Poverty Rates in the West

[Mike_Hunt]

In 2023, approximately 21% of the EU population, or 94.6 million people, were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, a slight decrease from 22% (95.3 million) in 2022. 

 

In 2024, approximately 13.4% of Australians, or 3.3 million people, lived below the poverty line, defined as 50% of the median household income, including 761,000 children. 

 

In 2023, the official US poverty rate was 12.7%, with 36.8 million people living in poverty, a slight decrease from 2022. 

 

 

I figured the EU rate would be lower.  The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn't stink. 

 

[hotsun]

11 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

 

 

 

I figured the EU rate would be lower.  The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn't stink. 

 

Not me. They are called europoors for a reason

[Mike_Hunt]

I'm surprised the Germans fall behind the rest of the EU in wealth per person. While you are at it, look at Russia.  That's phatheic.

[Mike_Hunt]

Adding the UK

 

In 2024, the poverty rate in the UK, measured by the Social Metrics Commission (SMC), reached a 21st-century high, with nearly one in four people (24%) living in poverty, an increase of 2 percentage points since 2019/20. 

 

[Cameroni]

15 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

I'm surprised the Germans fall behind the rest of the EU in wealth per person.

 

I am not, billions paid to the Jewish Materials claim conference, billions paid to Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and now Ukraine.

 

I am surprised the Germans have any money left at all.

[blaze master]

As long as I get my pension every month toss everyone else. 

[Mike_Hunt]

 

In 2023, the EU spent approximately 26.8% of its GDP on social protection benefits, which amounted to €4.583 trillion. 

 

 

The EU spends a pile of money with bad results. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[placeholder]

10 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

 

 

In 2023, the EU spent approximately 26.8% of its GDP on social protection benefits, which amounted to €4.583 trillion. 

 

 

The EU spends a pile of money with bad results. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

False. That's the total of what countries in the EU spent on social protection benefits. The E.U. budget for that year was €186.6 billion

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/eu-annual-budget/2023-budget/#:~:text=EU budget for 2023%3A Council,amount to €168.6 billion.

[Lacessit]

12 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

In 2023, approximately 21% of the EU population, or 94.6 million people, were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, a slight decrease from 22% (95.3 million) in 2022. 

 

In 2024, approximately 13.4% of Australians, or 3.3 million people, lived below the poverty line, defined as 50% of the median household income, including 761,000 children. 

 

In 2023, the official US poverty rate was 12.7%, with 36.8 million people living in poverty, a slight decrease from 2022. 

 

 

I figured the EU rate would be lower.  The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn't stink. 

 

The OP compares apples and oranges.

 

The US figure looks as if it is based on the SNAP food program.

 

In Australia the poverty line is 50% of median household income. It takes no account of savings.

 

I am below that poverty line, in terms of income.

 

Living in Thailand, I have two dwellings, two cars, and two scooters. Plus substantial cash savings in Thailand and Australia.

 

It's a flawed comparison, as different metrics are used.

[Airalee]

15 hours ago, Lacessit said:

The OP compares apples and oranges.

 

The US figure looks as if it is based on the SNAP food program.

 

In Australia the poverty line is 50% of median household income. It takes no account of savings.

 

I am below that poverty line, in terms of income.

 

Living in Thailand, I have two dwellings, two cars, and two scooters. Plus substantial cash savings in Thailand and Australia.

 

It's a flawed comparison, as different metrics are used.

Median household income in Australia is what?

 

Here is what AI dug up on median savings (NOT average(mean) which is skewed upwards because of the rich.

 

•  
• Savings by Age Group:

  • Under 17s: Have $3017 in savings on average, with a median of $2729. 
     
  • 18 to 24-year-olds: Have an average of $13,069 and a median of $2,410 in savings. 
     
  • 25 to 44-year-olds: Have an average of $29,769 and a median of $811 in savings. 
     
  • 45 to 54-year-olds: Have an average of $52,836 and a median of $1,429 in savings. 
     
•  

So.   How much savings do you think those who are below 50% of median household income have?  Probably not enough to make a bit of difference,

[Lacessit]

8 hours ago, Airalee said:

Median household income in Australia is what?

