|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Tackling Poverty
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
How can Christians tackle poverty?
Can we discuss this without it ending up in Hell and without Shipmates accusing one another of being self-righteous hypocrites - or posting in such a way as to suggest that this is what they are?
Meanwhile, here are some top-of-the head suggestions:
- Involvement in political action.
- Involvement in groups like Christians Against Poverty.
- By counter-cultural lifestyles and sharing what they have with other people.
- Through charitable and development work of various kinds.
- By lobbying and supporting causes that aim to eradicate inequality etc.
All easier said than done.
Thoughts?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Join a union.
Do everything they can to promote liberty, equality, and fraternity.
Treat people equally whether rich or poor.
Work towards the overthrow of capitalism.
Criticise Tories unceasingly.
Do everything in their power to avoid all immigration controls and limitations on the rights of people to live and work wherever they wish. Including breaking immoral and oppressive laws.
Support free trade and oppose all laws limiting it.
Expropriate the landed property of the rich.
Make good things and sell them for a fair price.
Pay decent wages.
Educate their children.
Tell the truth.
Don't mourn, organise!
Build better mousetraps.
Make the trains run on time.
Work.
Play.
Share stuff.
...
[ 01. January 2014, 23:24: Message edited by: ken ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
All very good suggestions. Poverty is a complex and multi-faceted problem, so it needs to be addressed on multiple layers rather than any one approach, so these suggestions are all important parts of that holistic effort.
In addition, I personally have been challenged by this quote from Shane Clairborne:
quote:
"I asked participants who claimed to be 'strong followers of Jesus' whether Jesus spent time with the poor. Nearly 80% said yes. Later in the survey, I sneaked in another question. I asked this same group of strong followers whether they spent time with the poor, and less than 2% said they did. I learned a powerful lesson: We can admire and worship Jesus w/o doing what he did. We can applaud what he preached and stood for w/o caring about the same things. We can adore his cross w/o taking up ours. I had come to see the great tragedy in the church is not that rich Christians do not care about the poor but that rich Christians do not know the poor.
After reading that, I came to realize that, while I am active in supporting our church's homeless shelter, I don't really know them. In fact, when I leave the office at 5 pm on cold winter nights, I walk right past the line of men, women, and children that is already forming for that night's shelter. And yet, I realized I don't even know their names. My goal last year was to just learn one person's name and maybe a small bit of their story each night. There were far too many nights, however, when I was caught up in my own thoughts and hurrying off to my own home, and let the opportunity pass. That might make a good resolution to renew this year.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynnk
Apprentice
# 16132
|
Posted
All Of the above suggestions sound fantastic,and the resources of the wealthiest organisation in the world would be well placed to finance it all.
--------------------
Ok, Who washed the cat?
Posts: 22 | From: Tasmania | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Lynnk
Apprentice
# 16132
|
Posted
I suspect the christian church would be the wealthiest organization in the world.It owns some of the best real estate, and greatest works of art on this planet.But maybe I'm wrong and they are only the second wealthiest organization.Even at the second or third wealthiest they could go a long way to alleviating the grinding poverty that is to be seen in some counties,or even in their own neighborhoods.
--------------------
Ok, Who washed the cat?
Posts: 22 | From: Tasmania | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
What is this "Christian Church" organization of which you speak?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galloping Granny
Shipmate
# 13814
|
Posted
I would support Fair Trade over Free Trade.
I would ask pointed questions at political meetings and write often to the paper (though a lot of the latter letters are about climate change).
The current trade talks in the Pacific seem to aim mostly at removing decision making from our elected representatives in favour of multinationals.
GG
--------------------
The Kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it. Gospel of Thomas, 113
Posts: 2629 | From: Matarangi | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lynnk
Apprentice
# 16132
|
Posted
Well Mr Beeswax, I see in your bio you are a priest in the episcopal church which I believe is loosely associated with the Anglican church which is loosely associated with the Catholic church,add these to the Presbyterians,the baptists,the Methodists the orthodox church and the countless numbers of denominations and christian organizations that are spread around the world and it seems to me that that might just be thought of as a world wide church. Actually I'm a bit surprised a person who is a part of the system can't see that the church is a multinational money making organization. I bet Jesus is proud.
--------------------
Ok, Who washed the cat?
Posts: 22 | From: Tasmania | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lynnk:
Actually I'm a bit surprised a person who is a part of the system can't see that the church is a multinational money making organization. I bet Jesus is proud.
