Britain is one of the richest countries. So why do children live in poverty?

How Poverty Is Defined

• Major disagreement over “relative poverty” (below 60% of median income) vs “absolute” deprivation.
• Some argue poverty should be tied to a concrete “basket of goods” (shelter, heat, food, clothes) rather than income ratios.
• Others note that in rich countries, relative and absolute measures overlap in practice; arguing definitions is seen as a way to downplay real hardship.
• One report cited in the thread defines “destitution” as being unable to afford basics like heating, lighting, and clothing; skeptics distrust self‑reported surveys.

Is Destitution in the UK Credible?

• Some posters find claims of a million children lacking warmth, food, or adequate clothing implausible and suspect exaggeration or survey bias (drawing parallels with US “food insecurity” stats that include six‑figure earners).
• Others counter with first‑hand UK examples: zero‑hour contracts, rents >50% of income, energy bills, post‑Brexit food inflation, and heavy reliance on food banks.
• There is debate over whether problems are mainly parental neglect vs structural poverty; several argue it’s scandalous either way and that the state can and should intervene.

Cost of Living, Work, and Policy Choices

• Commenters link rising child poverty to high housing costs (especially in London), weak labour power, childcare costs, and benefit withdrawal that makes extra work barely pay.
• Noted that ~70% of children in poverty have at least one working parent; seen as evidence minimum wage and welfare design are failing.
• Austerity after 2008 (local services cuts) plus later price shocks (Covid, Ukraine, Truss-era mortgage spike) are blamed for eroding safety nets.
• Some see the article as politically timed around the UK budget and tax decisions.

Inequality and Wealth Concentration

• One camp frames child poverty as a direct result of extreme wealth concentration and political capture by the rich.
• Others argue this is a “fixed pie” fallacy: wealth overall has grown, poor today are better off than historically, and the key metric should be absolute living standards, not rich people’s share.
• Counter-argument: the share captured by the rich and control over land, power, and attention still materially harms those at the bottom.

Generational, Cultural, and Behavioural Factors

• Several point to intergenerational resource lock‑in (older owners vs younger renters), and a “boomer”‑friendly policy tilt.
• Disputes over whether visible consumption by poor families (sneakers, phones, lattes) undermines poverty claims vs being a predictable outcome of consumer culture, poor financial education, and lack of opportunity.
• Some discussion wanders into fertility, abortion, marriage incentives, and family law, framed as background to why larger families are over‑represented in child poverty statistics.