Simple maths tells us that a proportion of the population will always live under a set point of the median income, because that's what the median means.
Personally, I think you're a lot smarter than me, and I fully admit I don't understand economics. However, it strikes me that you're incorect.
Poverty is measured here as below 60 per cent of contemporary median net disposable income in 2000/01
Oxfam arn't talking about the Median, there talking about 60% of it. That's 40% under the average. It is possiable to get rid of that kind of inequality. And frankly, it seems a suitable enough definition to me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-01-10 01:04 pm (UTC)Personally, I think you're a lot smarter than me, and I fully admit I don't understand economics. However, it strikes me that you're incorect.
Poverty is measured here as below 60 per cent of contemporary median net disposable income in 2000/01
Oxfam arn't talking about the Median, there talking about 60% of it. That's 40% under the average. It is possiable to get rid of that kind of inequality. And frankly, it seems a suitable enough definition to me.