Do larger churches spend money on unnecessary things? Do they sometimes lack proper focus? I think that argument can be made. But I am not seeing your statement, I am thinking it a bit more extreme than observation demonstrates.
Listen, I am not shy about confronting practice v. preach, but I think this statement a bit too far.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
A general reminder, since this thread is a spin off from a Hell thread, as Sioni Sais has pointed out there (in the "self-righteous hypocrite" Hell call to pydseybare). Which means that it is to be conducted under Purgatory guidelines. The subject will produce strong views and differences of opinion. But don't import Hellish arguments into Purgatory, without restating them in terms which avoid ranting or personal attack.
Also, I'm a bit bothered that the church discussion may become a tangent and take over the thread, but there is a relationship between tackling poverty and church wealth, so we'll see how that goes.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Do everything in their power to avoid all immigration controls and limitations on the rights of people to live and work wherever they wish.
While that would certainly work to destroy wealth in those areas where it exists, whether it would do anything to alleviate poverty is far less clear. It seems far more likely to me that it would instead lead to poverty for all.
The way to tackle poverty is to seek to make everyone rich, not to make everyone poor so that we can't tell the difference.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lynnk:
Well Mr Beeswax, I see in your bio you are a priest in the episcopal church which I believe is loosely associated with the Anglican church which is loosely associated with the Catholic church,add these to the Presbyterians,the baptists,the Methodists the orthodox church and the countless numbers of denominations and christian organizations that are spread around the world and it seems to me that that might just be thought of as a world wide church.
That'll be 'loosely' as in 'not at all' or even 'diametrically opposed to'. ISTM rather like saying 'You have a Scottish name. And so do you. And you. You must have a common perception and unified outlook on life'. Cue the wars as to who is/ is not a true Scot for a start....
I have no brief for defending Christianity - my own view is that it is a multitude of religions and probably none of them bearing much relation to anything that went on in1st C Palestine. But I am taking issue with your statements because they show a lack of grasp of actuality. The first rule of effective criticism is to know what you are talking about.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lynnk:
Well Mr Beeswax, I see in your bio you are a priest in the episcopal church which I believe is loosely associated with the Anglican church which is loosely associated with the Catholic church,add these to the Presbyterians,the baptists,the Methodists the orthodox church and the countless numbers of denominations and christian organizations that are spread around the world and it seems to me that that might just be thought of as a world wide church. Actually I'm a bit surprised a person who is a part of the system can't see that the church is a multinational money making organization. I bet Jesus is proud.
Yes, there are loose connections but loose connections do not an organization make. The Methodists are connected to the Roman Catholics in much the same way as Burger King is connected to McDonalds. There isn't even the kind of connection you mention within most denominations. Trinity Wall Street has a ton of money. That doesn't mean they send much of it to St. Swithen's in Poughkeepsie that struggles to pay all it's bills.
My treasurer and the treasurer of most churches of all denominations would be surprised to know that this Christian Church of which you speak is an international money making organization. We rely entirely on donations given by local members. Many of us struggle to pay all our bills. We would love to get our share of the profits, which according to you are quite large, made by Christian Church Inc.
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
What would help, I feel, is that there should be a definition of poverty that is a reflection of what poverty really is.
At the moment the UK defninition of poverty, in financial terms, is having less than 60% of the national average salary after rent/mortgage, income tax, council tax and water rates have all been paid.
Average salary in the UK is £26,000.
That means that poverty means having a net amount of £15,599 per annum after you've paid those major financial commitments.
This is cash in your pocket of £307 per week after you've paid rent/rates/taxes.
How is that poverty?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Average income may be £26,000, but 65% of all UK households live at incomes below that because the distribution is skewed. Source- Institute of Fiscal Studies There's a pdf report to read.
That report also shows incomes are falling -
quote:
In fact, 2010–11 saw very large falls in average household incomes: median income in the UK
fell by 3.1% in real terms (from £432 to £419 per week), while mean income fell by about 5.7% in real terms (from £542 to £511). (from page 19 of the report)
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
What would help, I feel, is that there should be a definition of poverty that is a reflection of what poverty really is.
At the moment the UK defninition of poverty, in financial terms, is having less than 60% of the national average salary after rent/mortgage, income tax, council tax and water rates have all been paid.
Average salary in the UK is £26,000.
That means that poverty means having a net amount of £15,599 per annum after you've paid those major financial commitments.
This is cash in your pocket of £307 per week after you've paid rent/rates/taxes.
How is that poverty?
For a single person I agree it isn't (last year, by that definition, I was poor ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ) but I would not like to have to feed and clothe a family on that.
