Though I appreciate it's much more complex than that.
you realise the definition of poverty is not what most people would regard as "poverty"?
-
-
Of course he doesn't. If you read the JRF's own definition, it's nebulous, to be polite.
-
-
It's relative obviously. But surely we're not patting ourselves on the back because we're not Calcutta (or wherever)
-
Of course not. But stretching the definition to include 1/3 of kids obscures the very real issue.
-
I thought it highlighted it. Simply dismissing it obscures it very effectively.
-
I disagree. People tend to dismiss hyperbole thereby missing a, perhaps, germane or cogent point.
-
Fair enough. No-one is doing anything about it either way. I'm off now. I'll leave Julia to her champers. :)
-
Indeed. :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Indeed I do! The gov stats give the definition - it's not starving, it's relative to average income, but that can be skewed by high earners
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.