提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增

提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增
http://chinanews.sina.com 2008年12月24日 03:50 德國之聲中文網

　　中國國務院扶貧辦確認，2009年中國政府將啟用新的扶貧標準，將絕對貧困和相對貧困標準合二為一。按照新制定的絕對貧困線，中國的貧困人口將從原有的1479萬人增加到4320萬人。在中國經濟騰飛、人均收入水平不斷提高的同時，中國的城鄉差距、貧富差距也越來越大。而提高貧困線無疑給中國的扶貧工作設定了更高的目標，也帶來了更大和挑戰。

　　中國國內媒體援引國務院扶貧辦官員劉福合透露的消息報導，從2009年開始，中國將啟用新的扶貧標準，取消絕對貧困人口和相對貧困人口的區分，而把現行的低收入標準作為新的扶貧標準。中國現行的絕對貧困線為年收入785元，而所謂相對貧困線，也就是低收入的標準為1067元。2009年的新扶貧標準將建立在1067元的基礎上，根據貧困地區的物價指數進行調整，有望超過1100元。消除貧困是聯合國新千年發展目標中的一項重要內容，去年9月，中國宣布成為第一個提前完成將貧困人口減半目標的國家。然而隨著新扶貧標準的啟用，扶貧對象的增加，中國的扶貧工作無疑面臨新的任務和挑戰。

　　曾撰寫《中國農民調查》的作家陳桂棣認為，中國政府現在提高貧困線，改變扶貧標準的原因一方面在於近年來中央財政用於農村的支出處於增長趨勢，說明政府希望將更多的資金轉移到農村建設中去；另一方面隨著中國經濟的增長，物價也在不斷地上漲，其實已經加重了貧困程度，而如果扶貧標準還停留在過去的水平上，就實在太低了。陳桂棣表示，長期以來，中國在政策上過於向城市、向東部沿海地區傾斜，而對農村投入得太少，"欠賬"太多。儘管中國的人均收入水平在不斷上升，但是貧富之間的差距也在不斷拉大。陳桂棣說："我舉個例子：根據我們掌握的數據，從1997年到2003年，城市人口的收入平均每年就增加500元，而農村人口的收入在這六七年間總共才增加了500元。這個差距是很大的。所以政府採取這種措施，也就是想方設法地減緩這種城鄉貧富差距不斷拉大的現實。"

　　改變扶貧標準的同時，也要求對農村基礎設施建設進行更大投入，包括交通條件、醫療衛生條件的改善，落實教育的普及，這樣才能避免貧窮問題導致思想落後、教育水平低，進而形成惡性循環。因此，陳桂棣先生認為，提高貧困標準，等於要投入更多的資金，有可能是中央財政投資為主，地方政府支持為輔。但是，中央的決策和投資是否能夠不走樣、不打折扣地在地方和基層得到落實，這恐怕將是扶貧工作面臨的一個重大挑戰。陳桂棣說："現在基層政權的改革進行的還比較慢。特別是中國的農村還不像日本、韓國和台灣，他們都有很成熟的農會或是合作社，能夠代表農民利益來接受中央的財政撥款。而在中國接受撥款的都是地方政府，如果他們有為農民服務的想法的話，就可能會把資金轉發下去。但僅僅是靠他們的覺悟和良心這個問題就很大了。"

　　陳桂棣講述了一個例子，前一段時間他陪同香港記者到湖南農村去，本來是很高興地告訴記者，經過三十年的改革，農村的變化還是很大的，比如義務教育階段學校的學雜費已經全部免除。可是到當地學校一了解，發現這個政策根本沒有得到真正落實，那裡的學生仍然要交200元左右的學雜費。因此，中央政府推出的政策和下撥的資金能不能落實到位，這是一個亟待解決的問題。陳桂棣說："唯一的出路就是加強監督。但是現在的監督並不是一種剛性監督，所以這也讓我們感到很憂慮。包括現在中央拿出了四萬億來拉動內需，解決金融危機的問題，這都是好事。問題是這四萬億的資金下去之後，雖然政府都派了監督人員下去，但能否全部解決問題，就很難講了。"

