Less people living in Absolute Poverty according to Mrs May

homelessness isn't JUST people living rough ,its the tens of thousnads or more who are living in temporary accomodation,or hostels or sleeping on friends sofas,its families living in one room with no cooking or bathing facilities that have to share with countless others.Its young people who dont get housing benefits who have been in care and had to leave when they came of age ,or who have been turfed out of the family home or who left because conditions areunbearable due to alcohol abuse or drug abuse or physical/sexual abuse .Homelessness is on the rise as is poverty ,more children live in poverty now than at any time since WW11.

...”the deserving and the undeserving poor”, just what I was thinking trisher

Thanks for the link Primrose a good clear article. I do think using the word ‘absolute’ is confusing - I see the reason for using the baselines figure of the median for 2010/11 but why not call it that. All the discussions and definitions of poverty ever since poverty studies began have used absolute in the UN way.

I agree - just use one definition of absolute poverty, then we all know what we're actually talking about.
I liked the way the fullfact article explains how a reduction in poverty statistically doesn't always mean people have a better standard of living and that there will always be some people who are statistically 'in poverty' but in reality, they are not (such as people between jobs and using some of their savings).
It made me realise that statistics can be useful, but actually what matters are individuals and their circumstance.

Homeless people living rough are not counted in absolute poverty figures according to Fullfact.

I am glad to see a some challenges to this as I really couldn't believe it was true. Obviously, if you change the way you are calculating you can prove just about anything. Thanks to those who have highlighted her attempt (another failure for Theresa of the Tories) at slight of hand.

500,000 more Brits are expected to be living in poverty by 2021, despite record high employment

HOMELESS PEOPLE aren't on the benefits system so she wont count them ..they dont matter..they dont cost her any cash

How can there be more living in poverty by 2021? Corbyn of the communists will be PM and we will be living in the land of milk and honey

Good point paddyann.

Poverty is of course something to be sarcastic about isn’t it annie and use yet again in your tedious anti-Corbyn campaign

it was the"there are more jobs,more people employed than before" that made my blood boil ...and of course there are eegits who believe him.There are more ZERO HOURS contracts ,more people on minimum wage ..and it IS MINIMUM wage not LIVING wage ,more people IN work who still cant earn enough to feed their families or who need top up benefits.And dont get me started on the universal credit fiasco!!!

To compare poverty today, with poverty in the 20s and 30s there is a world of difference. In those days people had very poor diets and children were running around in bare feet. Whole families crammed into one room and several families shared one toilet. Many people wore one set of clothes every day. They couldn't afford to see a doctor (no NHS). Mass unemployment. Infant mortality. Children with rickets. Incurable diseases. Have you read Love on the Dole or George Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London? This is all within living memory. I am not claiming poverty does not exist. The poor we will have always with us.
Will it ever be possible to eliminate poverty altogether I wonder? We live in hope.

So you just shrug, mrsmopp, misquote and misunderstand the New Testament, and decide that tackling poverty and injustice is a losing battle. You tell the rest of us that we must do a quick comparative study before we use insubordinate rhetoric to fight a situation we believe we should stand up against rather than doffing our mental caps to our 'betters', believing they know what they are doing and that in knowing that they do the best for all. I'm afraid at least half the country would disagree with that premise.

When Jesus (that guy you almost quoted) said "The poor you will always have with you." he was talking to an audience that would know those words as he was quoting the Torah and they would be able to mentally add the ones that followed them: "Therefore I command you,‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land."

When people were poor in the 20s and 30s much of what holds people out of such poverty today did not exist - either for the rich or the poor. They lived in relative poverty - relative to the standard of living around them. We are still measuring relative poverty - not absolute poverty, or is that the situation you believe people must get to before we help?

The UK is one of the 10 richest countries in the world. We shouldn't have any poverty. It's not due to a lack of money but the choices that are made by government as to how that money is spent. The magic money tree doesn't exist for the poor, education, the NHS etc. but miraculously appears to bribe the DUP or for any other purpose that helps the government cling to power.

mrsmopp to your ^ Mass unemployment. Infant mortality. Children with rickets. Incurable diseases.^
Today we have
Zero hours contracts (if you work 1 hour a week you are employed) Working families living in poverty.
Children with rickets (Yes really)
120,000 children living in temporary accommodation
There has been a 60 per cent increase in the number of families being housed in insecure temporary accommodation. In particular, bed and breakfast-type hotels are increasingly being used to house families for long periods of time as local councils struggle to find them proper homes to live in.
We haven't come far from the 1920s

No need to shoot me down in flames! I did not shrug either. Can anyone name a country where poverty does not exist??
The OP asks whether we agree that there are fewer people living in poverty now and that's the debate. I did not say we don't need to tackle poverty, we do, of course, and where does doffing the cap to our betters come in?

No one shot you down in flames mrsmopp, perhaps you didn't make yourself clear. You now sound as if you believe that, just because poverty exists everywhere, we should do nothing about it. Was that what you meant?

What the OP was pointing out was the Mrs May was playing games. Absolute poverty is what you see in third world countries and not something to crow about not having here. I cannot imagine anyone thinking it was okay for a single person to be living at that level as the OP said.

Poverty in this country is usually measured on a relative scale, i.e., how you can live by comparison to the median income.

It was a concept may used quite deliberately in order to avoid admitting that relative poverty is growing exponentially in the U.K., and will continue to do so under this government.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

There's a Tory saying at the moment that every pound we spend on our welfare is a pound less to spend on our schools and infrastructure.
He was comparing the UK with South Korea.
Nice to know that he thinks we should be more like them.
He says there's a moral case to do so.
Oh, and we should look at whether retirement benefits should be for all.

This is his record on welfare and benefits voting.

www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25323/oliver_dowden/hertsmere/votes#welfare

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Message withdrawn at poster's request.