Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Beetin t1_isoldok wrote

Reply to comment by LupusDeusMagnus in Number of poor people in India fell by about 415 mn between 2005-06 and 2019-21, a 'historic change': UN by AP24inMumbai

https://ophi.org.uk/multidimensional-poverty-index/

Article says it is based on MPI modelling. (health, education, living standards). That model gives you fun descriptors like "Multidimensionally poor" which just sounds like a sick burn.

It is a VERY low threshhold for poor though. "Do you have no assets but get enough calories, attend(ed) a decent amount of school, have electricity, shelter, and basic health?" You aren't UN humanitarian level poor, just normal poor.

You can find MPI reports for India online. here is 2021 AFAIK

It has some obvious gaps (can only estimate when health records aren't available for example) but it's developed by smart people with access to a lot of data with the purported goal to track and reduce extreme poverty. Make your own conclusions. It gives examples of how to calculate in the link above.

It varied from region to region, but new reports are showing that the poorest areas are gaining the most, reversing an old trend. Some had huge improvements to drinking water, others to education, attendance, and years in education, others to things like electricity and cooking fuel, others in housing + assets, and most regions saw big improvements to nutrition/caloric intake and very little improvement to child mortality.

78

Grammarnazi_bot t1_isqq2dh wrote

> “do you have no assets but get enough calories, attend(ed) a decent amount of school, have electricity, shelter, and basic health?” You aren’t UN humanitarian poor, just normal poor

Isn’t this almost every under-25 year old in the west who isn’t upper class?

6

Beetin t1_isra4tg wrote

In fairness, I think it would be weirder in a capitalist country if the vast majority of people under 25 weren't independently 'poor' in an asset sense, since they've been an adult and in the workforce for only a few years.

These stats use family/household wealth and assets anyways, so that 28 year old living at home would get grouped by their parents assets and education.

Although I knew a lot of folks living dorms who probably met some of the metrics high level concepts of poverty:

  • The household has unimproved or no sanitation facility or it is improved but shared with other households.

  • The household’s source of drinking water is not safe or safe drinking water is a 30-minute or longer walk from home, roundtrip.

  • Any person under 70 years of age for whom there is nutritional information is undernourished.

  • The household does not own more than one of these assets: radio, TV, telephone, computer, animal cart, bicycle, motorbike, or refrigerator, and does not own a car or truck. (squeaking by on computer + telephone)

  • The household has inadequate housing materials in any of the three components: floor, roof, or walls.

silliness aside, that is actually part of why 'poor' people in the developed are not living in that absolute poverty, according to metrics like the MPI.

These types of metrics are used by the UN to find, study, and combat extreme, multi-faceted, acute poverty in developing countries. Here is a map of where they've done case studies for it and the results. You'll notice developed western nations ain't on it.

https://ophi.org.uk/multidimensional-poverty-index/global-mpi-databank/

5

[deleted] t1_isp89g1 wrote

[deleted]

−2

currentscurrents t1_ispku2f wrote

Did you read any of that at all?

>Some had huge improvements to drinking water, others to education, attendance, and years in education, others to things like electricity and cooking fuel, others in housing + assets, and most regions saw big improvements to nutrition/caloric intake and very little improvement to child mortality.

3