Is anyone sick of relative poverty?Watch this thread
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.