Talk:Relative poverty

I split the article to clearly explain the two distinct meanings which were being confused. I was thinking the "In economics" part would get merged with Income inequality metrics, because it doesn't make much sense to explain one type of measurement without the other, and there's not much to say here that couldn't be said better there. The material on the second sense, in the "Moderate poverty" section is no more than a dictionary definition, which I think should either be moved to Wiktionary, merged with Poverty, or both. -- Beland 05:17, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

deletion?

I would opt for deletion of the rest of this page because

- the OECD/EU stuff is unclear and too specific. - the problem mentioned in the second paragraph is not about relative/absolute measurement but about whether or not one should have a poverty line at all. This is covered in the poverty line-page. - I do not understand the last paragraph; a relative measure does exactly the opposite: shows if people are left behind or not (vs. if they survive or not)

This should not have a redirect but instead an article. This should not be deleted. There is a difference between absolute and relative poverty.Smallman12q (talk) 02:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fisher, Gordon (12-16-05). "Relative or Absolute —New Light on the Behavior of Poverty Lines Over Time". Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved 2008 -01-16. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)