　　陳桂棣還指出，中國推出的四萬億刺激經濟計劃，主要是為了拉動內需。這個方向是正確的，但是如果中國八九億的農民不能成為消費者，農民的購買力不能得到提高的話，拉動內需就無法實現其真正的意義。

農村改革釀空心化
全球9％耕地養活20％人口 2008年12月20日


在中國30年變革的巨幕中，農村上演了一場交織?輝煌與沉重的多部曲，分田、進城、失地、維權；而10份中共中央「一號文件」(每年第一個文件)都是涉及「三農」(農村、農業、農民)問題。大量農民湧入城鎮，但城鄉融合卻寸步難行，鄉村「空心化」衍生大量民生問題。

明報特約記者 鍾健

「農民真苦，農村真窮，農業真危險。」8年前，時任湖北省某鄉黨委書記的李昌平致信總理朱鎔基，以此13字概括中國鄉村狀?，改善「三農」問題由此逐漸成為舉國共識。

在顯示農村發展的眾多統計結果中，「以世界7％的耕地養活22％的人口」一句在內地家喻戶曉。農業部農村經濟研究中心主任宋洪遠在接受專訪時指出，實際資料應該是，用9％左右的耕地養活世界20％的人口。「農村貧困人口由2.5億減至1479萬左右，全國農村已進入由溫飽不足發展到總體小康，並向全面小康邁進的階段」。但問題是，城鄉居民收入差距持續擴大，到2007年農村人均可支配收入還不到城鎮居民的1/3。農業部研究機構在一份報告中稱：「中國目前的貧困標準定得較低，如果按國際標準，農村貧困人口的數量將非常龐大。」這也印證了安徽小崗村流行的一句民謠：「一年跨過溫飽線，幾十年沒過富裕坎。」

只顧分田到戶 忽略管理

1982年至1986年，中央曾連續5年以「一號文件」發布農村改革政策，但主要是肯定並穩固分田到戶制度，在社會管理、村民自治等政治層面的改革逐漸滯后。這為後來官方及資本勢力操縱土地，群體事件難以平息埋下了伏筆，也大大損減中共基層執政能力。

宋洪遠指出，改革廢除了人民公社，在縣以下建立鄉鎮政府，實行行政管理，在鄉鎮以下設立村民委員會，實行村民自治。經過20多年的運行，「鄉政村治」結構存在的政府與村民自治組織之間權利與責任不清、財權與事權不相匹配問題，導致鄉村債務增加，農民需要的公共服務嚴重不足。

參與起草近5年「一號文件」的宋洪遠指出，重建政府與農民的關係已成為下一步農村改革的重要任務。但需要強調的是，中國不同區域的農村狀態不盡相同，在廣東、浙江等發達地區，鄉村直接選舉較為普遍；而在河南、甘肅等中西部省份，農民對「自治」一詞還很陌生。強制徵地、司法腐敗往往會引起大規模群體事件。

今年10月舉行的中共十七屆三中全會通過《關於推進農村改革發展若干重大問題的決定》，強調要「尊重農民意願」，允許農民以轉包、出租、互換、轉讓、股份合作等形式流轉土地承包經營權，發展多種形式的適度規模經營。

土地永包可保農民權益

在土地歸屬上，官方在話語層面仍然摒棄私有制，但已有高層智囊提出了「保持現有土地承包關係永久不變」的建議，反對者也只是稱「沒有什麽東西是永久的」。宋洪遠透露，土地永包制未嘗沒有實施的可能，對土地承包經營權的物權保護，可使農民充分享有土地權益。

