Poverty in Australia

[NumberJohnny5]

So I was reading an article titled "The poor reality of rich Australia" which can be found at http://www.smh.com.au/national/the-poor-reality-of-rich-australia-20131012-2vemb.html

Some blurbs:

But UnitingCare research released on Saturday paints a different picture and reveals Australia’s poverty rate has increased since 2000/01 from 10.2 per cent to 11.8 per cent.

Sounds ominous.

Almost one-quarter of the 2.6 million Australians living under the poverty line are dependent children aged under 25, according to the UnitingCare Poverty, Social Exclusion and Disadvantage in Australia report.

Well, if a family of four is living in poverty...that's 50% dependent children. 25% doesn't sound that far off, I guess.

The community services body says the findings reflected the paltry level of Newstart Allowance, which ranges from $501 a fortnight for singles and $542 for single parents.

Ok...wait a minute...what??!! Methinks I need to go find this magical poverty line. It takes some googling, but I find the official report that sets the poverty line each quarter. You can find the report at http://melbourneinstitute.com/miaesr/publications/indicators/poverty-lines-australia.html .

Assuming the head of household works, here's the current numbers (note that this is income per week, and that "income" includes any government payments):

Couple - $654.45
Couple plus 1 - $786.69
Couple plus 2 - $918.92
Couple plus 3 - $1,051.15
Couple plus 4 - $1,183.38
Single person - $489.23
Single parent plus 1 - $628.08
Single parent plus 2 - $760.22
Single parent plus 3 - $892.45
Single parent plus 4 - $1,024.69

So our family of four example...that's $918.92 per week, times 52 weeks...that's $47,783.84. Oh, btw, these numbers are AFTER tax. That's the poverty line.

[TS]

The report uses the Henderson Poverty Line which is a measure of relative (rather than absolute) poverty.  In broad terms, it says you are in poverty if you earn less than 56.5% of the average family of your type.  It isn't a measure of whether people can provide the basic necessities of life, but instead whether they can buy a reasonable amount of stuff compared to their neighbours. 

[NumberJohnny5]

Which is exactly my point. How can we possibly eradicate poverty if we keep moving the goalposts?

In other news, we're going to be living in poverty next year. Please keep us in your thoughts as we suffer through our 3mo trip back to the US, visit family, go to DisneyWorld (we'll probably rough it, camping in our tent or staying at a "Value" resort...oh the humanity!), eat at restaurants and do a lot of shopping (well, as much as our checked luggage will allow).

[Nudelkopf]

Hmmmm... I do find the idea of a "poverty line" to be very interesting.

I've planned my budget around what I would receive from Centrelink's Newstart allowance if I were eligible. It's pretty bleak, I have to say. After $150/week rent, it leaves me with $165/week.

Weekly:
Groceries $55
Transport $15
Social $30
Medical + prescriptions $12.50
Sport $4.50
Hair $2.50
Mobile $3.50
Office $8
Clothes $9
Travel $25

Needless to say, someone on Centrelink without an emergency fund or who had debt repayments would be up sh!t creek. It's well below the Melbourne Institute's poverty line for a single ($489/wk). Or for anyone who had a car. Granted, if you're on Centrelink you probably shouldn't be travelling at the cost of $1300 per year, or spending nearly $500 on clothes a year. But living on the "poverty line" of $489 per week would be lovely!

[steveo]

Couple plus 3 - $1,051.15

We try to spend around $900/fortnight however that isn't including the mortgage and additional costs like car insurance & maintenance which we budget for as more of a yearly cost which comes out of a different budget. $1,000 per week though is a lot to spend for a family with 3 kids.

[NumberJohnny5]

Couple plus 3 - $1,051.15

We try to spend around $900/fortnight however that isn't including the mortgage and additional costs like car insurance & maintenance which we budget for as more of a yearly cost which comes out of a different budget. $1,000 per week though is a lot to spend for a family with 3 kids.

The numbers I gave included housing. For a couple with three children, the number excluding housing is $827.67 per week.

If you exclude the amount we're saving, then our spending is currently below the poverty line. In fact it has been for quite some time now. Which tells me that a family in poverty can have two fancy smartphones, three tablets (generic Android, but still), a car, two holidays a year (we're about to go to Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore, and a cruise back...previous holiday was "just" a cruise), plenty of food to eat, going to a restaurant like McDonald's once a week or so, occasional movie out, etc. Someone making just below the poverty line can have the same lifestyle as we are (minus the extra in retirement savings).

This isn't meant to make light of people who actually struggle. If anything, I mean to make people look more closely at the "news." What's their agenda, and what are they leaving out to help boost that agenda? In this case, it's what the poverty line is; I don't think the article would have the same punch if it stated a family of four with $45k/yr in after tax income is considered below the poverty line.

[NumberJohnny5]

Hmmmm... I do find the idea of a "poverty line" to be very interesting.

I've planned my budget around what I would receive from Centrelink's Newstart allowance if I were eligible. It's pretty bleak, I have to say. After $150/week rent, it leaves me with $165/week.

Weekly:
Groceries $55
Transport $15
Social $30
Medical + prescriptions $12.50
Sport $4.50
Hair $2.50
Mobile $3.50
Office $8
Clothes $9
Travel $25

Needless to say, someone on Centrelink without an emergency fund or who had debt repayments would be up sh!t creek. It's well below the Melbourne Institute's poverty line for a single ($489/wk). Or for anyone who had a car. Granted, if you're on Centrelink you probably shouldn't be travelling at the cost of $1300 per year, or spending nearly $500 on clothes a year. But living on the "poverty line" of $489 per week would be lovely!

Bleak is relative. You have no job and are at the bottom of the safety net. You still have money for clothing, travel, social activities, etc. Haven't even touched on how, if this was an actual emergency, there's a lot of fat that can be trimmed. Travel, gone. Social...sorry guys, maybe after the emergency's over. Hair...I'm divided on this; my wife cuts mine, but if I was job-searching.... Sport, gone. Groceries, we spend $80/wk (plus another $20/wk on restaurants) for a family of four, so it might be tight...but that can be lowered. Mobile, that can be dropped, but not a lot I'll admit (wife's is $10/mo plus an extra dollar or two for calls made). Medical, depends on your condition I guess. Transport, only if it's for job searching. Anyways, if you have no savings and are out of a job, it's an emergency. Spend like it is. I'm fairly certain that if you cut as much as is feasibly possible, you'd have a bit left over. Build up a small emergency fund, then start relaxing a bit (bumping the social spending up to $15/wk, for example).

Oh...does $150/wk rent include utilities? If so, that's not bad! If not...then add those in. Depending on circumstances, should be possible to keep that within $50/wk. Ok, now things may be a bit tight, but not what I'd call bleak. If everyone around you has a McMansion and is spending money like it's going out of style, then I can understand you may feel like it's bleak.

[Nudelkopf]

I know, if I actually was on the dole I'm sure I'd spend differently. I wonder how people do it long term, though. Having no money to visit family or money to play sport would get very shit, very quick. Here's hoping I'm never actually on the dole.

[This_Is_My_Username]

Almost one-quarter of the 2.6 million Australians living under the poverty line are dependent children aged under 25, according to the UnitingCare Poverty, Social Exclusion and Disadvantage in Australia report.

so, ~23% of people under 25 are in poverty.
31.8% of the wider population is under 25.

This is good news for under 25's!

[NumberJohnny5]

Almost one-quarter of the 2.6 million Australians living under the poverty line are dependent children aged under 25, according to the UnitingCare Poverty, Social Exclusion and Disadvantage in Australia report.

so, ~23% of people under 25 are in poverty.
31.8% of the wider population is under 25.

This is good news for under 25's!

No...gotta read carefully. It's not 25% of people under 25 in poverty. It's 25% of those who are in poverty, are dependent children under 25. Of course, the former is what they want you to think...and it's why it's worded the way it is. Cause 25% is a much bigger number (and demands more immediate action) than 2.5% or so (25% of 10%...or thereabouts).

[This_Is_My_Username]

good pickup, thanks :)

[marty998]

$48,000 is poverty? I give up.

What an f'ed up lot we are. Nothing more need be said, best I end the rant before I start.

[Anatidae V]

Um. Where do you find a house in Australia for $150 per week with enough room for a family of 4? Granted a single person can rent out a single room, but I am not aware of anything larger than a single room for that level of rent.

[random_nobody_23]

Tasmania

[TS]

You can also find 2 or 3 bedroom places in almost every state and territory for $150 per week, so long as you live outside the major metropolitan areas.

[Anatidae V]

The trick is that the vast majority of jobs are in major metropolitan areas. As long as you can get a job outside the cities, so you don't have a ridiculous commute, it could work.

[Nudelkopf]

I know so many unemployed education graduates that refuse to move out of the major metropolitan areas... If they went rural, they would be paying $35/week in housing, and they'd have a job. Isn't MMM all about making choices? :)

[davisgang90]

You guys should have a War on Poverty in Australia like the US.

It worked great for us!

[happy]

Yup we did. Struggling to remember the promise and who made it, but politically we were gonna lick child poverty by year ????

[random_nobody_23]

I know so many unemployed education graduates that refuse to move out of the major metropolitan areas... If they went rural, they would be paying $35/week in housing, and they'd have a job. Isn't MMM all about making choices? :)

That's exactly what I'm planning on doing in a few years. I can live for free, get my bills subsidised and also have less things to spend my money on. All while my partner can work in the mines and we can both save.
I don't know why people are so averse to the idea.

[NumberJohnny5]

Um. Where do you find a house in Australia for $150 per week with enough room for a family of 4? Granted a single person can rent out a single room, but I am not aware of anything larger than a single room for that level of rent.

We pay $170/wk, two bedroom, enough for our family of four. With rent assistance (because we're so close to the poverty line) of $45/wk, that's $125/wk out of pocket. Bit over an hour away from Melbourne, so not metro but not rural either (there's three grocery stores within 1.7 miles of our house).

[marty998]

Yup we did. Struggling to remember the promise and who made it, but politically we were gonna lick child poverty by year ????

That was Bob Hawke "No child shall live in poverty by 198-" (I forget the year).

I am necroing this thread for another reason though. A topical article on The Drum was posted earlier this week regarding absolute vs relative poverty in Australia. Granted there is a hidden agenda with these contributions from "think tanks" but I suppose if no one puts it out there then it won't be discussed.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-04/taylor-poverty-wars/5237878

[happy]

The more I read about poverty, the more I realise how complex even defining it is.

I notice  2  of the "markers" talked about are missing a meal to save money, and not being able to afford to heat the house.

I'm sure the experience is entirely different psychologically, but I note I have voluntarily done IF (for health and frugality) and collect wood for free so I don't have to pay for heating. So even I, a not very good mustachian, have practiced a little voluntary poverty.  Some of this is, I'm sure, "all in the mind". It seems easier to be voluntarily poor, than suffer involuntary poverty. 

Ironically, if you practice voluntary poverty, you are less likely to end up in the state of involuntary poverty.

[marty998]

Ask a Sydney resident and an Alice Springs resident what is poor and you'll get 2 different answers.

For that matter ask an Aussie, a Chinese, an Ethiopian and a Brazilian and you'll get more answers

Ironically, if you practice voluntary poverty, you are less likely to end up in the state of involuntary poverty.

How true.