It's also important to note that many of the poorest, viz. those without
legal status, migrants, nomads etc. are left out in the compilation of these
statistics


That was such a profound observation. The poorest of the poor live not
only below the poverty line but below the radar of most such surveys
and statistics.

Also I want to say that often,  those with simple lifestyles (let's
say, for example, the Gond tribes, or the Irulas, or the Soligas) are
not counted as people living with Nature; they are counted as poor,
because poverrty is measured by how much money you have in the bank,
not how much you are able to survive without it. I remember that
movie, "The Gods Must Be Crazy." It made a valid point about the
currency of currency.

Deepa.



On 9/26/07, Ingrid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The merits of this article aside, Gini coefficients, that measure income
> inequality, have risen steadily in India since 1980 from 0.32 to 0.38. For
> the record, a Gini above 0.35 is generally believed to be unsustainable
> socially and politically. If it's any consolation the comparable Ginis for
> China are 0.32 and 0.40 and for the US 0.35 to 0.40 over the same period.
> Naturally, sheer arithmetic implies that greater income inequalities require
> greater rates of GDP growth to reduce poverty to the same extent.
>
> What really makes India different are:
> 1. the sheer numbers of people living in poverty. The percentages living on
> less than USD 2 per day have declined by less than 10% from 89.6% to
> 79.9%over the same 20 year period. At
> 1.5 billion, that's about 1.2 billion.
> 2. the skews within India where rural and tribal communities especially in
> Maharashtra, parts of MP, Bengal, Manipur, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh have
> seen increases in both the absolute number and the percentage of people
> living in abject poverty.  And all over India, but particularly in
> Jharkhand, Orissa, Bihar and parts of UP the numbers living on under USD
> 0.25 per day are, in absolute terms, staggering.
>
> It's also important to note that many of the poorest, viz. those without
> legal status, migrants, nomads etc. are left out in the compilation of these
> statistics
>

Reply via email to