@tokyo 14 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 A recent study says that one in eight Australians are living in poverty. This seems quite high for a developed country, so what's behind it? "In this study we used a relative poverty definition," says report author Bruce Bradbury from the University of New South Wales. "The basic idea of a relative poverty line is that you set a poverty line at some fraction of the middle living standard or the median income in that community. We have chosen 50% so people whose income, after adjusting for their family's size, is below half the middle income of the country in the same year are defined as being poor." So in this case, poverty is measured by looking at incomes relative to the rest of Australian society as a whole. It's a country-specific measure. This is not unusual. In developed industrial countries it is very common to measure poverty relatively. "Rich countries can afford to have higher standards," says Bruce Bradbury. "It is entirely appropriate that people thinking about policies in those rich countries think about the standards that those rich countries can afford." But some argue that this is not actually a measure of poverty but more an indication of inequality. Because this measure relates to how the average person in a country is doing, it shifts. For example, after the financial crash in Ireland in 2008, the number of people in poverty fell because the median - or middle - income of the whole society had decreased. Bradbury says that the relative poverty measure is closely related to inequality, but it's not quite the same. "You can think of it as being quite close to a measure of inequality which only looked at the bottom half of the distribution," he says. "The level of incomes that people in the top of the distribution have has no influence… But it is a measure of how far away the bottom is from the middle." Link to post Share on other sites
HelperElfMissy 42 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Is that image from Aus? I can't imagine a building being allowed to be inhabited when the top floor railing is missing..... On topic. It's a bad measure of 'poverty' really isn't it. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 If you're going to live in poverty Australia is certainly not the worst place to do it Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Is that image from Aus? I can't imagine a building being allowed to be inhabited when the top floor railing is missing..... On topic. It's a bad measure of 'poverty' really isn't it. The image is from news.bbcimg.co.uk/ - so I doubt that it's Aus originally (could be wrong, but!) Although the plate on the car seems to be a NSW plate (from a cursory inspection, that is!) Anyway, the measure of "poverty" must be relative to the society. No point having an absolute dollar value, if everyone else in the society is getting (on average) 500k a year, then 250k a year is relatively poor. If everyone else is getting 50k a year, then 25K a year is relatively poor, and 75K a year is affluent. The "these things are made by people earning only $5 a week" thing is bullshit! If the people making these "things" are earning above the average, they are better off than 50% of the population. Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 That is Redfearn inSydney if I am not mistaken. Definitely old Aussie townhouses Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 I thought all Aussies were dead rich and intelligent. Certainly the ones on here are! Link to post Share on other sites
HelperElfMissy 42 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Maybe not in Redfern http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redfern,_New_South_Wales Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Redfern has become pretty gentrified over the last decade or so I thought. Average house price in Redfern currently is something like $850,000. Just a ghetto in Australian terms of course! .. I thought all Aussies were dead rich and intelligent. Certainly the ones on here are! All the ones on here ski overseas on a fairly frequent basis. We're definitely not those living in poverty. They can only afford to go to Bali for their holidays Link to post Share on other sites
pie-eater 207 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 I see. I suppose it does look quite nice, nothing a quick lick of paint wouldn't fix up! Link to post Share on other sites
snowdude 44 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 I think poverty is relative even within the same type of group or bracket. What one person considers rich, maybe poor for another! The measurement they used I don't think is a good measure anyway. Have to say though from when I have been to Australia, I never got the impression that people were particularly rich or poor as a general observation. I think the same can be said for most of the developed countries. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Well it wasn't long back I heard a woman on talk back radio here claiming her family was struggling on only $250,000 a year! It certainly is all relative but at times it's just plain ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites
HelperElfMissy 42 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 That's ridiculous! Maybe struggling to pay the massive mortgage on the McMansion, afford the pool chemicals for the pool because they use so much more when they are heated, and the big urban 4WD sucks too much fuel... But REALLY 'struggling' on $250,000 a year is silly talk. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 We live in Australia MB. It's full of silliness as far as I'm concerned. Been around 18 months since I left Japan and I miss it now more than ever. I'd go back there to live in a heartbeat. Link to post Share on other sites
