• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Farage Ltd and Similar Watch

thehistorymakers said:
I'm trying to say there is more poverty. I don't need to interpret the statistics. They say there is more poverty than 30 years ago.Which is what I'm saying.
You need to interpret them, hoping it will change what they say,.
But it's not working.
Click to expand...

That's not what you were saying before, you started off blithering on about how life was so much better 30 years ago, that so many people were worse off now than they were 30 years ago but presented some statistics that didn't even come close to showing that.

If you're now changing your point to there being more people in poverty than there were 30 years ago then, yes, that piece of research does indicate that by a sliding scale, more people are in today's version of poverty than were in the 80s equivalent.

There's only one party changing what they say here, and it ain't me.
 
MARKakaJIM said:
If you're now changing your point to there being more people in poverty than there were 30 years ago then, yes, that piece of research does indicate that by a sliding scale, more people are in today's version of poverty than were in the 80s equivalent.
Click to expand...

At last and thank you.
 
THM - have a read here, the interesting part being:

But when we talk about poverty in the UK, we aren't talking about the same kind of poverty as in the developing world. The definition of poverty generally used in the UK, as in the rest of the developed world, is set at 60% of median income. But these people aren't poor in the same way as those 1.2 billion living on less than $1.25 a day, obviously; they are poor in relation to the person who is in the middle of the income distribution, with half the country above them and half below. That median UK household income at the moment is £23,200, which means the official threshold for poverty in the UK is £13,920.
Click to expand...

£13,920 is a decent amount of money, enough to live outside of London. When I moved back to the UK, not so long ago, myself and my wife managed to live & rent our own flat on a combined income of not much more than this.

The median income in the UK has gone up because of the inequality of the UK's wealth, brought about by the fallacy of trickle down economics - it doesn't work, the rich get richer and the poor (be they British or whatever) get screwed over. There is a concerted attempt by UKIP, the tory party and the right wing media to present immigrants or benefit scroungers as the problem, they aren't and by pandering to their opinions / beliefs you make it worse for the poor in the long term.
 
thehistorymakers said:
Ask Mark, he understands now.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that you've completely changed the point you were making in order to tie in with the piece of research you've got on your clipboard at the moment.

At least you've finally given up trying to convince the world that we've gone backwards in the last 30 years, well done you.
 
tredman said:
THM - have a read here, the interesting part being:



£13,920 is a decent amount of money, enough to live outside of London. When I moved back to the UK, not so long ago, myself and my wife managed to live & rent our own flat on a combined income of not much more than this.

The median income in the UK has gone up because of the inequality of the UK's wealth, brought about by the fallacy of trickle down economics - it doesn't work, the rich get richer and the poor (be they British or whatever) get screwed over. There is a concerted attempt by UKIP, the tory party and the right wing media to present immigrants or benefit scroungers as the problem, they aren't and by pandering to their opinions / beliefs you make it worse for the poor in the long term.
Click to expand...

At the risk of being a statistical pedant, if the rich get richer then (absent of other changes) median income doesnt change - its basically the income of the 'middle' person when you rank peoiple in order.
 
tredman said:
THM - have a read here, the interesting part being:



£13,920 is a decent amount of money, enough to live outside of London. When I moved back to the UK, not so long ago, myself and my wife managed to live & rent our own flat on a combined income of not much more than this.

The median income in the UK has gone up because of the inequality of the UK's wealth, brought about by the fallacy of trickle down economics - it doesn't work, the rich get richer and the poor (be they British or whatever) get screwed over. There is a concerted attempt by UKIP, the tory party and the right wing media to present immigrants or benefit scroungers as the problem, they aren't and by pandering to their opinions / beliefs you make it worse for the poor in the long term.
Click to expand...

Is £13,920 really the official poverty line? If so, due to benefits, I'd doubt there are many people in the UK in true poverty.
 
Visage said:
At the risk of being a statistical pedant, if the rich get richer then (absent of other changes) median income doesnt change - its basically the income of the 'middle' person when you rank peoiple in order.
Click to expand...

meh, good point, but you know what I mean!!

MARKakaJIM said:
That's some primary school maths there i think. #KS2
Click to expand...

And me an ex-maths teacher too :)
 
MARKakaJIM said:
Yes, I understand that you've completely changed the point you were making in order to tie in with the piece of research you've got on your clipboard at the moment.

At least you've finally given up trying to convince the world that we've gone backwards in the last 30 years, well done you.
Click to expand...

Touchy, mind you don't watch too much Sky TV and whatever you do, don't start wearing gola boots and slazenger sweaters.

If things start looking bad for you, Mark, start hanging around with Del wappio. She or he doesn't know any body worse off than 30 years ago.

Hahahahaja .No wonder the country is impoverished with a middle class like you lot.

hahahahaha
 
I think I'd really struggle to live independently (on my own without any benefits) on 14k a year.
 
I take back my James comment from yesterday, no way this guy could have offspring as clever as James.
 
Such tedium.

You're confusing yourself.

More people in 2014 are in what current times describe as 'poverty' than there were in 1984 by the standards of that time.

The standards of life 'in poverty' in 2014 are immeasurably better than the the standards of life in poverty of 1984.

The standard of life is not regressing, as per your initial point. It is improving.

Oh, and I'm a 'he', and I certainly wouldn't categorise myself as middle class! Is there some kind of test I can take?
 
thehistorymakers said:
Touchy, mind you don't watch too much Sky TV and whatever you do, don't start wearing gola boots and slazenger sweaters.

If things start looking bad for you, Mark, start hanging around with Del wappio. She or he doesn't know any body worse off than 30 years ago.

Hahahahaja .No wonder the country is impoverished with a middle class like you lot.

hahahahaha
Click to expand...

Sky was a true story, and me pointing out that some people thought their Sky Subscription was more important than their mortgage. The Gola and Slazenger thing was a piss take.....I've never owned a pair of Gola trainers.

You are a very strange cookie or a WUM. I've not quite worked out which yet.
 
thehistorymakers said:
Touchy, mind you don't watch too much Sky TV and whatever you do, don't start wearing gola boots and slazenger sweaters.

If things start looking bad for you, Mark, start hanging around with Del wappio. She or he doesn't know any body worse off than 30 years ago.

Hahahahaja .No wonder the country is impoverished with a middle class like you lot.

hahahahaha
Click to expand...

Ok that's enough,!!
THM, you wouldn't know a poor person if they fell on you off the roof of your house.
The Real Poverty line is about whether you have a roof over your head, food for you and your family, clothes on your backs, and access to basic Utilities like Water, Gas, and Electricity.

If you can't feed and house your family, it matters not a jot what it was like 30 years ago, or how many brownie points you think you can score on a forum.
 
machin05 said:
I think I'd really struggle to live independently (on my own with our any benefits) on 14k a year.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be pleasant. But then surely at £14k p/a there are some benefits, even as a single man (for example)?

If not, say that's a grand a month, you could rent a (shit) flat (in an unpleasant area) for £300, bills about £150 all in, maybe £100 on food, and £50 on transport. £300 a month to save/play with. If you're frugal and shop around a bit for the essentials, you'd have a bit of pocket money.
 
Penk Wolf said:
Sky was a true story, and me pointing out that some people thought their Sky Subscription was more important than their mortgage. The Gola and Slazenger thing was a piss take.....I've never owned a pair of Gola trainers.

You are a very strange cookie or a WUM. I've not quite worked out which yet.
Click to expand...

Don't tell fibs then Penk. I worked you out ages ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

darlowolf64
  • Locked
The Clique and how to join it...
Replies
6
Views
2K
The Bear
The Bear
Back
Top