In essence, poverty is judged in relation with society. This means that even though someone is earning enough money to provide for his basic needs, he would still be poor, if his income falls short of what the society around him is earning. (Galbraith, 1998)
The instruments to judge poverty are as widely differing as the debate on the definition of poverty itself. Where some people measure poverty according to the household income, others measure poverty by understanding the concept of depravity and the basic needs lacking in any person’s life. In Britain since the year 1999, the government has been measuring poverty using a criterion of sixty per cent of the existing average income level adjusted according to the size of the household.
Studies about poverty suggest that the population demographic is hit by poverty across different age-groups, ethnicities and nationalities. Where some individuals feel that poverty is experienced by those who are involved in double-crossing either the state or the society, other believe that the concept of a ‘welfare-state’ is what breeds poverty among masses. Such critics are of the view that the idea of welfare-state itself is responsible for higher rates of poverty; when individuals are aware that they will be able to obtain a decent amount of the basic necessities that they require, even if they do not work, such individuals might be tempted to stop working and rely on the state instead.
“The persistence of child poverty in rich countries undermines both equality of opportunity and commonality of values. It therefore confronts the industrialized world with a test both of its ideals and of its capacity to resolve many of its most intractable social problems.” (Centre, 2000)
The key findings of the Innocenti Report Card show how child poverty is still very much a relevant issue in the developed world, whereby