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
I haven't said it's not 'low income'. i haven't said that it's not easy.
But it is not poverty!
I listened to the leader of a charitable organisation give a speech last year about poverty in the UK.
The first comment was: "There are 3 million children in poverty in Britain!"
OK I thought - maybe under that definition...
5 minutes later came the comment: "There are 3 million children starving in Britain."
No. There are not!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Average income may be £26,000, but 65% of all UK households live at incomes below that because the distribution is skewed. Source- Institute of Fiscal Studies There's a pdf report to read.
That report also shows incomes are falling -
quote:
In fact, 2010–11 saw very large falls in average household incomes: median income in the UK
fell by 3.1% in real terms (from £432 to £419 per week), while mean income fell by about 5.7% in real terms (from £542 to £511). (from page 19 of the report)
When you say 'income', what do you mean?
Have you factored in the fact that by April this year no one earning £10,000 or below will pay any tax whatsoever and their disposable income will have risen?
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
This is Jack Monroe's description of what it was like for her - Hunger Hurts. Would you say that was poverty? Did it exist?
She handed in the petition to request the debate in Parliament on Food Banks before Christmas. So she's trying to raise awareness and support others even as she's back in work and earning.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Mudfrog - nice big report on poverty linked there. I suspect it's gross income.
But it doesn't really matter whether we're talking net or gross income when 65% are earning less than the figure you're bandying about as too much on 2010-11 figures, which were the most recent I've seen. And predictions were of further falls in income in 2012 and 2013.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
I'd like to know why £300 a week is poverty.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I haven't said anywhere that £300 a week is poverty. I have said that 65% of people are earning less than £300 a week and some of them are definitely in poverty.
After rent and rates and bills I'm on a lot less than £300 a week. I don't start with a lot more than £300 before paying that lot.
[ 02. January 2014, 14:49: Message edited by: Curiosity killed ... ]
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Dunno about the English situation (which does seem to have been made much worse by the present government), but I do know that most "conservative" policies in Canada and the US have been directed at making the poor worse off.
Not just in the sense of taking away food and other welfare support, but also in the sense of allowing corporations to reduce wage rates to the point that it is less possible for the working poor to make ends meet. When WalMart can blatantly expect that food stamps will be necessary for their workers, you know that the system isn't doing what it is supposed to do.
The Harper government is now regularly being described as mean, out of touch and doctrinaire in ways that are not helpful. Maybe a better time will come.
Rant over.
On the topic of knowing people, we've shifted our priorities a bit. Rather than having "fellowship" or "agape" meals for the faithful, we are now having potlucks that deliberately include our neighbours - at least, those who live relatively close to our church. Handbills go out to the low-rent area nearby and people are encouraged to come for supper. Our visitors are now beginning to contribute to the potluck. They are grateful that we do not proselytise - rather, we just have a meal together and any leftovers go away with the visitors if possible. Everyone serves/is served/ helps themselves/each other and we meet. Trying to avoid "Oh, look how we are helping you"
Rather like Pope Francis thing of meeting atheists and seeing their humanity and child of God status.
Whether we can grow this into a larger or more complete sampling of the village, we don't know, but it is "The Right Thing To Do" for now. If a need is seen, a response will be there.
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
This is Jack Monroe's description of what it was like for her - Hunger Hurts. Would you say that was poverty? Did it exist?
She handed in the petition to request the debate in Parliament on Food Banks before Christmas. So she's trying to raise awareness and support others even as she's back in work and earning.
Oh yes indeed that's poverty.
I do not deny it exists - I myself have seen it many times in my work as a Salvation Army officer.
It's heartbreaking.
But let's not insult people like Jack Monroe and suggest that they should be lumped together with people who are living on £300 a week AFTER their rent and council tax has been paid.
She might be trapped at present in hopeless poverty - but someone with income of £1200 a month is no way in her shoes!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I haven't said anywhere that £300 a week is poverty. I have said that 65% of people are earning less than £300 a week and some of them are definitely in poverty.
After rent and rates and bills I'm on a lot less than £300 a week. I don't start with a lot more than £300 before paying that lot.
People on £71 a week are in poverty.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Yes, I know, I was redundant for 10 months.
And a proportion of people on £71 a week are now paying a chunk (11% or 25% of that rent) towards rent as they are stuck in housing seen as having surplus rooms and a proportion of the council tax bill. Which further erodes that £71 a week.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I haven't said anywhere that £300 a week is poverty.
