RELATIVE INCOME VERSUS ABSOLUTE INCOME. Kids, there is a vigorous debate among economists about the importance of relative income versus absolute income. This article discusses the difference between absolute poverty and relative poverty. The European Union uses a poverty threshold of 60% of “national median equivalized household income”, which is a relative poverty concept. Somebody who has 50% of average European income would fall below the poverty threshhold and be considered poor even though he or she would be very well off compared to the roughly 20% of the people in the world who live on less than a dollar a day (discussed here). An example given here is: “in 1905 an individual in the United States unable to afford a car would probably not feel or be viewed as deprived since cars were a luxury. In 2005, when cars are common, an individual unable to afford a car is likely to be seen as deprived.”
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- ADAPTING GATSBY. (1)
- Mary Jane Schaefer: I think these are crucial, important decisions, what to leave out of any literary work, maybe any...
- DAMIEN HIRST—AN ART MARKET BUBBLE?. (1)
- Kate Bush: I hope you enjoy my visit to the Damien Hirst show as much as I did The Technical Impossibility of...
- THE MOST IMPORTANT EPISODE OF THE SIMPSONS ? (COMMENT). (1)
- Nick: Homer does has success as the team’s best hitter until Mr. Burns places a bet with a rival factory owner...
- THE “RIGHT TO EDIT”. (1)
- Lee: A relevant Simpsons clip.
- ULYSSES—VIRGINIA WOOLF LIKED THE BOOK, DESPISED THE AUTHOR. (3)
- A DEFENSE OF INVASIVE SPECIES. (3)
- Dick Weisfelder: Today’s Toledo Blade has an article on the importation of live Asian carp to Canada to serve...
- Lee: The downside is that red squirrels are way cuter than their gray cousins. Hitchens on the subject.
- THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT). (5)
- frank martin: Have been in a an Al only Roto league since 91… started at Ohio University were we all went to...
- DEATH OF A BUMBLEBEE. (1)
- Nick: By contrast, I remember witnessing the entire thing. I was surprised by Annalisa’s reaction and...
- ANOTHER VOTE ON UMBRIDGE. (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: When I look back at one of the Potter books, it’s usually this one. There are just a lot of...
- THE SCARIEST VILLAIN IN HARRY POTTER? (1)
- Dick Weisfelder: Didn’t we all meet her somewhere in grade or high school?
- ADAPTING GATSBY. (1)
Meta
From what you describe here, relative income seems to make sense as a concept. True, even in 2005 being unable to afford a car but still afford a house with four walls makes you better off than millions of people in the world. However, the way our country’s roads and cities are laid out, it’s a big disadvantage not to have a car. Some companies even require that you have your own transportation or else they won’t hire you. When your ability to get hired is limited, your income is limited (or nonexistent) and it’s harder to move up in the world. Perhaps what’s important is to do the numbers for both relative income and absolute income, so as to keep both sides in perspective.