How do we eradicate poverty in a sustainable way?

Question

The general realm of capitalism seems to be an effective way to move a nation away from poverty. (china being a good example). However, will simply social awareness and donation make enough of a difference to eliminate poverty? Or is a global economic reform necessary?

Answer 1

Poverty cannot be eradicated, any more than illness could be. It can, however, be lessened to such a significant degree that it ceases to be a major issue. Think about the comparison: diseases like smallpox and influenza, once killing millions, are now minor problems in much of the world, thanks, in part, to medical innovators.
You're right that the Chinese are better off today than they were in the past, but they (and we) are only being allowed to experience a watered down, sanitized-for- bureaucrats'-protection version of capitalism. The stranglehold that government desperately wants to keep on business and on your money restricts, yet fails to eliminate, the positive effects of capitalistic behaviour on the prosperity of those touched by it.
Even the capitalism-lite we've been stuck with has resulted in enormous progress. Today, most people below our poverty line have a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs and often even a car to drive. Most "lower class" Westerners have a quality of life probably comparable to aristocracy in the Middle Ages, an extremely un-capitalistic time. In medieval Europe, everything was considered the property of the government and only doled out to those who kissed royal butt. This is not what we need to return to!
Ultimately, the only way for poverty to be reduced on a global scale would be for all governments to cease meddling in the economy of "their" nation. Yet bureaucrats shamelessly use the poor for valuable political leverage and have no intention of willingly getting their noses out of business... well, draw your conclusions.

Answer 2

there are large numbers of chinese who are in worse straits because of the "capitalization" of china. the only people who have benefited are corporate owners, managers and the lucky few rural folks who manage to get those horrid/dangerous manufacturing jobs for piddly pay so they can support their families back home. otherwise, school has become less accessible for average people, govt corruption is rampant, and abuse of the ignorant is a matter of course.

no, social awareness and donations are not enough. global economic reform would be nice. but i think that mostly, people have to go around the governments to get the lives that they need, where all the basic needs are taken care of.

working on the UN Millenium Development Goals is a good start. (google it.) sustainability comes from the people in poverty being given the technology and information they need to have an equal chance in the world. a farmer can get cheated if he doesn't know market prices or if he's illiterate. a town can get destroyed by the influx of corporations if they don't have the ability to organize. free education is one key. access to the global economy via the Web is another.

Answer 3

The fact is that poverty will never be eradicated but you can try to limit the degree to which it exists.

You give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, you teach him to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Unfortunately, there will be a certain number of people who do not want to learn, and there are those who will always need government to intervene in order for them to live.

Government must take away any incentive for people to remain on public assistance. The incentive-based economy is the best solution and capitalism is the best system by far. Whether some like to believe it or not, the success of those who have (the "haves"), continues to provide for those who do not (the "have nots"). Without the tax revenue generated by the financially successful, the poor would be much worse off.

Answer 4

Capitalism should really be called consumerism at this point in its development of America. I think the only way to eradicate poverty is to end the relentless cycle of needing and wanting more. People who have millions are not happy. Address what really makes people happy and you will find that people are less likely to take more than they need. If people take and keep what they need and not what they WANT there would be a more equitable distribution of the wealth of the world, I think that would eradicate poverty. Now, how you DO, that? I don't know.

Answer 5

Erase 250 years of development based on the works of Adam Smith and David Hume promoting a growth economy and replace it with a philosophy of stable state economy.

In a growth economy, the decision makers keep expecting more return for less investment. The problem being investment has become doublespeak for putting money back into the system (working class). The growth economy would work well if the capitalist recognized that the people they employ are more that part of the production cycle, but they never do.

The wealthy and powerful have always used race, religion and nationality as a tool to control the poor. If you cannot live on the interest from your inheritance, you are poor (fanatically).

Or we just KILL THE RICH

Answer 6

If you think China is a good modle then your understanding of economics and sociology is so narrow that if I were you I go back to my instructor and ask them to give you 2 to 3 years of study on each one to be able to answer the question. Then you would understand there is no answer.

In a market society there will always be the haves and have-nots. The degree to which they exist depends on resources and education.

The reason most industrial countries face problems today is because they need workers for lesser jobs, thus import. Those people come third world countries, yes Mexico is included, and they have little to no education. They operate as a traitional economy would, feed the family, so their childrens education is not important to them, eating is. The children fall by the wayside in the educational systems in those countries, so they are impoverished as were their parents. The cycle continues.

Answer 7

If you call for government and social reform to solve the problem you miss your own great point. Capitalism is the answer. I know the far left thinks that taxes and governments are the answer, but capitalism brings more people up then any other means on the planet. Foster capitalism and poverty is reduced.

Answer 8

Are the poorest countries on earth capitalistic in nature? The answer is no. Capitalist countries by far experience a higher standard of living than their counterpart countries.

It's one of the great mysteries in life that some folks so embrace Socialism as the global ideal.

Answer 9

a million]advance exports 2]shrink imports 3]sell companies 4]liberalise export and import responsibilities 5]do no longer vote for communist party 6]improve education 7]sign neuclear deal 8]seek for help from progressed international locations 9]sell study and deveopement 10]beginning administration

Answer 10

Honestly???
1)Population Control and 2)better standards/wages for those who are already here...
Unfortunaly we legally can't regulate women's bodies...we(feminists and christians) would never go for it!!!

The real answer lies at the foot of socialism...equal pay for equal labor,no bourgeiose, all of us would be proletariats, but we would all the same wages, we would all have shelter and food!
But it isn't much fun