Hi ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
You yourself may not have said that but that's what the campaigners are saying - poverty is anything under that 15,999 net amount. The Opposition throw it at the government, even the churches are using this definition of poverty.
People on £71 a week are in poverty.
People on £290 - £300 a week are evidently not!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Yes, I know, I was redundant for 10 months.
And a proportion of people on £71 a week are now paying a chunk (11% or 25% of that rent) towards rent as they are stuck in housing seen as having surplus rooms and a proportion of the council tax bill. Which further erodes that £71 a week.
Erm.... some of them are 'stuck' I know people in one bedroom flats too.
We mustn't put everyone in the same category.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
For a single person I agree it isn't (last year, by that definition, I was poor ) but I would not like to have to feed and clothe a family on that.
What, you wouldn't want to do it on £300 a week? How quickly do your kids go through clothes?
The weekly food shop for a family of four would be what, about £90? Add on about £50 for transport costs (and I think that's a relatively high estimate for one week), and about £25 for gas and electricity (just over what I pay to heat/light a three-bed semi), and you're looking at £135 left in the account - surely that's enough to save up for annual expenses not covered already, as well as a decent amount of luxuries.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Mudfrog, I know not all single people are caught by the bedroom tax. That's why I used the phrase a proportion, meaning some.
Yes I know, i'm sorry. When I read your post again that word jumped out at me and I was going to delete my post but it was too late.
For what it's worth, I agree with the principle of the removal of the spare room subsidy because i don't think tax payers should should pay for a single person to live in a needlessly large 3 bedroom house.
This is already the case for private tenants - and there are many people in 'poverty' who rent privately and get lower housing benefit than their social-housing-dwelling neighbours. I haven't heard anyone decrying that particular system!
BUT what I do think was a mistake was to apply it to existing tenants. I believe it should have been introduced to new claimants from, say, April.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
aumbry
Shipmate
# 436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Join a union.
Do everything they can to promote liberty, equality, and fraternity.
Treat people equally whether rich or poor.
Work towards the overthrow of capitalism.
Criticise Tories unceasingly.
Do everything in their power to avoid all immigration controls and limitations on the rights of people to live and work wherever they wish. Including breaking immoral and oppressive laws.
Support free trade and oppose all laws limiting it.
Expropriate the landed property of the rich.
Make good things and sell them for a fair price.
Pay decent wages.
Educate their children.
Tell the truth.
Don't mourn, organise!
Build better mousetraps.
Make the trains run on time.
Work.
Play.
Share stuff.
...
Ken - I think it is time for your family to get the power of attorney registered with the Court.
Posts: 3869 | From: Quedlinburg | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:
For a single person I agree it isn't (last year, by that definition, I was poor ) but I would not like to have to feed and clothe a family on that.
What, you wouldn't want to do it on £300 a week? How quickly do your kids go through clothes?
The weekly food shop for a family of four would be what, about £90? Add on about £50 for transport costs (and I think that's a relatively high estimate for one week), and about £25 for gas and electricity (just over what I pay to heat/light a three-bed semi), and you're looking at £135 left in the account - surely that's enough to save up for annual expenses not covered already, as well as a decent amount of luxuries.
What you paying in mortgage payments?
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I'd like to know why £300 a week is poverty.
Look at it this way. £300 per week is a shit wage.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I'd like to know why £300 a week is poverty.
Look at it this way. £300 per week is a shit wage.
For a bank manager maybe but it's still not poverty.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
What would help, I feel, is that there should be a definition of poverty that is a reflection of what poverty really is.
At the moment the UK defninition of poverty, in financial terms, is having less than 60% of the national average salary after rent/mortgage, income tax, council tax and water rates have all been paid.
Average salary in the UK is £26,000.
That means that poverty means having a net amount of £15,599 per annum after you've paid those major financial commitments.
This is cash in your pocket of £307 per week after you've paid rent/rates/taxes.
How is that poverty?
I think you must be getting some wires crossed here, because by your version of the definition I'm below the poverty line, and no organisation on earth considers me to be living in poverty. I think if we're talking about net income it will be a net income less than 60% of average net income, not a net income less than 60% of average gross. It's also usually calculated from median earnings, not the mean, so will be lower.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Hmmm ... quite a thread so far and thought-provoking ...
How about poverty in its global sense? Not necessarily people on low incomes here but people who are living at subsistence level in plenty of countries across the world.