 

Here is what AI dug up on median savings (NOT average(mean) which is skewed upwards because of the rich.

 

•  
• Savings by Age Group:

  • Under 17s: Have $3017 in savings on average, with a median of $2729. 
     
  • 18 to 24-year-olds: Have an average of $13,069 and a median of $2,410 in savings. 
     
  • 25 to 44-year-olds: Have an average of $29,769 and a median of $811 in savings. 
     
  • 45 to 54-year-olds: Have an average of $52,836 and a median of $1,429 in savings. 
     
•  

So.   How much savings do you think those who are below 50% of median household income have?  Probably not enough to make a bit of difference,

If AI could give you the savings, it could also give you the median household income.

 

The point of my post is to illustrate a difference in the way poverty rates are measured in different countries.

 

The point of your post is an exercise in off-topic trolling.

[LosLobo]

Maga Mike’s statement about the EU poverty rate being "lower than expected" is a bit misguided, and his general tone suggests a misunderstanding of both the numbers and the social context. Let’s break it down:

1. EU Poverty Rate: The EU's poverty and social exclusion rate of 21% in 2023, affecting nearly 95 million people, is indeed a significant number. However, it’s worth noting that the EU's method of calculating poverty includes not just income but also social exclusion and material deprivation, which paints a broader picture than income alone.

2. Australia's Poverty Rate: Australia’s poverty rate in 2024 at 13.4% (3.3 million people, including 761,000 children) is a sobering statistic. It's also important to consider that the measurement used to define poverty (50% of the median household income) can vary by country and may not directly equate to EU or US standards.

3. US Poverty Rate: In the US, the official poverty rate was 12.7% in 2023, with 36.8 million people living in poverty, which is comparable to the EU and Australia but at a different threshold.

Key Points for Fact-checking:

• Different Definitions: The EU includes broader criteria like social exclusion, which can inflate their statistics in ways the US or Australia may not.

• Economic Differences: The wealth disparity between EU countries can influence the overall poverty rate. Countries like Germany might have lower rates, while others, like Romania or Bulgaria, might be higher.

• Misinformation Habit: Given Mike's history of presenting flawed data, it's fair to question his broader claims without the full context or consideration of how poverty is measured and reported across different regions.

Maga Mike’s critique is a classic case of simplifying complex data to fit a narrative. His comment about Europeans acting like their "stuff doesn't stink" is an opinion that doesn't add value to the poverty discussion and distracts from a more nuanced examination of social issues across the globe.

 

[LosLobo]

Maga Mike’s post is loaded with a salad of logical fallacies. Let’s dissect them:

1. Hasty Generalization:

• Example: "The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn’t stink."

• Explanation: This statement generalizes the attitudes of all Europeans based on an unspecified, likely exaggerated, observation. It's an over-simplification of the situation, assuming that all Europeans share the same self-perception or behavior, which isn't supported by any evidence provided. It’s a clear case of hasty generalization, where Mike jumps to conclusions about an entire population based on a narrow or inaccurate view.

2. False Cause (Post Hoc):

• Example: "I figured the EU rate would be lower."

• Explanation: This suggests that because Europeans often present themselves as superior or have a certain attitude (implied by the derogatory comment), their poverty rate should be lower. It's an example of false cause, assuming that a population's self-image or behavior directly impacts their poverty rate without any logical connection or evidence. In reality, a country’s poverty rate is shaped by complex economic, political, and social factors—not by national pride or attitudes.

3. Ad Hominem:

• Example: "The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn’t stink."

• Explanation: Instead of addressing the actual issue—the poverty rate and its implications—Mike attacks the character or presumed attitude of Europeans. This is an ad hominem attack, where the argument is sidestepped by attacking a group’s character or perceived arrogance, rather than engaging with the actual data or the reasons behind the poverty statistics.

4. Appeal to Emotion:

• Example: "The Europeans act like their <deleted> doesn’t stink."

• Explanation: This statement is designed to evoke a negative emotional response toward Europeans, relying on a stereotype or negative characterization to sway opinion rather than presenting factual evidence. It’s an appeal to emotion, as it plays on the reader’s emotions rather than reasoning logically or presenting a balanced argument.

