Join for free
Reply
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Senior Member
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 4,795
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 11:30 AM
1

Labours Definition of Poverty

I heard on the radio today that, according to the Labour Party, there are over 3 million people living in the UK in poverty.

It was revealed that Labour are using the definition by the UN where poverty is defined as "a family earning less than 21K per year".

21K doesn't seem to be living in poverty to me, in fact far from it... There are millions of students (for example) who have a maximum student loan of about £18K per annum so have students been included in this figure as well ?

Furthermore, as far as I know, the £21K does not include in-work benefits either and neither does it include other subsidies, discounts and "gifts".

If labour impose the 4 day week as they say they will in their manifesto, this will put more people in the below £21K poverty threshold won't it ?
Reply With Quote
Donkeyman
Senior Member
Donkeyman is offline
Melton,United Kingdom
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 3,309
Donkeyman is male  Donkeyman has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 12:35 PM
2

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Bread ->
I heard on the radio today that, according to the Labour Party, there are over 3 million people living in the UK in poverty.

It was revealed that Labour are using the definition by the UN where poverty is defined as "a family earning less than 21K per year".

21K doesn't seem to be living in poverty to me, in fact far from it... There are millions of students (for example) who have a maximum student loan of about £18K per annum so have students been included in this figure as well ?

Furthermore, as far as I know, the £21K does not include in-work benefits either and neither does it include other subsidies, discounts and "gifts".

If labour impose the 4 day week as they say they will in their manifesto, this will put more people in the below £21K poverty threshold won't it ?
Yes Bread, Corbyn seems to lack some brain function does'nt he?
Donkeyman!
Reply With Quote
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Senior Member
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 4,795
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 01:30 PM
3

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Donkeyman ->
Yes Bread, Corbyn seems to lack some brain function does'nt he?
Donkeyman!

Typical millionaire socialist that Corbyn bloke
Reply With Quote
Boot's Avatar
Boot
Senior Member
Boot is offline
England
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 388
Boot is female  Boot has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 03:24 PM
4

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Bread ->
I heard on the radio today that, according to the Labour Party, there are over 3 million people living in the UK in poverty.

It was revealed that Labour are using the definition by the UN where poverty is defined as "a family earning less than 21K per year".

21K doesn't seem to be living in poverty to me, in fact far from it... There are millions of students (for example) who have a maximum student loan of about £18K per annum so have students been included in this figure as well ?

Furthermore, as far as I know, the £21K does not include in-work benefits either and neither does it include other subsidies, discounts and "gifts".

If labour impose the 4 day week as they say they will in their manifesto, this will put more people in the below £21K poverty threshold won't it ?
Are they talking about absolute poverty or relative poverty?
I have heard the 3 million figure quoted before in relation to relative poverty, so Iím guessing youíre talking about relative poverty, which has stayed about the same over the last 20 years. Although absolute poverty has halved in that time, the earnings inequality gap hasnít changed much, so itís the ďrelative povertyĒ of those in work that Labour are pledging to address, I think.

Itís not clear to me how Labourís definition is different to the current Government definition of relative poverty - what is the Labour definition of ďfamilyĒ - presumably they use different figures depending on how many adults and children are in the family.
For example, under the current Govt definition, a couple with two children with an income of less than £21,000 is classed as being in relative poverty.
Isnít the current definition pretty much the same as Labourís definition?

To establish whether someone is living in relative poverty, the government looks at the median income - that is the midpoint where half of the working population earn more than that amount and half earn less. Then they take 60% of this middle amount and anyone who earns less than this is considered to be living in relative poverty.
According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) charity, that's a weekly income less than:
£248 for couple with no children
£144 for single person with no children
£401 for couple with two children aged between 5 and 14
£297 for single parent with two children aged between 5 - 14
Reply With Quote
Bread's Avatar
Bread
Senior Member
Bread is offline
Sudbury, United Kingdom
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 4,795
Bread is male  Bread has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 06:26 PM
5

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Boot ->
Are they talking about absolute poverty or relative poverty?
I have heard the 3 million figure quoted before in relation to relative poverty, so Iím guessing youíre talking about relative poverty, which has stayed about the same over the last 20 years. Although absolute poverty has halved in that time, the earnings inequality gap hasnít changed much, so itís the ďrelative povertyĒ of those in work that Labour are pledging to address, I think.

Itís not clear to me how Labourís definition is different to the current Government definition of relative poverty - what is the Labour definition of ďfamilyĒ - presumably they use different figures depending on how many adults and children are in the family.
For example, under the current Govt definition, a couple with two children with an income of less than £21,000 is classed as being in relative poverty.
Isnít the current definition pretty much the same as Labourís definition?

