<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>The poverty level</title>
		<description>Comments for The poverty level at http://www.adamsmith.org , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.adamsmith.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 13:06:52 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>It's about time..</title>
			<link>http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/the-poverty-level-200807031645/#comment-533</link>
			<description>...that someone assaulted the nonsense of relative poverty as a benchmark for setting government welfare policy. - Lola</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:57:03 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/the-poverty-level-200807031645/#comment-532</link>
			<description>&quot;One might quibble over the details of what should or should not be included, but the exercise itself is a laudable one. It is useful information for us to know what level of income is needed by specific groups to sustain a minimum acceptable standard of living.&quot;

One might quibble, since the notion of &quot;a minimum acceptable standard of living&quot; has no objective basis.  That the compilers of this report consider wine but not tobacco as necessary is a perfect manifestation of their attempt to disguise their arbitrary subjective preferences as objective necessities.  Insisting that various luxuries are &quot;part of living a decent life&quot; may be your opinion, but it has no more basis in fact than a claim that attending church or enjoying opera are part of living a decent life, and should not be used in the formulation of public policy. - Andrew Roocroft</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:32:03 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/economics/the-poverty-level-200807031645/#comment-530</link>
			<description>&quot;It would be a good thing if this were to be institutionalized, with a standing commission reporting annually on how the figure has changed over the year, much as the inflation rate basket of goods is changed from time to time to reflect changing lifestyles.&quot;

The above sounds like a wonderful opportunity to create yet another institution at taxpayers expense.
Why not leave it to the Joseph Rountree Foundation??

The real plus of this report is it gives us a target at which income tax should start and not include so many low wage earners - Richard Calhoun</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 07:14:25 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