5. Cherry-Picking:

• Example: The criticism of the EU poverty rate without considering the nuances of poverty measurement.

• Explanation: Mike selectively focuses on the EU poverty rate and uses his preconceptions about European attitudes to dismiss it, while failing to acknowledge that poverty is defined and measured differently in each region. This is cherry-picking, where only certain data points are highlighted, ignoring broader context that would change the narrative.

6. False Comparison:

• Example: Implicit in the comparison between the EU, US, and Australian poverty rates.

• Explanation: By comparing the EU’s poverty rate to the US and Australian rates, Mike assumes these regions are directly comparable without considering differences in poverty measurement or economic context. The poverty rates in these regions are calculated differently, and this comparison doesn’t account for variations in social safety nets, income distribution, and national wealth. This is a false comparison, as the data isn’t directly equivalent without further context.

In summary, Mike’s post is riddled with logical fallacies such as hasty generalization, false cause, ad hominem, and appeal to emotion, among others. These undermine the argument by diverting attention from the data and using emotional or dismissive language to make a point that isn’t supported by solid reasoning.

[JonnyF]

On 3/31/2025 at 11:46 PM, Cameroni said:

 

I am not, billions paid to the Jewish Materials claim conference, billions paid to Poland, Czechia, Hungary, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and now Ukraine.

 

I am surprised the Germans have any money left at all.

 

Wait until Trump's tariffs hit German auto manufacturers.

 

The proverbial will really hit the fan.

 

And when Germany fails, the EU fails. A well deserved failure. 

[Cameroni]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Wait until Trump's tariffs hit German auto manufacturers.

 

The proverbial will really hit the fan.

 

And when Germany fails, the EU fails. A well deserved failure. 

 

You're right, it wil be a huge problem for Germany, already struggling in the auto sector due to the energy failure of German politicians.

 

There are other sectors in the Germany economy, chemical giants like BASF, consumer goods like Siemens, but no doubt the auto  industry is a huge part of the German economy.

[JonnyF]

13 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

You're right, it wil be a huge problem for Germany, already struggling in the auto sector due to the energy failure of German politicians.

 

There are other sectors in the Germany economy, chemical giants like BASF, consumer goods like Siemens, but no doubt the auto  industry is a huge part of the German economy.

 

Yep, squeaky bum time for Zee Germunz.

 

 

Lucky they haven't got any other problems. Oh, wait a minute...

[Airalee]

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

If AI could give you the savings, it could also give you the median household income.

 

The point of my post is to illustrate a difference in the way poverty rates are measured in different countries.

 

The point of your post is an exercise in off-topic trolling.

Using yourself as an example of a “low income, but super high savings” is a ridiculous comparison to people making minimum wage.

 

Almost as hilarious as your boastful claims of “I have enough money saved to live to 108 years old”…..do ya remember that?  It was cringe.

 

I’m sure all the low income people are in the same boat eh?

 

Next time I’m not even going to do half the work for you.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Wait until Trump's tariffs hit German auto manufacturers.

 

The proverbial will really hit the fan.

 

And when Germany fails, the EU fails. A well deserved failure. 

 

... But by the way, I'm not anti-European😂

 

The alternative scenario is that Trump's antics brings Europe closer together. This appears to be the case.

[RayC]

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yep, squeaky bum time for Zee Germunz.

 

 

Lucky they haven't got any other problems. Oh, wait a minute...

 

And retaliatory action by Germany and the EU results in a contraction in the economic activity.

 

Just as there are no winners with Brexit, there are no winners with tariffs.

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yep, squeaky bum time for Zee Germunz.

 

 

Lucky they haven't got any other problems. Oh, wait a minute...

Are you now in some kind of denial about the existence of the EU? If you total up what just the EU nations in this list  import from Germany the total in thousands is about 696,369,000. And if you throw in Switzerland, which should be included given how tightly bound it is by agreements with the EU the total in thousands  comes to about 770,360,000. This is about 4.5 times as much trade as Germany does with America. And of course, this doesn't include all the other EU nations that don't make the top 10 list.

Isn't free trade amazing?