ALSO, AS I understand it, the measurement of “perceived hunger” does not really measure the actual number of people who are actually hungry.
I think that getting the accurate data as to how any people are really hungry should involve more than just asking the respondents as to how many times they have experienced hunger in the past period or so.
Although I am not a statistician myself, I have some amount of experience in market research, and somehow that is a similar set of sciences.
I am not an economist either, but I do believe that the real hunger data should really just be a subset of poverty data, and the latter being just a subset of unemployment data. And perhaps for purposes of this discussion, we could say that being in business is as good as being self-employed, and in that sense all self-employed people should be taken off the unemployed list.
Pardon me too for sounding a bit sarcastic, but would it not be fair to say that all those who are considered poor should also be considered hungry?
It may be logical to say that, because the imaginary basket of goods that is used to measure poverty should actually include food items.
There was a time when everyone could get water for drinking or cooking anywhere, but that is no longer the case.
It was not the case before, but as it is the case now, bottled water is already product, a commodity that we have to buy, otherwise we would not have anything to drink or cook with, and mind you, I am not yet talking about bathing and washing.
I have no way to check it now, but it seems that drinking water is not yet included in the imaginary basket of goods. What that means is that the poor would have to buy the water for them to drink; they would become poorer because they have to spend more money to be able to survive.
Let us hope however that they would do better than just survive, because it means more to have a higher quality of life.
Right now, our poor people might be eating, but that may not be eating nutritious food. How can our LGUs look into this?/PN