「生產發展，生活寬裕，鄉風文明，村容整潔，管理民主。」這20字，是這名官方學者對中國未來農村描繪的藍圖。

好貼！

貧困線從年收入785元提高到1067元，中國的貧困人口將從原有的1479萬人增加到4320萬人。

一年1067元能活人嗎？一天50美分不到。

按照世界銀行ppp標準，1.25美元一天，中國大概有1.3億（官方），國際扶貧組織估計至少是double，所以中國人民的生活水平提高還有很長的一段時間要走

[ 本帖最後由 bearbee82 於 2008-12-25 22:03 編輯 ]

Fighting Poverty: Findings and Lessons from China』s Success

http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/0,,contentMDK:20634060~pagePK:64165401~piPK:64165026~theSitePK:469382,00.html

Across China, there were over 400 million fewer people living in extreme poverty in 2001 than 20 years previously. By 2001, China had met the foremost of the Millennium Development Goals — to reduce the 1990 incidence of poverty by half — and it had done so 14 years ahead of the 2015 target date for the developing world as a whole.

As countries prepare for the United Nations Summit in September 2005 to evaluate progress toward these goals, researchers Ravallion and Chen have assembled new data going back to around 1980 and extracted critical findings and lessons from China』s success in the battle against poverty.

China』s success against poverty since the reforms that began in 1978 is undeniable. A closer inspection of the numbers, however, holds some warnings for the future and caveats on the implications for fighting poverty in the rest of the developing world.


Huge (but uneven) overall progress


Between 1981 and 2001, the proportion of population living in poverty in China fell from 53 percent to just eight percent. However, this progress was not smooth. Significantly, half the reduction occurred in the first half of the 1980s, and the decline was not continual thereafter, with periods of some set-backs for China』s poor (such as the late 1980s and late 1990s).

Consider the specific situation in China at the time reforms began: the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution had left a legacy of severe, pervasive rural poverty by the late-1970s. Arguably, there were some important but relatively easy gains to be had by simply undoing failed policies, notably by de-collectivizing agriculture.  Much of the rural population that had been forced into collective farming with weak incentives for work could still remember how to farm individually. Returning the responsibility for farming to individual households brought huge gains to the country』s poorest.

「Although we cannot offer a rigorous test against alternative explanations,」 says Martin Ravallion, poverty expert at the World Bank, 「we can hypothesize that the halving of the national poverty rate in the first few years of the 1980s was largely attributable to picking these 『low-lying fruit』 of agrarian reform. But this was essentially a one-time reform.」

The specter of rising inequality


There are warning signs that income inequality, on the rise since the mid-1980s, is slowing down poverty reduction in China. The country will need to address this problem if it is to maintain its past rate of progress against poverty.

「We estimate that with the same growth rate and no rise in inequality in rural areas, the number of poor in China would have fallen to less than one-quarter of the actual value,」 says Ravallion, 「this would have meant a poverty rate in 2001 of 1.5 percent rather than eight percent.」

Ravallion and Chen found no evidence that the rise in inequality was the 『price』 of high economic growth. Periods of rapid growth did not bring more rapid increases in inequality. And provinces that saw a rapid rise in inequality saw less progress against poverty, not more.

Evidence from the post-reform period in China suggests that more unequal provinces are likely to face a double handicap in future poverty reduction - they will have lower growth, and poverty will respond less to that growth.

As the low-lying fruit of pro-poor reforms grow scarcer, poverty has become far more responsive to rising inequality. When China began the transition, poverty levels were so high that inequality was not a major concern. This has definitely changed.
  Inequality trends in China

In marked contrast to most developing countries, relative inequality is higher in China's rural areas than in urban areas. However, there has been convergence over time with a steeper increase in inequality in urban areas.
Unlike most other studies, Ravallion and Chen's research shows that relative inequality between urban and rural areas has not shown a trend increase since reforms began. This difference with past work reflects the fact that they allowed for the higher rate of increase in the urban cost-of-living, and also that they studied a longer period of time.
Absolute inequality has increased appreciably, both between and within both urban and rural areas, and absolute inequality is higher in urban areas.

