Absolute and relative poverty
There are two ways of looking at welfare, absolute and relative. Absolute is self-explanatory and is the absence of basic requirements needed to sustain life. Relative on the other hand is a socialist construction and is welfare that is given based on a comparison to the living standards of others, whether working or not. It’s why in the riots that occur and the looting that invariably follows; the unproductive seek to gain a materialistic lifestyle in comparison to those that produce. In all riots, the main targets are not those stores that enable basic essentials, but electric, brand name and electronic goods stores. One suggestion is that governments subside basic essentials such as food, electricity and clothing with the money now given as welfare, which would prevent absolute poverty, but also instill a message that cell phones and plasma TV’s are for …show more content…
So, by a continuing demand for more wealth, the rich are becoming money richer but their increased wealth only buys them what a dollar was worth when made and not what it’s worth in the future and it’s why, despite a relative welfare system, the poor say they’re getting poorer, but only in relation to everyone else, because they can’t demand increases and have to pay the higher prices.
Money itself is not a good indicator of wealth and that’s because it simply indicates how much purchasing power an individual has at any one period in time and not the future. It’s why despite salary increases and business profits, what you can buy today you could have bought ten years ago for half the price, when your salary was also half of what it is today. If all salaries were cut in half tomorrow, but so too were prices, you’d still have the same purchasing power with less
There are two ways of looking at welfare, absolute and relative. Absolute is self-explanatory and is the absence of basic requirements needed to sustain life. Relative on the other hand is a socialist construction and is welfare that is given based on a comparison to the living standards of others, whether working or not. It’s why in the riots that occur and the looting that invariably follows; the unproductive seek to gain a materialistic lifestyle in comparison to those that produce. In all riots, the main targets are not those stores that enable basic essentials, but electric, brand name and electronic goods stores. One suggestion is that governments subside basic essentials such as food, electricity and clothing with the money now given as welfare, which would prevent absolute poverty, but also instill a message that cell phones and plasma TV’s are for …show more content…
So, by a continuing demand for more wealth, the rich are becoming money richer but their increased wealth only buys them what a dollar was worth when made and not what it’s worth in the future and it’s why, despite a relative welfare system, the poor say they’re getting poorer, but only in relation to everyone else, because they can’t demand increases and have to pay the higher prices.
Money itself is not a good indicator of wealth and that’s because it simply indicates how much purchasing power an individual has at any one period in time and not the future. It’s why despite salary increases and business profits, what you can buy today you could have bought ten years ago for half the price, when your salary was also half of what it is today. If all salaries were cut in half tomorrow, but so too were prices, you’d still have the same purchasing power with less