Well, yes, but…..

The child poverty rate in Penzance is 41% – on a par with parts of inner city London, Birmingham and Manchester – compared to the national average of 25%,

The average wage is just over £22,000 a year against a south-west average of £25,625.

And the national average is higher.

But we measure “poverty” as being below 60% of the national median household income, adjusted for size (and often after housing costs).

We do not adjust for differences in regional or local living costs.

Thus if we have an area with generally lower incomes all around then we’re going to have more “poverty”. Not that this next would particularly help Cornwall but if we adjusted for local costs we would find that a lot of British “poverty” would disappear. Because we do have vast, by European standards, regional differences in prices and incomes.

18 thoughts on “Well, yes, but…..”

  1. “…while many children are enjoying the summer holidays building sandcastles and eating (clotted cream) ice cream, the children from one of the town’s estates can only dream of days at the seaside. Treneere is only a mile away but parents, unable to afford the ice cream and bus journey to get tired children home, avoid the outing. It may as well be 100 miles away.”

    It’s that definition of ‘poverty’ again.

    Want to take your kids to the seaside? Get a better job that pays more, and wait to have kids until you can afford them…

  2. It’s also the ‘Guardian’ choosing unsuitable subjects once more, just like in your last post:

    “Sarah Wilson, a 33-year-old single mother of five, who works long hours as a care worker…”


  3. There’s also this bit:
    “Cat Keene, director of programmes and operations at Trelya, says that poverty blights the lives of the children and young people they work with. They dread going to school as they don’t often have a clean uniform, and know they will get into trouble for not having a PE kit, or for being late because nobody was there to wake them up. They might be bullied for their unkempt appearance, not having the same trainers as everyone, for being poor.

    “They often have chaotic family lives with unstable relationships,” Keene explains. “There are often mental health issues, violence either in or out of the home and substance abuse.”

    So basically the reason they are poor is that they’re not capable of living normal lives. And this of course is the fault of the rest of us, who are, and manage to do so in exactly the same towns and cities that these people live in.

  4. Relative poverty is essential to keep the poverty industry in business since short of a Marxist revolution where everyone is equally poor, there will always be people with income below 60% of the average. Except of course that it is calculated before benefits. Sarah, the single mother of 5 (!) selected by the Guardianista’s would for example get a considerable amount of tax free credits for her brood. Assuming ‘working long hours as a carer’ is, say 45 hours a week on minimum wage, that is approximately 17.5k a year, well in the relative poverty camp. Now a quick check on the tax credit website calculator and that little brood of hers will get her ‘working tax credits’ of 13.5k giving a nice total of over 31k. But it’s even better than that if we now run another quick calculation. Of the 17.5k earnings she is left with just over 15k after tax and NI, add back in the benefits which are of course tax free and the total is now 28.6k.To take home that amount after tax, someone not claiming credits would have to earn 37.5k a year. So thanks to our benefits system and her 5 children, Sarah now takes home a sum equivalent to 40% above the average wages in the South West. Hurrah for our generous system that alleviates poverty!…..Err hold on, doesn’t that rather spoil the story?

  5. I suspect that Cornwall has more pensioners than Chelsea and Kensington. Also, the Cotswolds will be different from those areas of the West Midlands with large migrant extended families. Also, if those flinging figures about are not aware that average and median are not quite the same in real statistics this will not be helpful.

  6. ‘Treneere is only a mile away but parents, unable to afford the ice cream and bus journey to get tired children home, avoid the outing. It may as well be 100 miles away.’

    That I don’t believe. With reduced fares for kids etc it should be perfectly possible to get to the beach at least once a fortnight and likely more.

  7. Suggest the point to look at is not ‘this is relative poverty’ but “Does relative poverty have similar debilitating effects as real poverty in an appreciably large section of those who fall under the classification?’ – whether you use national or local price indexes.

    Because if it does then it might be worth addressing the problem so we don’t have the young growing up with these effects – for the sake of our society.

    Not saying it does or doesn’t, mind you – nor not claiming that some in poverty are not workshy (though likely enough fewer than is thought – one lady in the article is studying to get better prospects. An incipient Tory voter bigod 🙂 )

  8. That I don’t believe. With reduced fares for kids etc it should be perfectly possible to get to the beach at least once a fortnight and likely more.

    I don’t believe it either. I grew up in Pembrokeshire in the 1980s which was shit-poor, and everyone used to go to the beach when the weather was nice (twice per year, then). My Dad was a solicitor in Pembroke and used to have all these pykies coming up to him on the beach thanking him for keeping them out of jail.

  9. The lazy fuckers won’t walk a mile to the beach? Or cycle, since second-hand bikes are virtually free. Tough tittie.

  10. Technical question on Tim’s point – surely much the largest source of regional/local variation in prices is housing costs?

    If that’s so, doesn’t calculation of incomes after housing costs mean that, within the rules of this game, the local levels of relative poverty are fairly accurate? (NB I agree that the whole concept is open to serious attack.)

  11. Property prices in general influence a lot of other prices. So, no, the adjustment isn’t complete with just housing prices.

  12. If she has 5 kids –even if by five different men–5 lots of child support payments should see them reasonably off.

    What…What’s that you say?… She shagged 5 blokes who are all wasters and pay fuck-all?

    Oh Dear.

    And the Gladrag can fuck its bollocks about how the area “depends” on EU finance as well. Bribed with our own money–except it is very rarely those who pay who get the handout.

    The woman was right to support Brexit tho’. Good for her. She may have a point about arrivals crowding the South West since that is a pleasant area also popular with well-off London Bubble CM trash.

  13. ‘child poverty rate’

    Nonsense. Children are not part of the economy; they are not allowed to own property.

    What is the child wealth rate? Nonsensical, isn’t it?

    Their parents may be in ‘poverty,’ but we might not care about the story. Children are thrown in as props to get us to care. Lefttards using children.

  14. One mile? That’s how far I walked to school EVERY DAY, and then another mile back again. Plus less than how far we walked at the weekend up the valley to the park.

  15. Bloke in Costa Rica

    When I was a small boy, I used to have to trail round after my mother on shopping trips. I just checked on Google Earth and from our house it was 3km to the bottom of the town. So 6km there and back if we needed something from a shop on the Esplanade. The trip included two right bastards of a hill (Binstead and Union St). Did us kids complain? Of course we fucking did, but Dad had the car for work, so tough shit.

Leave a Reply

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