Sectoral imbalance in overall growth

About three-quarters of the overall reduction in poverty from 1981 to 2001 came from gains to the rural poor. Growth in the primary sector (largely agriculture) did much more to reduce poverty and inequality than growth in either the secondary or tertiary sectors.

But the gains to the poor since the mid-1980s were limited by considerable sectoral imbalance in China』s overall growth process, with agriculture getting a lower priority in key policy decisions. Ravallion and Chen argue that if the same aggregate growth rate had been balanced across the three sectors (primary, secondary and tertiary), it would have taken half the time to reduce the poverty rate to e

[ 本帖最後由 bearbee82 於 2008-12-25 21:50 編輯 ]

Poverty Facts and Stats
http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats
Author and Page informationby Anup ShahThis Page Last Updated Wednesday, September 03, 2008
This page: http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats.
To print all information e.g. expanded side notes, shows alternative links, use the print version:
http://www.globalissues.org/print/article/26
Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day.



At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day.Source 1

More than 80 percent of the world』s population lives in countries where income differentials are widening.Source 2

The poorest 40 percent of the world』s population accounts for 5 percent of global income. The richest 20 percent accounts for three-quarters of world income.Source 3

According to UNICEF, 26,500-30,000 children die each day due to poverty. And they 「die quietly in some of the poorest villages on earth, far removed from the scrutiny and the conscience of the world. Being meek and weak in life makes these dying multitudes even more invisible in death.」Source 4

Around 27-28 percent of all children in developing countries are estimated to be underweight or stunted. The two regions that account for the bulk of the deficit are South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

If current trends continue, the Millennium Development Goals target of halving the proportion of underweight children will be missed by 30 million children, largely because of slow progress in Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.Source 5

Based on enrolment data, about 72 million children of primary school age in the developing world were not in school in 2005; 57 per cent of them were girls. And these are regarded as optimisitic numbers.Source 6

Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.Source 7

Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn』t happen.Source 8

Infectious diseases continue to blight the lives of the poor across the world. An estimated 40 million people are living with HIV/AIDS, with 3 million deaths in 2004. Every year there are 350–500 million cases of malaria, with 1 million fatalities: Africa accounts for 90 percent of malarial deaths and African children account for over 80 percent of malaria victims worldwide.Source 9

Water problems affect half of humanity:

Some 1.1 billion people in developing countries have inadequate access to water, and 2.6 billion lack basic sanitation.
Almost two in three people lacking access to clean water survive on less than $2 a day, with one in three living on less than $1 a day.
More than 660 million people without sanitation live on less than $2 a day, and more than 385 million on less than $1 a day.
Access to piped water into the household averages about 85% for the wealthiest 20% of the population, compared with 25% for the poorest 20%.
1.8 billion people who have access to a water source within 1 kilometre, but not in their house or yard, consume around 20 litres per day. In the United Kingdom the average person uses more than 50 litres of water a day flushing toilets (where average daily water usage is about 150 liters a day. The highest average water use in the world is in the US, at 600 liters day.)
Some 1.8 million child deaths each year as a result of diarrhoea
The loss of 443 million school days each year from water-related illness.
Close to half of all people in developing countries suffering at any given time from a health problem caused by water and sanitation deficits.
Millions of women spending several hours a day collecting water.
To these human costs can be added the massive economic waste associated with the water and sanitation deficit.… The costs associated with health spending, productivity losses and labour diversions … are greatest in some of the poorest countries. Sub-Saharan Africa loses about 5% of GDP, or some $28.4 billion annually, a figure that exceeds total aid flows and debt relief to the region in 2003.Source 10

Number of children in the world
2.2 billion
Number in poverty
1 billion (every second child)
Shelter, safe water and health
For the 1.9 billion children from the developing world, there are:

640 million without adequate shelter (1 in 3)
400 million with no access to safe water (1 in 5)
270 million with no access to health services (1 in 7)
Children out of education worldwide
121 million
Survival for children
Worldwide,

10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (same as children population in France, Germany, Greece and Italy)
1.4 million die each year from lack of access to safe drinking water and adequate sanitation
Health of children
Worldwide,