To establish whether someone is living in relative poverty, the government looks at the median income - that is the midpoint where half of the working population earn more than that amount and half earn less. Then they take 60% of this middle amount and anyone who earns less than this is considered to be living in relative poverty.
According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) charity, that's a weekly income less than:
£248 for couple with no children
£144 for single person with no children
£401 for couple with two children aged between 5 and 14
£297 for single parent with two children aged between 5 - 14

I think Labours definition comes from the UN definition which is the £21K. Looks like the UK Government use the same from what you wrote.

As you say, absolute and relative poverty are two different things and Labour are trying to make out that 3 million people are in absolute poverty, when in fact, they are in relative poverty which is a completely different situation.

I wonder in this 21K includes the 1M or so students ?
Reply With Quote
Boot's Avatar
Boot
Senior Member
Boot is offline
England
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 388
Boot is female  Boot has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 07:18 PM
6

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Bread ->
I think Labours definition comes from the UN definition which is the £21K. Looks like the UK Government use the same from what you wrote.

As you say, absolute and relative poverty are two different things and Labour are trying to make out that 3 million people are in absolute poverty, when in fact, they are in relative poverty which is a completely different situation.

I wonder in this 21K includes the 1M or so students ?
I didnít hear the radio programme you did so I donít know exactly what Labour are claiming about the figure of 3 million.
I canít find any info about what you heard but I just looked at a few figures.
I did discover that under the current Tory govt guidelines, the number of people in households in the relative poverty bracket is over 14 million and the number of children in relative poverty is over 4 million, so I donít think they were talking about that.

The number of children reported to be in families that fall into the definition of absolute poverty is between 3 and 4 million, so perhaps that is what the programme you heard was referring to. Absolute Poverty is defined in a similar way but the threshold 60% of the median household income is calculated from the median income from 2011.

If you heard Labour say 3 million are in absolute poverty, I expect they were talking about 3 million children and the figures suggest they are right. These arenít figures that Labour make up for themselves. They come from official Govt statistics.

Individual Students who are single with no children donít really come into it if you are talking about a familyís household income.
As you can see from the relative poverty threshold list I gave you, the figure of £21k applies to a family income when the family is composed of 2 adults + 2 children.
A single person with no children is not classed as being in relative poverty unless their income is below £144 pw (around £7,500 per annum)
Reply With Quote
d00d's Avatar
d00d
Senior Member
d00d is offline
London, UK
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 4,080
d00d is male  d00d has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 08:56 PM
7

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

When I was little my father told me a bacon rind would feed a starving miner's child for a fortnight.

I guess he was just trying to say I should count myself lucky.
Reply With Quote
Baz46's Avatar
Baz46
Senior Member
Baz46 is offline
Somewhere rural 'out in the sticks', UK
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 2,138
Baz46 is male  Baz46 has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 09:03 PM
8

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Originally Posted by Boot ->
Ė Snip Ė

To establish whether someone is living in relative poverty, the government looks at the median income - that is the midpoint where half of the working population earn more than that amount and half earn less. Then they take 60% of this middle amount and anyone who earns less than this is considered to be living in relative poverty.

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) charity, that's a weekly income less than:

£248 for couple with no children
£144 for single person with no children
£401 for couple with two children aged between 5 and 14
£297 for single parent with two children aged between 5 - 14
Those figures rather show up the Basic State Pension for what it is, pitifully low after possibly working for 55 years as I have:

The full new State Pension is £168.60 per week if you are
ē a man born on or after 6 April 1951
ē a woman born on or after 6 April 1953

https://www.gov.uk/new-state-pension/what-youll-get


The lesser amount and the most you can currently get is £129.20 per week if you are
ē a man born before 6 April 1951
ē a woman born before 6 April 1953

https://www.gov.uk/state-pension

I feel certain the amounts many people will have paid into the State scheme, if paid into a personal pension, would generate far more. I don't believe anyone can live adequately on what is the Basic State Pension, either pre- or post- the dates shown above. Just one instance of this is Council Tax, mine as a single person and claiming 25% reduction as a sole occupier, as an example would take 23% and 30% respectively of those figures shown above. That doesn't leave much to live on, especially with today's cost of gas and electricity.
Reply With Quote
swimfeeders
Chatterbox
swimfeeders is offline
Shropshire
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 18,953
swimfeeders is male  swimfeeders has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
03-12-2019, 09:22 PM
9

Re: Labours Definition of Poverty

Hi

Working for Government in one form or another all my working life, imagine my State Pension.

Far less than that quoted because I have other Pensions.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.