A while ago I challenged whether we have Poverty in New Zealand following a Green Party claim it was as high as 30%.
Some took me to task in that their definition is based on a relativity and therefore we do have poverty in our society.
My dictionary defines Poverty as "unable to access the necessities of life".
A couple of days ago Mike Hosking, who delivers my weekday connection to what is happening in the world related a bit about a slum suburb of Mumbai, or Bombay as I understand it, called Dharavai.
Covering less than a square mile 500 acres (200 Ha), it is described as an "Administrative Ward". Sandwiched between two rail corridors, low lying, subject to flooding, with poor "fresh" water and almost no sewer (the main outlet for that is an open "creek"). As of 2006 there was ONE TOILET per 1440 residents
Population approaching one million souls, it is self contained as to business/residential activity based on leather, pottery and textile industries and recently it has become the recycling center for Mumbai.
Latest figures suggest there are around 5,000 businesses and 15,000 'single room factories'.
Total turnover is 'estimated' at between $500 million and $650 million US pa. That was turnover not income, I am unable to access an individual citizen income pa.
It was once described as Mumbai's biggest slum but has since been overtaken by four others.
Christchurch Hagley Park covers about 80% of the area of Dharavai so put 750,000 souls with their homes, work, and access, deliver substandard water and put the sewerage into the Avon River. Deliver welfare with Charity, throw in the still very apparent Caste system, a decent bloc of Tamils with the Hindus, the Buddhists, a few Christians and other assorted sects and tell me how to RELATE Dharavai to my image of 'relative disadvantage'.
A picture of Poverty might become apparent, then again you could just ask the NZ Green Party or their socialist big brothers, who are going off about an effort to better target youth welfare to be more effective and beneficial.