If the problems of poverty in the UK are about relative poverty, why
will reducing the incomes of the rich not help?
Martin Rathfelder
Director
Socialist Health Association
22 Blair Road
Manchester
M16 8NS
0161 286 1926
www.sochealth.co.uk
If you do not wish to be on our mailing list please let us know and we will remove you
John Whittington wrote:
> At 15:56 07/06/2010 +0100, Ted Harding wrote:
>> Hmmm ... The official definition of "poverty line" suggests a simple
>> and cost-effective solution.
>>
>> Take all those with disposable incomes above 60% and up to 100%
>> of the median. Reduce all their incomes to below the current 60%
>> level. Then, suddenly, many of those who had been below the poverty
>> line will be above it, with respect to 60% of the new median.
>> With care, none of those whose incomes have been lowered will
>> subsequently be below the new poverty line. Thus many will have
>> been removed from poverty, none will have been brought into poverty,
>> and a profit will have been made. Magic!
>
> Indeed, but the worrying thing about this is that some politicians
> would probably 'buy' (or, rather, attempt to 'sell') this idea -
> particularly those whose political ideals favour reducing the
> disposable incomes of the higher paid by taxation. One can imagine
> them proudly announcing (and perhaps even believing) that they had
> done good by markedly reducing the number of people 'below the poverty
> line', despite the fact that not one of them would have a penny more
> than they previously had!
>
> Such a 'relative' official definition of poverty would certainly seem
> to be 'asking for trouble' - and clearly is of little/no use when
> looking across a range of countries.
>
> Kind Regards,
>
>
> John
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225
> Mediscience Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893
> Twyford Manor, Twyford, E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender
> and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held
> by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about
> Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and
> past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site
> www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
>
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|