Is anyone sick of relative poverty?

Watch
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
Relative Poverty is used by the UK to pretend their is loads of poverty in the UK it is calculated based on people who earn 60% less than the median income, after basic bills like rent and water have been paid.It is extremely stupid because this would mean that some of the poorest people in Africa may actually be classed as not in poverty and if there was a country that just had rich businessmen then some of them would be in poverty.

According to this term you get silly statistics like "1 in 3 children are in poverty in the UK", which is simply ridiculous these people aren't in poverty-I speak with experience having grown up in a poor family always getting free school meals and my mam was unemployed and we were receiving child benefit and disability living allowance and in no way were we ever in poverty, I bought a lot of takeaways, I have 2 laptops and have saved up over £1000 in the bank through careful spending.

Whilst I am concerned for the poor in our society I feel that ridiculous definitions of poverty, neglect those few who are in real poverty-these people are living rough on the sleep and have nothing to eat and actually have life expectancy's similar to poor african countries(at 47 years).The government likes to hide the much larger than you'd think real absolute poverty in the UK, with 80,000 homeless children in the UK and I have heard the Government doesn't pay these people benefits because they have no permanent address, shocking.
1
reply
MangoFreak
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
Dichotomies.

Dichotomies everywhere.
0
reply
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
(Original post by MangoFreak)
Dichotomies.

Dichotomies everywhere.
Dichotomy equals a contrast between things whats that got to do with relative poverty statistics.Yes there are contrasts across the whole world but that shouldn't mean because there are huge contrasts in the living standard in the UK that these people who are poorer than the rest are in poverty, when they can afford the basic essentials that poor Africans can't.I don't really understand what you are trying to say.
0
reply
MangoFreak
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
(Original post by Dalek1099)
Dichotomy equals a contrast between things whats that got to do with relative poverty statistics.Yes there are contrasts across the whole world but that shouldn't mean because there are huge contrasts in the living standard in the UK that these people who are poorer than the rest are in poverty, when they can afford the basic essentials that poor Africans can't.I don't really understand what you are trying to say.
I apologise I assumed you would make the inference that I was pointing out your false dichotomies.

Some people are poorer than other people. Help them all.

Congratulations though, on writing posts which are actually legible, although I can't help but think it's because this subject doesn't involve numbers or symbols much.
0
reply
bananaminion
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
(Original post by Dalek1099)
x
I agree that the definition of poverty here is ridiculous. The other day I put in my family's details (income, children etc) and turns out that I've been living in poverty all my life. Apparently in the bottom 1% of the country.
This can't be true, I've always been fed and clothed, and have extra-curricular activities as well (swimming, tennis lessons, music lessons etc).

Real poverty, I would define as being in a situation where you cannot feed, clothe and house yourself and your family. Being in a situation where your needs to live healthily are not met.

I doubt there are very many people in Britain in poverty at all, and you're right, the ridiculous definition means that those who really are in poverty are ignored to some extent - and those in other countries who most definitely are in poverty are equated with those earning 20K a year.
1
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
Real poverty is obviously more serious but the poverty op describes still has an effect on people.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
50% of people earn below the median wage. This is unacceptable. We must not rest, comrades, until this situation is reversed and we all earn more than average!
0
reply
Picnic1
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
The only poverty that matters is poverty of love.

I agree with the OP. Who stands to benefit from the idea that so many people live in poverty? The government. Big employers. Universities. Charities. They weave a tangled web.

We work to afford the things that people worked on for them to afford the things that people worked on. And if it's housing some of those 'people' whose products (the housing they made) we want are long dead!

Some who already have ample enough money work just to have something in common with the majority.

More women in the workplaces and yet relative poverty is increasing? Well stop contributing to the wealth inequality and stop working for those companies who make so much money off your back. Or would minds rarely be imaginative enough to enjoy life as the potential for long life luxury (including family life) that it really is?
0
reply
Suetonius
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
Yeah, the government likes to use "poverty" as a pretext to steal more money from you, to spend on "welfare" which simply locks poor people into dependency on the government, reduces their incentive to work and develop, and consequently provides the government with a permanent support base. That's the little bit of that stolen money that actually is "redistributed", of course the rest is spent on war, corporate welfare, and GCHQ, which is a little fact people seem to gloss over when they defend the theft that is taxation.
0
reply
Dalek1099
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#10
(Original post by Suetonius)
Yeah, the government likes to use "poverty" as a pretext to steal more money from you, to spend on "welfare" which simply locks poor people into dependency on the government, reduces their incentive to work and develop, and consequently provides the government with a permanent support base. That's the little bit of that stolen money that actually is "redistributed", of course the rest is spent on war, corporate welfare, and GCHQ, which is a little fact people seem to gloss over when they defend the theft that is taxation.
I never said anything about cuts to Welfare but the real issue is that the Government is using the term relative poverty to hide behind the fact that a decent amount of absolute poverty exists in the UK and a lot of these people don't have an address so the Government doesn't pay welfare to these people-a very sneaky way to leave the poorest in society to rot.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you travelling in the Uni student travel window (3-9 Dec) to go home for Christmas?

Yes (58)
28.57%
No - I have already returned home (24)
11.82%
No - I plan on travelling outside these dates (46)
22.66%
No - I'm staying at my term time address over Christmas (21)
10.34%
No - I live at home during term anyway (54)
26.6%

Watched Threads

View All