The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) made a bit of a press splash with their report discussing what is the minimum income required for an adequate standard of living in the UK today http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/jul/02/welfare full report at http://www.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/findings/socialpolicy/2244.asp This is an interesting addition to the more common debate about relative and absolute poverty. Minimum adequate income was calculated on the basis of what goods and services were needed to pay for an "adequate" standard of living as defined by a panel of adjudicators who assessed a range of goods and services that are widely available and deciding if they were a necessity or a luxury. I was interested by their classification of broadband access as being a luxury, except for families with secondary school students. I feel they are a bit behind the times on this one, and I would have included it as a necessity for all citizens wishing to live an adequate life and I would further argue that without it families with children of all ages slip below the threshold of an adequate life into the disadvantaged. For example, if one looks at the type of home/school internet links that will soon be in place http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2288247,00.html these will fundamentally alter interactions between parents and teachers and as the article shows will put those who are not able to engage on a routine basis over the internet at a major disadvantage. I don’t think the existence of public points of access are equivalent to home access.
Saturday, 5 July 2008
3) Minimum income
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
John - I agree with your comment about internet access. The digital divide is a massive issue, and with technology-based tools to help overcome social exclusion becoming so widespread, I think access should be properly tackled by government.
Post a Comment