English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

5 answers

Our country has done a great job of almost completely eliminating the true or "abject" poverty, only to find people redefining it to include more people. As the standard of living in this country continues to increase, people will adjust their definition of "poverty."

I know a family who has 4 TVs, Satellite, several DVD players & more than enough to eat (the whole family is overweight.)
They are "impoverished" because they "can't afford nice clothes, nice cars (they have old cars & hand-me-downs) & other things this modern society now considers necessity.

I think it is not right to use the same word, "poverty", to discribe the family living in a mobile home, buying clothes at garage sales, & eating simple food, like beans & rice, or Spaggetti & meat sauce. This type of family would be considered well-to-do in many places in Mexico! I prefer the phrase "disadvantaged." They need help, but we shouldn't try to act like they are on the same level with those dying of starvation in Africa!

2006-09-18 13:26:11 · answer #1 · answered by Smart Kat 7 · 0 0

Thats a relative term. In the United States, some people make thousands of dollars a month, yet that is not enough, they feel impoverished. There are some people who make a couple hundred a month, yet, they are happy and healthy. What do you consider extreme poverty. I would say very few in the united states live in extreme poverty, because there is plenty of help out there if someone really needs it. Even people with no income, get a tax refund, equivalent to three years income in some countrys. Children always have access to food and clothing, and lots of free toys at christmas. extreme poverty in the united states? don't really think so.

2006-09-17 16:19:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

it rather is a reliable one. i could undertaking a wager as a million%-2%. We nevertheless have them in this area, however the communities frequently build them properties as promptly as they are in a position to, they are regularly elderly who've merely escaped the community's interest over the years. The inhabitants right this is particularly opened up so in trouble-free terms a fragment of our citizens have close friends. maximum stay in systems that have been outfitted long earlier 1940. they have not got indoor plumbing, unfavourable insulation, and unsafe living situations. All are at present in the placement of figuring out between nutrition or utilities. it rather is terrible.Social protection does not take care of their needs. A relatives chum makes a whopping $375. dissimilar them have been mothers whose husbands left them to develop the little ones. They raised the little ones, the little ones moved off, and that they have got no working history to entice from. Or, the little ones are deceased. i could say there are comparable situations in rural places national.

2016-12-12 10:18:16 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

worldwide, I would say maybe .000001 percent , and they are too crazy to get help

people around the world living on like 10 cents a day know poverty like we will never even imagine. Maybe even folks on $3 a day know poverty that we can't even imagine

2006-09-17 16:08:50 · answer #4 · answered by kurticus1024 7 · 0 0

0%

2006-09-17 16:28:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers