erolz66 wrote:cyprusgrump wrote:erolz66 wrote:It is not your problem with relative poverty definitions in the UK that is the issue here.
It is your denial that there is any absolute poverty in the UK, with that being defined as not having to struggle in order to provide the basic things like food, shelter and warmth.
The idea that no one in the UK has to struggle daily to meet these basic needs, that no one lives in or under constant threat of this kind of poverty in the UK, that this kind of poverty just does not exist at all in the UK, is what I am challenging here.
No, the problem is the ridiculous black/white nature of your posts...
the black and white nature of MY posts ? This whole thread stated in response to your black and white assertion that there was no absolute poverty in the UK at all and that there only was 'relative poverty' of those who had less than average but were still able to meet basic necessities like food, shelter and warmth. It was this black and white denial that there was ANY such poverty in the UK today that I was not willing to let go without challenge.cyprusgrump wrote:Okay, I'll concede that there may be a small number of people that (for whatever reason*) struggle...
And kudos for you for conceding that , however grudgingly and however hedged around with caveats.cyprusgrump wrote:...But to suggest that there is a large problem in the UK is simply untrue.
I have little interest personally in arguing / discussing with you here what the degree of this poverty is in the UK. I merely was not prepared to accept your original black and white binary claim that it did not exist at all.
So you agree it is a minor problem yet you could not let is pass...?
Amazing that you agree that but couldn't bring yourself to correct posters that claimed it was a bigger problem eh? Pathetic.
Please get a life...