We respond to Banks and Johnson's (1994) Comment on Coulter et al. (1992) drawing on a more general discussion of parametric equivalence scale and scale relativity issues and new empirical results. We show that criticisms of our earlier work are unfounded. When the McClements scale is properly characterised, the scale does indeed provide lower estimates of poverty and inequality levels than most other scales. We reiterate our conclusion that relationships between scale relativities and inequality and poverty indices may be index-specific. Moreover the picture about distributional trends may differ from that about levels.