I've been reading a book entitled "Creating Unequal Futures?" edited by Fincher and Saunders. It is a book on rethinking poverty, inequality and disadvantage. Not exactly easy reading for a Sunday afternoon (if you are so lucky). However, since I enjoy reading about facts, thoughts and theories I'm doing OK.
The media often talk about "the poverty line", but what exactly is this "line"? Well, the above mentioned book suggests that there's not even consensus on what poverty actually is. Here's a snippet from the book:
"....there is no correct, scientific, agreed definition of poverty because poverty is inevitably a political concept, and thus inherently a contested one. Indeed, alleviation of 'poverty' or the 'social question' could be considered as one of the primary goals of politics itself. The ways in which different societies conceptualise poverty or their own equivalent to poverty are likely to reflect the complex political balances and forces within that society.....
.....Most studies of poverty have done so from an economic perspective. Commonly they are concerned with material living standards rather than broader welfare concepts, such as satisfaction with life, levels of security, social isolation, subjective evaluations of income adequacy, or feeling of stress."
It is my believe that consecutive federal governments have held the following defintion of poverty (also from the book)..."The real problem is not poverty but welfare dependence and the growing underclass, which are caused by the welfare state policies ostensibly designed to alleviate poverty and inequality" or worse still "policy should be concerned with economic growth, which can reduce poverty and alleviate the worst excesses of inequality."
I hope it is clear to all that reliance on monetary policy to 'reduce' poverty is never going to work. What we require is a fair society where EVERYONE is valued and given the opportunity to contribute in some way. Through contribution and self-worth come increased levels of well-being.
