How should poverty be defined given that it drives the benefits culture

leveller2911

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

above watford = poverty
below watford = non-poverty

quite simple

Load of old tosh.......If you go back about 5yrs or so parts of East Sussex were the 2nd poorest in the country and parts of West Sussex were 2nd richest.
Statistics yes ,but they do give you an idea how different parts of the same area can be.

Thats a very sweeping statement Inspector, shocking in fact.:rolleyes:

lemonjelly

leveller2911 wrote: »

Load of old tosh.......If you go back about 5yrs or so parts of East Sussex were the 2nd poorest in the country and parts of West Sussex were 2nd richest.
Statistics yes ,but they do give you an idea how different parts of the same area can be.

Thats a very sweeping staement Inspector, shocking in fact.:rolleyes:

Whoosh!!!

I think it was a joke pal - hence the smiley?

inspector_monkfish

leveller2911 wrote: »

Load of old tosh.......If you go back about 5yrs or so parts of East Sussex were the 2nd poorest in the country and parts of West Sussex were 2nd richest.
Statistics yes ,but they do give you an idea how different parts of the same area can be.

Thats a very sweeping staement Inspector, shocking in fact.:rolleyes:

get back in your outhouse and calm down you nutter !!!;)

spuds_2

The Joseph Rowntree trust asked the public in 2009 what you need to have an adequate standard of living:


"According to what people said, in order to maintain a minimum, socially acceptable quality of life in April 2009:

• a single working-age adult needs a budget of £167 per week;
• a pensioner couple needs £212;
• a couple with two children needs £389; and
• a lone parent with one child needs £221;

These amounts are after income tax, and do not include housing or childcare costs."

That means a family of 4 should have £1556 to live on after housing (mortgage or rent) - well I think you could have a pretty good standard of living in the UK on that, if you'd already paid your rent/mortgage.

Poverty is relative to some extent, but to say that everyone should have x% of the median average wage just doesn't make sense. Anyone who's living off less than 60% of the median household income is defined by the E.U. as living in poverty. So, if the average wage was (as an example) £100,000 a year, should the minimum benefits give you £59k?

leveller2911

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

get back in your outhouse and calm down you nutter !!!;)

Dont tell me, or you,ll set the hounds on me???...:D..

Never been called a "Nutter" either..:D thanks..

michaels

Oops - family of 5 we spend 1750 pcm excluding housing (mortgage only) - includes council tax, house insurance, house maintenance etc. and I thought we were pretty profligate (you should see how much the Mrs spends on clothes)...and we run 2 cars and this includes a depreciation allowance.

If we had to cut back we could live on a lot less - I can't see how spending 200 less per month would feel like poverty...

spuds wrote: »

The Joseph Rowntree trust asked the public in 2009 what you need to have an adequate standard of living:


"According to what people said, in order to maintain a minimum, socially acceptable quality of life in April 2009:

• a single working-age adult needs a budget of £167 per week;
• a pensioner couple needs £212;
• a couple with two children needs £389; and
• a lone parent with one child needs £221;

These amounts are after income tax, and do not include housing or childcare costs."

That means a family of 4 should have £1556 to live on after housing (mortgage or rent) - well I think you could have a pretty good standard of living in the UK on that, if you'd already paid your rent/mortgage.

Poverty is relative to some extent, but to say that everyone should have x% of the median average wage just doesn't make sense. Anyone who's living off less than 60% of the median household income is defined by the E.U. as living in poverty. So, if the average wage was (as an example) £100,000 a year, should the minimum benefits give you £59k?

inspector_monkfish

leveller2911 wrote: »

Dont tell me, or you,ll set the hounds on me???...:D..

Never been called a "Nutter" either..:D thanks..

everyone north of watford is a 'nutter' isn't he/she ?

well thats what mater and pater told me anyway

lemonjelly

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

everyone north of watford is a 'nutter' isn't he/she ?

well thats what mater and pater told me anyway

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

South of Watford = Delusional:D;)

Kev09

The staff tell me the watford gap is do with the inequalities between rich and poor in our capital!

bo_drinker

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

above watford = poverty
below watford = non-poverty

quite simple

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL-PKL-L1P8