[ZenGum]

Man, Marx must be soooo out of fashion. Oh wait, he is.

A person should receive in exchange for their labour (over the course of their working life) enough that they can live and replace themselves in the population. This means paying for their food, clothing, shelter, health care, their further education, the feeding, housing and education of their children (the initial person's education being supplied by the previous generation) and their retirement and eventual death expenses.

Exactly what this works out to in material terms is variable. In a society of farm labourers, formal education is above the bare minimum. In a society of industrialised workers who have to read safety warnings and such, literacy is required and so education is necessary. In a technological/service focused economy, education and socialisation is necessary and for the latter, a televsion could be considered a necessity - but it doesn't have to be an enormous flat-screen. In a market where most job seekers have a mobile phone, to not have one is a significant employment disadvantage and so they are necessities, but they don't have to be fancy. Likewise internet access.

I know this lacks details.

I think the crucial thing is that there is no poverty trap. That is, no one is so poor that they cannot allocate any of their resources to the gradual imporvement of their situation, because all resources must be devoted to immediate survival. I know many people who are in a poor situation have some resources which they could use to improve thier situation, but which they instead use for other purposes, like drinking. Their choice. Their consequences.