Was Malthus ever poor?

[Malthus]

What Languish needs now is a new member who has dragged himself up from the slums of Calcutta to the mighty heights of call centre operative. I would imagine that such a person would have short shrift for the claims of former or current poverty of any of us.

Sure, by third-world standards this whole debate would be hilarious.  In Canada in particular, no-one is "really" poor.*

*Some exceptions for Native Canadians may apply.

[Josephus]

Well there is a lot of poverty in Canada, not just with natives, but unlike in India, we do have social programs to help them out. Well we had really good social programs in the past, but now they're just passable.

[Eddie Teach]

The verdict is in:  Malthus, the jury of your peers concluded that you were never poor.  I'm sorry. 

Better be careful, or a jury of your peers might make you a Canes fan. 

[Richard Hakluyt]

Well there is a lot of poverty in Canada, not just with natives, but unlike in India, we do have social programs to help them out. Well we had really good social programs in the past, but now they're just passable.

I'm sceptical about the extent of claimed poverty in first-world countries. In the UK it is claimed that there are millions, but the overwhelming majority of these people have homes, access to clean water, electricity and enough cheap food to make them fat.

Now these people do have my sympathy, apart from anything else it can be rather boring being broke and being excluded from the various activities most of us do without a thought. But it is simply not in the same league as living in a Nairobi shanty town or Calcutta slum.

[Admiral Yi]

First world poverty is defined in relative terms.  People should not confuse that concept of poverty with absolute poverty.

[DGuller]

The verdict is in:  Malthus, the jury of your peers concluded that you were never poor.  I'm sorry. 

Better be careful, or a jury of your peers might make you a Canes fan. 

I have no peers here.  You people are beneath me. 

[Malthus]

First world poverty is defined in relative terms.  People should not confuse that concept of poverty with absolute poverty.

Yup, it is generally defined as falling below some line of earned income. Where that line should be drawn leads to a lot of debate, generally about relative costs of living in various places and the like. Usually they take "family" income into account, which makes sense. 

What it doesn't include, is exclusions based on extended family circumstances. Your typical liberal-arts-degree-young-adult-dishwasher-from-middle class-family is still defined as "poor" if he or she falls below that line, in spite of the fact that causes CC and DG conniptions, and in spite of the fact he or she lives like unto a god compared with your average Calcutta scavenger. 

[garbon]

First world poverty is defined in relative terms.  People should not confuse that concept of poverty with absolute poverty.

Actually I was thinking, great, there are no poor people in America! Now that the war on poverty is over, we can focus on more important issues.

[Neil]

I have no peers here.

This part you got right, filthy Slav.

[lustindarkness]

If my dad pawned his wedding ring to buy groceries after stretching out what little food we had that week, were we poor? I started working at 15 years old when I found out he did so. We never knew we were poor I guess. We were never homeless, never went hungry, just lived in a very restricted budget.

BTW, one of his favorite sayings translates to: The day that shit is worth gold, the poor will be born without an asshole. 

[Richard Hakluyt]

First world poverty is defined in relative terms.  People should not confuse that concept of poverty with absolute poverty.

Yes, but the problem with relative poverty is where are the lines to be drawn?

In the UK it is defined as having a household income of less than 60% of the median household income. When incomes fell in the recession the rate of poverty also fell because so many benefit-dependent households crept above that 60% line. Interestingly my household counts as "in poverty" as the two houses, capital gains from my sharedealing, undistributed profits from my wife's business and cash savings are immaterial for the purposes of the definition 

Which is why I voted "Yes" to the poll question. In a hopelessly subjective area he said he was poor for a few years. I believe him, if he felt he was poor then he was, who are we to quibble? After all, it drove him into training as a blood-sucking lawyer 

[garbon]

What it doesn't include, is exclusions based on extended family circumstances. Your typical liberal-arts-degree-young-adult-dishwasher-from-middle class-family is still defined as "poor" if he or she falls below that line, in spite of the fact that causes CC and DG conniptions, and in spite of the fact he or she lives like unto a god compared with your average Calcutta scavenger. 

Would you consider yourself typical?

[Malthus]

First world poverty is defined in relative terms.  People should not confuse that concept of poverty with absolute poverty.

Actually I was thinking, great, there are no poor people in America! Now that the war on poverty is over, we can focus on more important issues.

Why, from these threads I have learned:

- You can't be poor if your parents aren't

- you can't be poor unless you have eaten nothing but ramen noodles for months (and were glad to get even them)

- you can't be poor if you use drugs, because drugs are a luxury and poor people can't afford luxuries

- you can't be poor unless you live in a crackhouse (presumely those crackheads aren't themselves poor - see point above)

It's all so complex, but the sum is that basically no-one, or very few, in North America are really poor. Yay! Problem solved.

There I was, thinking all that was necessary is to earn too little money ...

[garbon]

Which is why I voted "Yes" to the poll question. In a hopelessly subjective area he said he was poor for a few years. I believe him, if he felt he was poor then he was, who are we to quibble? After all, it drove him into training as a blood-sucking lawyer 

I feel that I'm the Queen of the Night.

[Admiral Yi]

Yes, but the problem with relative poverty is where are the lines to be drawn?

I have long argued in favor of ditching relative definitions of poverty and using absolute definitions instead.