you're basing "poverty" as not having much money left over after paying debts, mortgage, bills, and household expenses, etc., is that really an accurate representation? Is someone who earns $200k a year, but spends the majority of it without saving anything actually "in poverty"?
Perhaps Phil simply disagrees with the changes to how poverty is now measured,
If you change how poverty is measured, you can drastically increase or decrease the percentage of people "in poverty". I'm better than you, but that doesn't mean you're not great!
04-Jun-2019 09:44:23
Quick find code: 23-24-312-63626936 Back to Top