Obviously poverty has a broad meaning, but if we compare poverty in the city and poverty in the village, I would say that poverty can be reduced because the village relies more on natural products. I would emphasize primary needs here, which include food, clothing and shelter as well as education.
But in education I think we can still get it as long as there is a will, because the government is now making many policies that make it easier for someone to access education. However, if a person does not have the drive within himself, he will not use the programs carried out by the government.
Poverty does have a broad meaning and each region has its own classification in assessing poverty, of course it is a different matter when comparing people who are called poor in the city and people who are called poor in the province but we can draw both of them into one direction as unable to fulfill all their basic needs, for example in terms of food, more or less they will definitely get food and in fact the poor in cities can still live as well as in the provinces, in education it is the same, because if the government has a free education program it can be accessed even with general education intake, so the poor can only fulfill their primary needs with the money they have, and even then they are still lacking both in cities and in provinces.
The problem that often occurs when talking about poverty is when it is treated slightly differently.
Actually, things like this are common knowledge if you look at some conditions where people who are in a lower standard of living are treated a lot differently and this almost covers all points not only about attitudes but sometimes to facilities.
In addition, I don't know what it is like in other countries but looking at the conditions and examples for my own country there are a lot of policies that should benefit the poor such as some assistance in the form of food or money instead of things like this that make this a big question because some unscrupulous officials who act like mafia with almost related networks cut the existing budget which makes this even more difficult when talking about poverty.
I think this will be too far and may come out of the context of the actual discussion, but yes it affects poverty on poverty in the area, and may be worse because of the cheating games of the officials.
We can say that poverty refers to lack of money, We can consider weather individual are able to full fill their basic needs or not. If He/she are able to full fill their family's basic needs then we cannot consider them under poverty level. Poverty is said to exist when people lack the means to satisfy their basic needs. There are several things to determine poverty like poor education, unemployment, over population etc. We can reduce poverty with Productivity and incomes from occupations and livelihoods are important factors for reducing poverty. Social conditions such as health, nutrition, education and housing influence productivity, thus affecting poverty status.
Actually, at the beginning it was mentioned about poverty that is a shortage of money or not? of course not, because this can be seen from various sides, and if this is viewed subjectively, that person can say that I am not poor because I can still live to this day and do not feel lacking even though we can see from the outside that he has many shortcomings.
And if seen objectively like the points you mentioned, of course not wrong either because it is standardization in assessing poverty in someone.
