Tim Worstall is not innumerate. He crunched the numbers out, and found out this is what the Joseph Rowntree Foundation says is the borderline for poverty (in the U.K.):
The JRF is using a definition of poverty that is higher than median income for the country. … It gets worse too. The band for higher rate income tax starts at £43,000. The JRF is defining a two parent, two child, household beginning to pay higher rate income tax as being in poverty.
To put this another way, a British family in the top 0.23% of the global income distribution for an individual is in poverty and one in the top 0.32% of that global distribution is deprived. Yes, after adjusting for price differences across countries.
The British population is some 1% of the global population.
Across the pond here, we prefer to call people in the top income tax brackets “the rich'”. So the JRF is advocating for the rich who are the poor … or is it the poor who are rich?
Tim also notes that this foundation started the push for a living wage in the U.K. about ten years ago. This is what they’ve moved on to.
I’m speculating here, but I think this has to do with the complete unwillingness for potential critics in the legacy media to do any math checking at all. If they did, wouldn’t someone push a lawsuit for false presentation on these people?