Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The history of the end of poverty has just begun

ourworldindata.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 449 posts

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#91

Post by IncRnd »

jdthedisciple wrote: post #21
hideo wrote: post #18

It’s incredible how wording can be confusing to different readers. The HN title of this post is currently “the end of poverty has just begun” which made me think “just” = “recently”. So I thought the article would be about something that has indicated that the rate of poverty reduction has increased. The URL says “history-of-poverty-has-just-begun” which made me think this is an article about historiography of povert…

I fully agree with you but I'd suggest simply adding the word "only" before "just" in the title, I think that's missing. I.e.: "The end of poverty has only just begun"

It's odd to say that an end has a beginning instead of it happening. It's more accurate to say - without the hyperbole - that the incidence of poverty is being reduced.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#92

Post by goodpoint »

Isamu wrote: post #43
hideo wrote: post #18

It’s incredible how wording can be confusing to different readers. The HN title of this post is currently “the end of poverty has just begun” which made me think “just” = “recently”. So I thought the article would be about something that has indicated that the rate of poverty reduction has increased. The URL says “history-of-poverty-has-just-begun” which made me think this is an article about historiography of povert…

> “Poverty is only now starting to decline” More like: progress has been made at extreme poverty ($1.90/day) and now we can upgrade our expectations to start to address basic poverty ($30/day).

"extreme poverty" is a very arbitrary threshold and some charts are using a fixed threshold that is based on purchasing power and not updated based of *real* cost of life compared to what goods and services are enjoyed by less poor people.

Furthermore, inequality is actually rapidly increasing in many societies.

Yet, one can cherry-pick an arbitrary threshold making the whole analysis profoundly misleading.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#93

Post by trcarney »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #61
gitfan86 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that If basic food and clothing and shelter and internet and housing were free, the economy would be very different.

But would it? In most of the developed world health care is free, and it's more expensive than food, clothing & internet, and almost as expensive as shelter.

health care is not free anywhere, you either pay for it at the point of use or through taxes.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#94

Post by goodpoint »

slibhb wrote: post #88
coldtea wrote: post #48

One problem, other comments hint on the same thing, is that poverty is not an absolute, it's relative. We would consider ourselves poor if we lived as a family of five in a tiny early 20th New York immigrant's appartment, even though we'd be much better off than a feudal peasant living in a straw hut with no electricity and a distant water well (the "working class" of its day), which in turn would be must better off…

"Poverty" (the word) is relative and has a cultural meaning. But it's not clear that we should care about those components of the word/concept. If the poorest person in the world has a car, a home, food, and water, are they poor just because other people have much more? Even if they are, does it really matter? We find poverty viscerally disturbing because it comes with privation. If we get to a point where that is no…

> poverty may still exist but perhaps it shouldn't bother us as much

No, constant psychological distress e.g. anxiety about the future is extremely relevant.

For example having "home, food and water" without universal healthcare or without personal safety.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#95

Post by aszen »

Isamu wrote: post #43
hideo wrote: post #18

It’s incredible how wording can be confusing to different readers. The HN title of this post is currently “the end of poverty has just begun” which made me think “just” = “recently”. So I thought the article would be about something that has indicated that the rate of poverty reduction has increased. The URL says “history-of-poverty-has-just-begun” which made me think this is an article about historiography of povert…

> “Poverty is only now starting to decline” More like: progress has been made at extreme poverty ($1.90/day) and now we can upgrade our expectations to start to address basic poverty ($30/day).

Folks 30 usd a day isn't basic poverty at all, it's what i used to earn as a software developer for some time. It's a pretty decent amount in a third world country

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#96

Post by gruez »

coldtea wrote: post #74
gruez wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One problem, other comments hint on the same thing, is that poverty is not an absolute, it's relative. Seems like you're just trying to redefine "poverty" to mean "income inequality". Income inequality is an issue that's worth tackling, but it's also important to recognize absolute standards of living conditions. We already have a term for income inequality, it's called income inequality. It's unclear why you want…

> Seems like you're just trying to redefine "poverty" to mean "income inequality". No, I'm trying to properly define property, instead of leaving it as a hazy term. And this includes income inequality, because what's considered poor is not static (see my example regarding the feudal peasant in their hut, the early 20th century immigrant family, or a modern trailer poor). > It's unclear why you want to redefine "pover…

>No, I'm trying to properly define property, instead of leaving it as a hazy term.

Alright, after looking at the wikipedia article, you're technically correct in the sense that the word only means "poor", therefore people are free to define it in whatever they want (either in relative or absolute sense). However, in the context of international development, it almost always refers to absolute poverty. Even in governmental terms, the use of relative poverty is limited to rich countries.

