Questions from Polly we can answer

Do we care about 300,000 more children in poverty?

No, we don\’t.

For the definition Our Poll is using is not in fact poverty, it\’s inequality.

That is, it\’s relative poverty. It\’s about 300,000 children having less than some arbitrary number: it\’s not even about 300,000 children actually having less in real terms.

And we\’ve looked at this one before:

The government\’s astonishing trajectory of cuts means that, according to Professors Peter Taylor-Gooby and Gerry Stoker, by 2013 public spending will be a lower proportion of GDP in Britain than in the US.

The answer being that UK public spending will be at or just above the post war average. It\’s Obama who is going to haul US public spending hugely up, well over its post war average.

4 thoughts on “Questions from Polly we can answer”

  1. I think its the World Health Organisation which is responsible for the ‘relative poverty’ fiasco. By their formulae, there will always be a section of society which is ‘poor’ and, as a blogger whose names escapes me pointed out, in an economy that becomes increasingly wealthy, this means that there will come a day when children without en suite bathrooms will be classed as living below the poverty line. Hold their heads underwater, I say.

  2. Mark,
    No it won’t, because long before then the Greens will have us go back to shitting in holes in the ground to save water.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *