From: Ellen K. 

Usually there will be people living the entire length of a river.

Other non-material measures include health care and education.

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 11:00:17 +0000, Adam
 wrote in message
:

>Ellen K. wrote:
>
>> Some of the points mentioned were not about material goods per se, but
>> issues like consistently functioning utilities.
>>
>
>So long as you're the only people utilizing the river & the woods then
>you've got clean water & fuel. It's only as number of people build up
>that the fact that there is a village upstream polluting your water &
>taking your wood becomes a problem.
>
>Adam
>
>> On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 16:36:37 +0000, Adam
>> <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge"> wrote in
>> message :
>>
>>
>>>Ellen K. wrote:
>>>
>>>>I recently saw a comparison (I think in the latest Economist) of a
>>>>"poor" person in the US vs a "rich"
person in the Congo.  The "poor"
>>>>person in the US has a much higher standard of living.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yes & no. You are only poor if you can see people who are richer than
>>>you. A peacefull village in Africa can have quite a high standard of
>>>life if not of material goods.
>>>
>>>Adam
>>
>>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5