>Since richer nations would have lower levels of absolute poverty,[34][35] relative poverty is considered the "most useful measure for ascertaining poverty rates in wealthy developed nations"[36][37][38][39][40] and is the "most prominent and most-quoted of the EU social inclusion indicators".[41]

Taking this into account, I'm still opposed to your initial claim that "poverty is not an absolute, it's relative". There's certainly an absolute component to it, even if countries shift to using relative measure once they get rich enough. Furthermore, since it already means absolute poverty in most contexts, arguing for it to be redefined just causes confusion.

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#97

Post by alboy »

lovich wrote: post #80
RealityVoid wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, it's funny, I see in the price adjusted the US is near the top, with most of the population seeming well off. On the other hand, there is _a lot_ of complaint about poverty in the US, and, well, a lot of unsatisfaction about the income. I honestly don't know what to think anymore. Is the US popoulation really poor or just... unhappy with what they have because they compare with others? I had a short stint i…

Inequality of wealth and/or income is how you get high averages but still see people living in poverty. Something like 10% of Americans experience food insecurity throughout the year and I’d place that as a pretty basic necessity of life

The USDA defines[1] food insecurity to include the following:

>Food Insecurity

>Low food security (old label=Food insecurity without hunger): reports of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet. Little or no indication of reduced food intake.

People in other countries would scratch their heads at the very concept of "food insecurity without hunger".

[1] https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo...

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#98

Post by gruez »

goodpoint wrote: post #92
Isamu wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Poverty is only now starting to decline” More like: progress has been made at extreme poverty ($1.90/day) and now we can upgrade our expectations to start to address basic poverty ($30/day).

"extreme poverty" is a very arbitrary threshold and some charts are using a fixed threshold that is based on purchasing power and not updated based of *real* cost of life compared to what goods and services are enjoyed by less poor people. Furthermore, inequality is actually rapidly increasing in many societies. Yet, one can cherry-pick an arbitrary threshold making the whole analysis profoundly misleading.

>that does not updated based of real cost of life

Does being adjusted for PPP not do that?

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#99

Post by beepbooptheory »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #83
beepbooptheory wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just a little funny to say an essentially communist society has a scarcity of labor... It's like yes, that's kinda the point! They often note on the show itself that it is in fact replicator tech itself that sealed the deal for their era of post-scarcity, so yeah, that would imply some kind of scarcity in handmade goods. I think when people generally talk about "post-scarcity" it isn't that literally everything…

By that definition we already live in a post-scarcity economy. Food & housing are extremely plentiful in the US. We consume over 3600 calories per person, and waste a similar amount. Livestock eat over 10,000 calories per person. We have over 800 square feet of living space per capita.

Ok sure but all those things are still subject to whatever artificial scarcity the market needs in order to survive, which is not the case in Star Trek.

The fact that there is no money in that world is not a byproduct, it is the whole thing. Whatever is scarce or not follows from that, not the other way around.

Granted, especially as you get later on, star trek is not the best at realizing its original conceit. But I choose to believe!

Re: The history of the end of poverty has just begun

#100

Post by coldtea »

chrisco255 wrote: post #78
coldtea wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Today, America's poor have a better quality of life than medieval kings. Only in some very limited aspects. "Oh, they can eat wild strawberries in winter" or "have access to modern technology whereas a medieval king didn't" and such. The don't have the power of medieval kings, the don't have the wealth of medieval kings, they don't have the estates of medieval kings, the servants and free time of medieval kings, th…

They have access to all the world's information. They can travel across continents in a number of hours for less than two weeks wages. They can push a button on their phone to have gourmet food delivered to their house in under an hour. They can press another button on their phone to fetch a personal driver that will deliver them to any destination. They can choose to drive themselves, of course, and can travel hundr…

>They have access to all the world's information.

So? The Kings had access to much more information than they cared about already.

>They can travel across continents in a number of hours for less than two weeks wages.

A big chunk can't even afford to take a couple of sick days off, lest they be fired, or can't afford to retire and work in their late 60s and 70s in shitty jobs like a Walmart greeter - much less travel across continents to have vacations.

>They can push a button on their phone to have gourmet food delivered to their house in under an hour.

The King could do the same, all day, every day, with personal chefs familiar with their preferences, and without fear for the expenses...

>They can press another button on their phone to fetch a personal driver that will deliver them to any destination.

Oh, how Kings would be jealous of the magic of Uber...

Still, are we talking about the poor - for which Uber is an expense they have to consider very well, and days off a luxury, or people above that? Because I don't see many trailer park types visiting Paris or Barcelona...

>If you had to choose between being Louis XVI or Henry VIII and a middle class American in Cleveland, Ohio, what would you choose?

Depends, if the middle class American is also cherry picked to die (e.g. from some stray bullet or robbery gone wrong), I'd pick one of the Kings. As for Kings who didn't die in guillotine, that would be a no brainer. Who wants to be a middle class schmuck in Ohio, as opposed to a King? (I guess the kind of people who overestimate the magic of Uber and food delivery).

Post reply on HN