How can we help alleviate that?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Definitions of poverty:
quote:
The key UK government measures take 60 per cent of median income as the poverty line. But while this is easy to measure and does provide useful comparisons over time, it is essentially an arbitrary definition and has been much criticised, most recently in the UK in the Field Review
The median wage and average wage are different. The 2010-11 figures I was quoting from earlier gave a median figure of £419, against the mean figure of £511. 60% of that median gives a weekly income of £251.40 net (after taxes have been taken off and benefits added) before rent and other costs.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Hmmm ... quite a thread so far and thought-provoking ...
How about poverty in its global sense? Not necessarily people on low incomes here but people who are living at subsistence level in plenty of countries across the world.
How can we help alleviate that?
Now yes, that I can discuss!
Poverty is where one has not enough to eat, wear, use as comfortable permanent shelter, recourse to medicine, education or safety.
That of course, in some limited ways, can apply to people in the west, but globally there is huge poverty.
One radical way to eliminate poverty in some countries, I'm afraid to suggest, is regime change! ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
You'll not eliminate poverty in places like Zimbabwe when you have a president like Mugabe in charge!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Nor will you by invading the country and trying to impose a solution from outside. Afghanistan and Iraq still have a lot of poverty, though Iraq is doing slightly better now the west isn't blockading it.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Nor will you by invading the country and trying to impose a solution from outside. Afghanistan and Iraq still have a lot of poverty, though Iraq is doing slightly better now the west isn't blockading it.
Yes I know - I was writing tongue in cheek; but the problem is still there! The corruption in many of these governments is the direct cause of the poverty in those countries.
It's one thing to put a band aid on the presenting problem (did you see what I did there?) but eliminating the causes of poverty must involve a change of policy by the leadership.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
So, we, as Christians, can't really do much of anything about global poverty other than throw jellyfish back into the ocean. In other words, Christians can do on a global level what I with my discretionary fund and outreach budget can do on a local level. I'd be quite depressed if I thought Christianity was all about providing material things to people.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I haven't said anywhere that £300 a week is poverty.
Hi
You yourself may not have said that but that's what the campaigners are saying - poverty is anything under that 15,999 net amount. The Opposition throw it at the government, even the churches are using this definition of poverty.
People on £71 a week are in poverty.
People on £290 - £300 a week are evidently not!
It really depends where you live - in areas like the South East where rents are extortionate, someone can earn £300 a week and easily be in poverty. The basic cost of living has increased enormously (eg food prices, utilities etc) and many on £300 a week will have to choose between heating and eating. Childcare is another huge cost.
Someone on £300 a week with no dependents in Newcastle is probably not in poverty, someone on £300 with two children and a disabled partner who has had their DLA claim rejected by ATOS, living in Kent is very likely to be in poverty.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
What you paying in mortgage payments?
The £300 was after mortgage/rent payments are taken care of.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
So, we, as Christians, can't really do much of anything about global poverty other than throw jellyfish back into the ocean. In other words, Christians can do on a global level what I with my discretionary fund and outreach budget can do on a local level. I'd be quite depressed if I thought Christianity was all about providing material things to people.
Christianity isn't all about that. This thread is very nearly all about that though.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Can I flag up this post?
After digging around a bit the Government doesn't use the formula Mudfrog was giving earlier, but this one:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Definitions of poverty:
quote:
The key UK government measures take 60 per cent of median income as the poverty line. But while this is easy to measure and does provide useful comparisons over time, it is essentially an arbitrary definition and has been much criticised, most recently in the UK in the Field Review
The median wage and average wage are different.
The 2010-11 figures I was quoting from earlier gave a median figure of £419, against the mean figure of £511.
60% of that median gives a weekly income of £251.40 net (after taxes have been taken off and benefits added) before rent and other costs.
So the actual figure for poverty is £251.40 (on 2010-11 figures) before rent and other costs were taken out. That figure is unlikely to have gone up in the previous two years as incomes have been falling.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Converted to dollars that's about $413.05/week or a monthly salary of $1652.20. Federal poverty level in the United States in 2013 was $1627.50 for a family of 3. Throwing that out there so it makes sense for those of us across the pond. Somebody else will have to do the conversion to Canadian and Australian dollars.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
More info than simple income figures are needed. Have a look at income inequality. It has increased in most of our countries, example link. Notable is the countries are in the most equal list.
When one of my kids lived in Norway I saw stats that put income equality together with positive health outcomes and crime. Equality of income is associated with both. We might thus see the rich-poor gap and gap growth as public health and social policy issues rather than simple ideological positions. Or as items of responsibility, but we have effectively eliminated morality from such decisions and, in our minds, decided Jesus likes our ideas.
--I am on a not so smart phone at the moment or I wld post more links.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