2.2 million children die each year because they are not immunized
15 million children orphaned due to HIV/AIDS (similar to the total children population in Germany or United Kingdom)
Source 11

Rural areas account for three in every four people living on less than US$1 a day and a similar share of the world population suffering from malnutrition. However, urbanization is not synonymous with human progress. Urban slum growth is outpacing urban growth by a wide margin.Source 12

Approximately half the world』s population now live in cities and towns. In 2005, one out of three urban dwellers (approximately 1 billion people) was living in slum conditions.Source 13

In developing countries some 2.5 billion people are forced to rely on biomass—fuelwood, charcoal and animal dung—to meet their energy needs for cooking. In sub-Saharan Africa, over 80 percent of the population depends on traditional biomass for cooking, as do over half of the populations of India and China.Source 14

Indoor air pollution resulting from the use of solid fuels [by poorer segments of society] is a major killer. It claims the lives of 1.5 million people each year, more than half of them below the age of five: that is 4000 deaths a day. To put this number in context, it exceeds total deaths from malaria and rivals the number of deaths from tuberculosis.Source 15

In 2005, the wealthiest 20% of the world accounted for 76.6% of total private consumption. The poorest fifth just 1.5%:



The poorest 10% accounted for just 0.5% and the wealthiest 10% accounted for 59% of all the consumption:

Source 16

1.6 billion people — a quarter of humanity — live without electricity:

Breaking that down further:

Number of people living without electricity Region Millions without electricity
South Asia 706
Sub-Saharan Africa 547
East Asia 224
Other 101

The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the 41 Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (567 million people) is less than the wealth of the world』s 7 richest people combined.Source 18

World gross domestic product (world population approximately 6.5 billion) in 2006 was $48.2 trillion in 2006.

The world』s wealthiest countries (approximately 1 billion people) accounted for $36.6 trillion dollars (76%).
The world』s billionaires — just 497 people (approximately 0.000008% of the world』s population) — were worth $3.5 trillion (over 7% of world GDP).
Low income countries (2.4 billion people) accounted for just $1.6 trillion of GDP (3.3%)
Middle income countries (3 billion people) made up the rest of GDP at just over $10 trillion (20.7%).Source 19
The world』s low income countries (2.4 billion people) account for just 2.4% of world exportsSource 20

The total wealth of the top 8.3 million people around the world 「rose 8.2 percent to $30.8 trillion in 2004, giving them control of nearly a quarter of the world』s financial assets.」

In other words, about 0.13% of the world』s population controlled 25% of the world』s financial assets in 2004.Source 21

For every $1 in aid a developing country receives, over $25 is spent on debt repayment.Source 22

51 percent of the world』s 100 hundred wealthiest bodies are corporations.Source 23

The wealthiest nation on Earth has the widest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation.Source 24

The poorer the country, the more likely it is that debt repayments are being extracted directly from people who neither contracted the loans nor received any of the money.Source 25

In 1960, the 20% of the world』s people in the richest countries had 30 times the income of the poorest 20% — in 1997, 74 times as much.Source 26

An analysis of long-term trends shows the distance between the richest and poorest countries was about:

3 to 1 in 1820
11 to 1 in 1913
35 to 1 in 1950
44 to 1 in 1973
72 to 1 in 1992Source 27
「Approximately 790 million people in the developing world are still chronically undernourished, almost two-thirds of whom reside in Asia and the Pacific.」Source 28

For economic growth and almost all of the other indicators, the last 20 years [of the current form of globalization, from 1980 - 2000] have shown a very clear decline in progress as compared with the previous two decades [1960 - 1980]. For each indicator, countries were divided into five roughly equal groups, according to what level the countries had achieved by the start of the period (1960 or 1980). Among the findings:

Growth: The fall in economic growth rates was most pronounced and across the board for all groups or countries.
Life Expectancy: Progress in life expectancy was also reduced for 4 out of the 5 groups of countries, with the exception of the highest group (life expectancy 69-76 years).
Infant and Child Mortality: Progress in reducing infant mortality was also considerably slower during the period of globalization (1980-1998) than over the previous two decades.
Education and literacy: Progress in education also slowed during the period of globalization.Source 29
A mere 12 percent of the world』s population uses 85 percent of its water, and these 12 percent do not live in the Third World.Source 30

Consider the global priorities in spending in 1998

Global Priority $U.S. Billions
Cosmetics in the United States 8
Ice cream in Europe 11
Perfumes in Europe and the United States 12
Pet foods in Europe and the United States 17
Business entertainment in Japan 35
Cigarettes in Europe 50
Alcoholic drinks in Europe 105
Narcotics drugs in the world 400
Military spending in the world 780

And compare that to what was estimated as additional costs to achieve universal access to basic social services in all developing countries:

Global Priority $U.S. Billions
Basic education for all 6
Water and sanitation for all 9
Reproductive health for all women 12
Basic health and nutrition 13

Source 31

Notes and Sources
Sources:

Shaohua Chen and Martin Ravallion, The developing world is poorer than we thought, but no less successful in the fight against poverty, World Bank, August 2008
For the 95% on $10 a day, see Martin Ravallion, Shaohua Chen and Prem Sangraula, Dollar a day revisited, World Bank, May 2008. They note that 95% of developing country population lived on less than $10 a day. Using 2005 population numbers, this is equivalent to just under 79.7% of world population, and does not include populations living on less than $10 a day from industrialized nations.
This figure is based on purchasing power parity (PPP), which basically suggests that prices of goods in countries tend to equate under floating exchange rates and therefore people would be able to purchase the same quantity of goods in any country for a given sum of money. That is, the notion that a dollar should buy the same amount in all countries. Hence if a poor person in a poor country living on a dollar a day moved to the U.S. with no changes to their income, they would still be living on a dollar a day.

The new poverty line of $1.25 a day was recently announced by the World Bank (in 2008). For many years before that it had been $1 a day. But the $1 a day used then would be $1.45 a day now if just inflation was accounted for.

The new figures from the World Bank therefore confirm concerns that poverty has not been reduced by as much as was hoped, although it certainly has dropped since 1981.

However, it appears that much of the poverty reduction in the last couple of decades almost exclusively comes from China:

China』s poverty rate fell from 85% to 15.9%, or by over 600 million people
China accounts for nearly all the world』s reduction in poverty
Excluding China, poverty fell only by around 10%

The use of the poverty line of $1 a day had long come under criticism for seeming arbitrary and using poor quality and limited data thus risking an underestimate of poverty. The $1.25 a day level is accompanied with some additional explanations and reasoning, including that it is a common level found amongst the poorest countries, and that $2.50 represents a typical poverty level amongst many more developing countries.

The $10 dollar a day figure above is close to poverty levels in the US, so is provided here to give a more global perspective to these numbers, although the World Bank has felt it is not a meaningful number for the poorest because they are unfortunately unlikely to reach that level any time soon.

For further details on this (as well as some additional charts), see Poverty Around The World on this web site. back

[ 本帖最後由 bearbee82 於 2008-12-25 22:02 編輯 ]

Poverty line ($ a day) Population in poverty (in billions) Population above that level (in billions) Percent in poverty
Sources:

Shaohua Chen and Martin Ravallion, The developing world is poorer than we thought, but no less successful in the fight against poverty, World Bank, August 2008
For the numbers on $10 a day, see Martin Ravallion, Shaohua Chen and Prem Sangraula, Dollar a day revisited, World Bank, May 2008. They note that 95% of developing country population lived on less than $10 a day. Using 2005 population numbers, this is equivalent to just under 79.7% of world population, and does not include populations living on less than $10 a day from industrialized nations.
ppp     below         above
             (in billion)   (in billion)   
$1.00    0.88           5.58                      13.6%
$1.25    1.40           5.06                       21.7%
$1.45    1.72           4.74                       26.6%
$2.00    2.60            3.86                      40.2%
$2.50    3.14            3.32                      48.6%
$10.00   5.15           1.31                     79.7%

