premise: The leaders of a society might argue they have abolished poverty if they ensure that no citizens are homeless or starving. In developed Western societies, few would accept so narrow a definition. They are very likely to add further indicators such as the level of income, the standard of housing, the quality of diet, and access to everyday commodities such as heating, running hot water, a bath and a washing machine. The list soon grows from items essential to support life to include things that a society views as impracticable to be without. It is clear, therefore, that most people do not mean absolute poverty when they use the term, but something much more relative and dependent on the society in which they live. Because for most people poverty is a relative concept, its abolition is much more difficult. Poverty ends up being defined in terms of people who live on a percentage of the median income.
hypothesis: A hundred years ago people would have included in their definition of poverty many of the items listed in the passage as indicators of poverty in developed Western societies.