HelperElfMissy 42 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 We live in Australia MB. It's full of silliness as far as I'm concerned. Been around 18 months since I left Japan and I miss it now more than ever. I'd go back there to live in a heartbeat.I'm getting closer every day GN Link to post Share on other sites
Tex 3 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Well it wasn't long back I heard a woman on talk back radio here claiming her family was struggling on only $250,000 a year! It certainly is all relative but at times it's just plain ridiculous. Oh the poor dear... if I had an address I would send a food package Link to post Share on other sites
Tubby Beaver 209 Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 yep Redfearn looks a great place to live Link to post Share on other sites
NoFakie 45 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Because this measure relates to how the average person in a country is doing, it shifts. For example, after the financial crash in Ireland in 2008, the number of people in poverty fell because the median - or middle - income of the whole society had decreased. It must be a "least worst" way of measuring poverty. Loads of folks in Ireland have lost their jobs. I reckon the measurement of poverty should include how many hours most people have to work to pay the rent/mortgage. Maybe food and utils too. Japan is a fairly egalitarian country, but over 70% of workers get less than average income. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 That's not unusual, really, Mr Wiggles! If you consider the maths of the situation, for every person who earns twice the average, four people earn half the average. Simple mathematics will explain that an average (usually considered as the mean, as opposed to the median or mode) requires a preponderance of readings below the average to balance a few "high" readings. So, if the corporate boss earns ten times the average, 20 people have to earn half the average to balance it. Explanation: If average is 20,000 per year, corporate boss earns ten times that = 200,000 per year. a low paid operator earns 10,000 a year - 20 of them will earn 200,000 balancing the boss's income. Ratio is 20 to 1 ... work it out! Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 That's why the median income is far better than using the average JA. Here's a good article on wages in Aus and some of the misconceptions out there http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2614076.html Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 GN, I agree wholeheartedly, but the term "average" is, particularly in these sort of comparisons, the one that is used. Mainly because that is the simplistic understanding of statistical analysis that is widespread in the population. It is also because that is generally the only measure of the "average" that the journalist understands. The mean income of drinkers in a pub goes through the roof if Bill Gates walks through the door, but the typical drinker has become no better off. For this reason, the median is a much better measure of a typical person’s income, as it is not distorted upwards (or downwards) by large changes in the tails of the distribution. This is a point that we all should recall from Year 8 maths, but for some it is apparently a difficult point to grasp. from your linked article - quite pertinent. Link to post Share on other sites
Mantas 3 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 This is a photo of Claymore. A housing project in western Sydney. It was featured in a recent documentary about Australia's 'poor' This place will be demolished next year to make way for new housing. Lets just have a recap of what these 'poor' people have. running water sewerage electricity gas solid housing 3 and 4 bedroom (brick and tile) a fridge flatscreen TV family car laptops and mobile phones. The only thing poor about these people is the mental ability to co-exist in society. Link to post Share on other sites
JA2340 16 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Income has a bit to do with it, but, as Mantas has suggested, the mental thing is much more important. If you think you are poor, then you will be! Of course, outflow of money is also important - if the rent takes half of your pay, the rest has to be spread fairly thin to make it. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 Generally it all depends on what you want compared to what you earn I reckon. If you don't want much you don't need to earn much. Although I know there are plenty out there who are genuinely doing it tough by any measure. I remember when I was doing my uni degree I was earning $120 a week and paying $70 a week in rent. Leaving less than $8 a day for food, beer and entertainment. Sure that's over 20 years ago now but that was poor I can tell you. Not ashamed to say I scrounged a number of meals out of rubbish bins at uni. Amazing what people throw out! Link to post Share on other sites
Mantas 3 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 It might seem callous but I don't regard these people as poor by any definition. I've seen too many people in Asia and Africa living in dire poverty to feel compassion for this lot. People in India or Zambia would be overwhelmed with joy just to have two of the things I listed above. Social problems, drug and alcohol and a generational 'victim' mentality are what these people suffer from. Selective poverty. Link to post Share on other sites
Go Native 70 Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I've worked with people in the past Mantas who were definitely living on the edge. Their living expenses were so tight that something simple like having to replace school shoes could mean having to miss out on some meals. Their budget was that tight. And they didn't have any drug or alcohol issues. But I agree that poverty here is not like poverty in 3rd world countries but you'd really hope not in a country as wealthy as Australia would you? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts