Talk:Poverty

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article Collaboration and Improvement DriveThis article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of December 5, 2007.

References[edit]

References[edit]

Wiki Education assignment: LLIB 1115 - Intro to Information Research[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): ParrTiff (article contribs).

Wiki Education assignment: Global Poverty and Practice[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2022 and 15 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Go23bears (article contribs).

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Leosibb4 (article contribs).

Poverty reduction section headings[edit]

@Avatar317: the TOC structure for the "Poverty reduction" section is laid out with three general approaches at the second level, and specific categories at the third:

 Poverty reduction
   Increasing the supply of basic needs
     Food and other goods
     Health care and education
     Housing
     Removing constraints on government services
     Reversing brain drain
     Preventing overpopulation
   Increasing personal income
     Income grants
     Economic freedoms
     Financial services
   Reversing wealth concentration
     Tax and governance reforms
     Labor support
     Direct aid
     Education
     Infrastructure

I didn't create that structure, but I tried to follow it when expanding the "Reversing wealth concentration" subsection. I did so because the section as a whole was missing consequentialist approaches prevalent in the literature and in practice. Does it make sense that the specific categories addressing wealth concentration shouldn't be at the same header level as that general approach?

I do agree there is some overlap, for UBI in particular, but there are some subtle differences, for instance between increasing the overall supply of food to a population and direct food aid to individuals, between instituting microloan programs and reducing interest rates for consumer credit generally, and between increasing housing supply and increasing its density and affordability on a per-unit basis. Sandizer (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I think that there are many ways to structure an article, with no necessarily right or wrong ways. My impression (while I haven't read all of your recently added sources) is that things like education are NOT ONLY a means to reduce RELATIVE poverty by reducing wealth concentration or income inequality, but even a way to help people in extreme poverty, (basic job skills) so I think that most of those sub-categories you added should be higher up, like I changed them to be. ---Avatar317(talk) 20:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The categorization of "increasing supplies / increasing income / decreasing inequality" is the cause of some overlap, and may be inferior to listing all of the specific interventions at one level, but it doesn't make sense to do that for some but not all of those categories. There are also some clear flaws, e.g., "reversing brain drain" isn't "increasing supply of basic needs" at all. I'm trying to think of some better top-level categories. Sandizer (talk) 02:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The subsections above mentioned about increasing the supply of healthcare and education. "Reversing brain drain" is a significant part of retaining healthcare personnel. JustBeCool (talk) 05:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How is this? (Ordered alphabetically at both levels)

  • Governance: Corporate accountability, Development aid, Good institutions, Increasing economic freedoms, Land reform, Microloans, Providing more financial services, Removing constraints on government services
  • Human development: Early childhood education, Empowering women, Free college, Increasing the availability of health care, Job training and vocational education, Political participation, Reducing workweek length
  • Infrastructure development: Bicycles; Climate change adaptation; High-density and affordable housing; Increasing the housing supply; Public transportation; Water, sanitation, energy, and transportation infrastructure
  • Labor issues: Employment and hiring subsidies, Helping farmers, Increasing wage share of income, Worker protections
  • Population management: Increasing the supply of food and other goods, Overpopulation prevention, Reversing brain drain
  • Social safety nets: Clothing, food, electricity, heating, housing and telecommunication services welfare programs; Debt relief; Income grants; Universal basic income; Universal healthcare
  • Taxation: Payroll tax reduction, Progressive taxation, Wealth taxation

I've included topics from Poverty reduction which we don't already have here but should probably include at least a couple sentences in italics. Sandizer (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't much mind how stuff is ordered (so I won't argue over it) but I think the most intelligent way to order this stuff would be from most IMPORTANT or EFFECTIVE to lesser, in the way that you solve problems by solving the biggest first, but that would also require sources prioritizing poverty responses, which may be very difficult to find.
Your choice at least groups things together logically, so I'd support reorganizing the article to that structure. If you do this, can you please move one or two paragraphs per edit, to make it easier to follow than one HUGE re-org. Thanks! ---Avatar317(talk) 00:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do not support this proposal as it is proposed right now. If you check the history section, more than ten years ago, the poverty reduction section was not navigable and was becoming increasingly exhaustive similar to the poverty reduction article is right now. This section already has a tag for repeating too much of the poverty reduction article and for not following summary style. The original categorization as explained in the lead of the section of 'increasing supply of basic needs' and 'increasing personal income' I believe helped the structure over the years a lot. Recently, a third subsection of 'reversing wealth concentration' was added which I feel only made things worse and muddied the waters. The section used to be about reducing absolute poverty. Perhaps a solution is to have another section for relative poverty where more of the issue of wealth concentration can be addressed. JustBeCool (talk) 05:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The number of people below different poverty lines
Most impoverished people are poor at the margins. Extreme and moderate poverty are increasingly the minority of those impoverished, so restricting the section to reducing "absolute" poverty is WP:UNDUE here. Anyway, I'll work on Poverty reduction first since it needs help and it seems reasonable to do the WP:SUMMARY article before the section, and then I'll work on a concrete proposal for the section here so there is something substantive to compare. Sandizer (talk) 22:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My proposal was for two sections, one dealing with reducing absolute poverty and the other dealing with relative poverty. Taking the recentism bias approach that since absolute poverty is decreasing that this would be WP:UNDUE is not how WP:UNDUE works. Would you want two sections for relative poverty and only one for absolute poverty to balance it out somehow? I see you have made the same layout proposal in the poverty reduction article. I still think the different approaches to relative and absolute poverty need to be separated but, if anything, your layout would rather be better in the poverty reduction article since having seven level-three headers instead of two or three would be cumbersome in a section that already has a tag for not being concise. JustBeCool (talk) 20:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How would you sort specifics into those two categories? Does education decrease absolute or relative poverty? How about universal health care? UBI? Means-tested direct cash grants? All can do both. As for recentism, the decline of extreme poverty has taken place over decades. Regarding brevity, I suggest trimming the longer sections from this article and moving anything missing from poverty reduction to that article. Sandizer (talk) 22:50, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you do not want another section for relative poverty, then having a subsection for it within the poverty reduction section isn't any better. Some of the content you added are appropriately sourced and I would like to incorporate those into the existing structure such as universal health care and grants which already had a place in the section before you repeated extra subsections. JustBeCool (talk) 00:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I haven't gotten a reply for two weeks now. I am proceeding with merging what you added into the existing structure. JustBeCool (talk) 21:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tooltip needs to be edited[edit]

hey im not a normal user i just browse but i couldnt find a way to report the tooltop for the page on poverty. screenshot attached https://i.imgur.com/FyoJbjX.png 69.201.139.236 (talk) 21:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]