The Institute for Economic Affairs posted an article about the Child Poverty Action Group yesterday:
It is a bit tricky to criticise an organisation that describes itself as “the leading charity campaigning for the abolition of child poverty in the UK”. But when a charity enters the realm of political debate, as the Child Poverty Action Group frequently does, then their proposals ought to be examined without the kid gloves on...
*ahem*
They have since added a footnote: "A reader has pointed out that the CPAG receives a significant proportion of its income from various government departments. See Note 3 to the 2008 accounts."
*/ahem*
Male Talkers
2 hours ago
9 comments:
Thye problem is that the "ooverty" in their title is a redefinition of the traditional meaning of that word. It is not poverty, in terms of lack of wealth, but inequality.
That is why there is more "poverty" in Britain than North Korea because while people are starving there they are all starving.
Since "poverty" now means having a significantly below average income & families with children have a lower per capita income than those without such "poverty" (lets call it 2poverty) will always exist & thus campaigners have a job for life.
The way to end traditional poverty is to create more wealth - something anti-2poverty campaigners have no interest in.
I call it RelPov.
@neil craig
Its probably a good idea to get out of your sofa and go and visit some ghetto's... in the UK
When you get there, shout at the top of your voice:
"NO ONE IS STARVING IN ENGLAND, ITS ALL A MYTH"
Robin,
Why should he wake up a bunch of fat benefit addicts having a mid afternoon snooze?
^ deleted by me for correction.
Great stuff, Fake Charities being outed.
RS, a tale from a Sky installer. " I used to arrive at houses to be told 'come back after 11am when we will be up' or made to wait until they had finished their computer game, that's why I gave up that job, it meant I never got home from work 'till 8 in the evening ".
There's no poverty in the UK.
There's squalor, neglect, and cruelty. All of which produce poverty-like symptoms.
But no poverty.
There's certainly poverty of aspiration, and that's caused by the structure of the benefits system.
Krauser: define poverty please ? You also seem to be saying that "squalor, neglect, and cruelty" come first. Are you certain of this ? If so, what causes these things in your opinion?
Banned: Out of all the houses Sky is used in, what is the proportion of the folks you refer to ?
AC1: agreed, when you continue to beat people down, in the end they will give up
Post a Comment