如果貧困線降到5毛，中國一個窮人也見不到。

原帖由 鐵螳螂 於 2008-12-26 01:29 發表 [提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增 - 時事述評 -  backchina.com]  
如果貧困線降到5毛，中國一個窮人也見不到。

請看上面第一篇，5毛不到，4600多萬人，只有看到，才有對策

原帖由 yugs75 於 2008-12-25 21:08 發表 [提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增 - 時事述評 -  backchina.com]  
貧困線從年收入785元提高到1067元，中國的貧困人口將從原有的1479萬人增加到4320萬人。

一年1067元能活人嗎？一天50美分不到。

那看怎麼活.

像德國之聲這樣的媒體，職業素質到哪裡去了！

08年4月，國務院已經把」貧困線「提高為1300元。

隨著國民收入的不斷提高，這線一直在調整中。從85年的200元到08年的1300元，中國幅度和速度在世界上是沒有的。

原帖由 laodai 於 2009-1-3 10:50 發表 [提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增 - 時事述評 -  backchina.com]  
像德國之聲這樣的媒體，職業素質到哪裡去了！

08年4月，國務院已經把」貧困線「提高為1300元。

隨著國民收入的不斷提高，這線一直在調整中。從85年的200元到08年的1300元，中國幅度和速度在世界上是沒有的。

有進步，是好事，但沒必要爭論這些，當是明鏡，讓自己進步
中國解決了世界6億多的貧困人口，但還有4000多萬的絕對貧困人口是不可否認的事實，2億多是還沒達到wb的1.25美金/day的ppp標準

看清了，才能對事情做成判斷，做出政策

正視了，才能重視

貧困不只是政府的問題，是全國的問題，是全民的問題。只靠政府是不能夠完善解決貧困問題的。只是大家都認識了，注意了，那2億多被忽略的人口生活才能夠得到真正的重視，關心和改善。

要講清事實，必須用正確的數據，才能正視，才能正確判斷。

解決貧困問題，關鍵還是政府的一系列政策。這方面的工作，中國政府的努力舉世矚目，脫貧的幅度和速度在當今世界僅有。

4000萬，佔總人口的1/30，如果用並不適合中國的PPP標準，也就是1/7。在全球範圍中，中間偏上。但這個「分母」，肯定會越來越大。

原帖由 laodai 於 2009-1-3 11:44 發表 [提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增 - 時事述評 -  backchina.com]  
要講清事實，必須用正確的數據，才能正視，才能正確判斷。

解決貧困問題，關鍵還是政府的一系列政策。這方面的工作，中國政府的努力舉世矚目，脫貧的幅度和速度在當今世界僅有。

4000萬，佔總人口的1/30，如果 ...

將目標定大一點，效果不是會更好 （現在又不是讓你那這數據定出政策，只是讓大家正視問題而已，正確的數據當然要自己找和對比，這文不過是做為一面明鏡，勉勵自己而已）

上面還有幾篇國外關於貧困問題的分析，數據很詳細（到2005，我試過找2005之後的，很難找，但可以作為很好的參照，因為現在世界的貧富差距問題比那時候更嚴重，而解決貧困問題。。。沒什麼進展）

政府是關鍵，但無論什麼政策，都是有漏洞的，而那些漏洞就應該讓有認知的國民補上，才能夠讓政策更加地完美執行 不對嗎？

原帖由 laodai 於 2009-1-3 10:50 發表 [提高貧困線，中國貧困人口激增 - 時事述評 -  backchina.com]  
像德國之聲這樣的媒體，職業素質到哪裡去了！

08年4月，國務院已經把」貧困線「提高為1300元。

隨著國民收入的不斷提高，這線一直在調整中。從85年的200元到08年的1300元，中國幅度和速度在世界上是沒有的。

85年的200元和08年的1300元，哪個更值錢呢？