The Oxford dictionary describes it as a state of being extremely poor.
Campbell Live has covered many stories recently where poverty has been the underlying theme. So much so that his programme has virtually become a public Telethon of sorts, where those in financial difficulty will share their hard luck story and then, more often than not, the viewing public will come to their rescue with donations and everyone lives happily ever after.
It's heart-warming stuff and really wonderful to see just how caring and generous many Kiwis are, but I've yet to be convinced that any of the stories I saw were, indeed, true examples of poverty. Most, if not all, seemed to be the result of poor financial decision making.
If it was as simple as coming up with a "woe is me" tale, whereby there wasn't enough money to live the lifestyle we want, then surely we would all qualify to be on the programme.
Take, for example, the young couple who had been burgled. They had the money to buy a giant flat-screen TV, PC, laptop and surround-sound stereo. All top of line mod cons, costing thousands of dollars, but they couldn't find a few hundred to buy contents insurance. Poverty? Sorry, not in my book and nor was it worthy of a public "whip around".
We're given examples of "poverty" every day in the media. Children, walking barefoot to school and minus a school bag and/or lunch box, yet the same kids are filmed at a corner dairy emerging with hot pies and overpriced energy drinks. Does this qualify as poverty?
Families bemoaning the fact that they can only afford two-minute noodles and budget bread to live on but somehow a case of beer finds its way into the supermarket trolley. Again I ask, is this poverty?
We can find posts on Faceache or whatever the hell it's called, of people claiming poverty while sitting at a computer screen connected to broadband or tweeting from their $1000 iPhone. Same question ... poverty?
Many schools have adopted the "grow your own" initiative, teaching our kids how to plant and grow fresh vegetables and herbs, then take what's been grown and turn it in to a fabulous healthy home-made meal, all in an effort to promote self sufficiency, cooking skills and good nutrition. What a truly invaluable lesson. It's such a shame, then, that the whole message is set to be undermined when upon the completion of that lesson the kids are going to be told to line up for their state-funded lunch. It kind of defeats the purpose.
Where's the motivation to be self-sufficient and independent when, on the other hand, you are almost fostering a dependence on the state. It just doesn't make sense, nor does it address the root cause of the problem.
And before you start in on me, I get that the kids are the innocent victims in all this, but the fact remains, the more the state finances the fix, the less incentive there is for families to fix their finances and so another generation of beneficiaries is born and the vicious circle, of those living below the breadline, continues to claim more "victims".
I'm not saying there is no genuine poverty, for there undoubtedly is, but an awful lot of the claimed poverty actually comes back to poor financial literacy and people having their spending priorities all wrong. I'm not sure what a viable solution is.
The irony is that, especially in an election year, every party will promise you they can fix the problem with poor financial choices of their own. It will, of course, be with a band aid. One that will forever need changing, covering a festering sore that will never heal until somebody can finally find an effective treatment.
In the meantime, the gap between rich and poor will continue to grow ever wider. I'd put money on it, if I had any to spare, but I'm not crying poverty just yet.
I do wonder, though, what the life forms might be worth on the black market. I'm even prepared to do a two- for-one deal on the clones. Send your offers to investik8@gmail.com
Kate Stewart is an unemployed, reluctant mother of three, currently running amok in the city ... approach with caution or cheesecake.
