Poverty

[tigersaw]

Pretty surprised to hear how many children live in poverty in the UK this morning on breakfast TV.
Thats until I heard the definition of poverty:

Poverty is defined by the Government as ‘household income below 60 percent of median income’. The median is the income earned by the household in the middle of the income distribution.

The definition goes further to say that in 2004/2005, this 60% threshold was defined as a sum of £183 per week for a family of two, after tax, mortgage, water etc.

WTF? When I was a kid we lived in a cottage with no heat, a single cold tap and a belfast sink, no fridge, outside dunny etc.
However, I would never had considered that poverty, I had shoes on my feet, food to eat and a school to go to.

I guess we need a new word to define the kids in Africa in 'poverty', since our definition is the lap of luxury to them.

Not just children,the number of old people who live below the poverty level is immense,probably greater than the number of children.
Rates ,gas,electric and rents have all gone up but they are stuck on a fixed income
and that is in this country.
Perhaps if our government considered its own house first instead of trying to prove that we are still a rich nation and can afford wars and generosity we would be able to provide better internal security,student grants,medical services and many other things.
I may be hard hearted in this but Africa amongst other nations would still survive if left to the laws of nature.Western interference has caused nearly all of the problems and we never hear how the billions of pounds of aid have ever done any good apart from providing them with arms.---------views of a disillusioned cynic

DT - you only say what everyone else thinks. We spend an absolute fortune on overseas aid.

In the last financial year, ie 2009 - 2010 -

£215m to Ethiopia - corrupt
£67m to Zimbabwe - corrupt, Mugabe, no regard for human rights
£30m to Somalia - no functioning government, bunch of pirates and murderers
£66m to Uganda - WHY??????
£103m to Kenya - corrupt
£295m to India - nuclear and space power
£140m to Pakistan - ditto, also corrupt according to WikliLeaks
£58m to Nepal - oppressed by CHina
£40m to China - one of the richest nations on Earth, no regard for human rights
£25m to Burma - corrupt and brutal military dictatorship

...and on and on goes the gravy train. There's a shedload more too, and then there is all the private sector and charitable support.

Don't believe me? I have just lifted these astonishing figures from the website of the Department For International Development. Not one of the UK Government's better known departments, rather odd that given its spend.

And the local authority here in Liverpool where I work (probably not for much longer) has just had a 9% grant cut this year, with more promised for the following three years.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Dicky Ticker

Not just children,the number of old people who live below the poverty level is immense,probably greater than the number of children.
Rates ,gas,electric and rents have all gone up but they are stuck on a fixed income
and that is in this country.
Perhaps if our government considered its own house first instead of trying to prove that we are still a rich nation and can afford wars and generosity we would be able to provide better internal security,student grants,medical services and many other things.
I may be hard hearted in this but Africa amongst other nations would still survive if left to the laws of nature.Western interference has caused nearly all of the problems and we never hear how the billions of pounds of aid have ever done any good apart from providing them with arms.---------views of a disillusioned cynic

Read the OP!
He says that people in "Poverty" are not poor
now back on topic

If you mean I as a pensioner am well off compared to Africa or India probably yes but in comparison to western european standards I would beg to differ-----could you live on £100 per week?----no where near average income but with the same costs.

Charity should start at home.

I agree with OP, When my dad died in 1978, my mom worked 3 jobs and still hardly had a pot to p1ss in, poverty my ass.
My family would have thought we was well off if we had the disposable income of some of the so called poverty stricken.
We survived and there isnt really a reason why the majority of others cant either considering how much help the government gives now compared to the 70's.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by tigersaw

a sum of £183 per week for a family of two, after tax, mortgage, water etc.

So that's £183 to spend on transport, food, clothing?

Seems a pretty retarded idea of poverty, I'm pretty sure I know a lot of people who have less than that to spend once they've paid out those expenses.

Considering I used to be able to feed myself for a week on about £15. (plus baccy and beer obviously)

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

So that's £183 to spend on transport, food, clothing?

Seems a pretty retarded idea of poverty, I'm pretty sure I know a lot of people who have less than that to spend once they've paid out those expenses.

Considering I used to be able to feed myself for a week on about £15. (plus baccy and beer obviously)

I couldn't, I don't like beans on toast

[jambo]

Originally Posted by Ed

I couldn't, I don't like beans on toast

Let me introduce you to Lidl pasta and jars of pasta sauce. Kept me going when I was on my placement year and brassic.

Jambo