Can poverty ever be erased?

Question

I agree with Jesus who said the poor you will always have with you.

Answer 1

No. Because you cannot ever erase the personal behaviors, the personal decisions, or the government tyranny that leads to poverty.

If you took all the money in the world, and redistributed it evenly among the people, within 10 years, you would see that many of the same rich people are rich again, and many of the poor are poor again.

This is because many, if not most (in civilized countries), got rich or poor because of their personal behaviors and choices, not because of some fickle finger of fate.

Now, I'm not talking about places like Zimbabwe, where the government has created the poverty out of abundance, or places like Congo, where anarchy riegns, or Mexico, where the corrupt and inept government prevents education and prosperity. I'm talking about places where people have all the opportunity to succeed, and choose not to.

You cannot prevent people from making decisions that leave them in poverty. What you can do is stop subsidizing those who make the bad decisions.

Answer 2

You have to be willing to make sacrifices to allow poverty to be erased. You have to be willing to let capitalism reshape your social and cultural landscape. This requires a great amount of determination and more than likely a ruling middle class. As soon as you are established as a worthwhile market, the world will take notice and you're on the first step of the ladder.

Capitalism in the West has improved people's lives no end. From squalor and early death in the previous century to every person living as their own private king or queen today. Remarkable. If you want something, you work, then you buy it. Capitalism exists to satiate a demand. Everything there is a worthwhile demand for, there is a supply. The rapid turnover in technology is the best example. Do you think we would have come so far if we were all still devoting our lives to families, farming and worship? No. You wouldn't be typing on this page on a computer - you may not even be alive - if it weren't for capitalism.

Look at what is happening to China. It is currently being remoulded at a vastly accelerated rate compared to the West's initial development. They currently provide the industrial backbone of the world because labour is so cheap.

Eventually it will change and China will become a major economic force and cheap labour will probably then move to Africa. The process will then start again.

Obviously I'm being overly general and presumptuous.

Capitalism is also singularly the most responsible force for multiculturalism and equality. Don't let them tell you it was "pioneering individuals" - their real affect was limited. For a country to work its way out of poverty it has to assimilate into global markets, and that means accepting other races into its borders, more often than not to live. A profitable nation will also attract many asylum seekers and immigrants because they desire the cheap labour that the natives think they are above. If the migrant population becomes big enough, capitalism will further empower them because they have a worthwhile spending power. Look at how representation for sexual and ethnic minorities has increased in the media in the past 20 years, for example. Not because of a benevolent desire for equality, but because those markets are big enough to warrant being sold to. So, people flee persecution and poverty to join more profitable nations - often the lowest rung in the developed world is infinitely more desirable than where they were.

What will you lose? What have we lost? Religion, the family, culture, communitarianism, identity, restraint, respect, self-respect, authority, possibly also our lives because we work far too long and only define ourselves through what we can spend money on... Probably a lot more besides.

All of these are casualties of capitalism principally because they don't have anything to sell, or another alternative proved more lucrative. Look at how Christmas was altered from a religious event to a commercial one.

If you can live with society being like that, then poverty may then be cured. Not totally, but at least everyone will have a chance. If you're willing to work 2/3rds of your life and not question the status quo, that is.

My overall point is that society would have to be vastly different the world over. It would probably take 400-600 years for all this to occur and in that time, something else might have come along to cure the world's ailments. Either in the form of an invention or a meteorite. Ha.

Answer 3

The answer to that question is YES!, for the simple reason that poverty only exists in the first place because of the nature of the society we live in.
Products are produced for profit and not for need, and if society were organised so that economic production were planned, not only would there be more than enough for everyone, but starvation, hunger, disease and the slaughter of people in wars would be a thing of the past.
There wouldn't be any wine lakes, food would not be dumped at sea to keep the price up, while elsewhere millions starve .
In fact, far from there being too many people on the planet, if production and particularly modern technology were utilised to benefit humankind and the environment, instead of the millionaires of this world, planet earth could sustain a lot more people!
"Gold is the reason for the wars we wage" to quote a well known public figure!

Answer 4

dont know about developing countries - i believe poverty should be erased from these shores (UK). The education system in britain is as we all know inadequate for todays society - it is still very academically biased. Instead of third years having to choose from dry, bookish subjects that may be too hard or of no interest - after all not everyone wants to go to university - schools should bring in vocational skills such as construction, plumbing etc. But more importantly, entrepreneurial skills should be part of the carriculum - showing the upcoming workforce how to make money - buying and selling. It is these skills that make for a lively economy, and then all talents would be catered for. If I had been rubbish at learning there is no way I would have sat in a class to be embarrassed in front of my peers - I would have played truant to get myself away from a no win situation. This is how poverty happens.

Answer 5

If the world's wealth were to be distributed equally, we'd ALL live in poverty.

Poverty can not be totally erased. Some people are not willing to do what it takes to rise above it. And with the government paying them anyway, what incentive is there for them.

If taxpayers would stop footing the bill for people who are living in poverty, there would be a lot less of it. It's amazing what a person can do when they HAVE to.

As with unemployment compensation, people can become very motivated to succeed if they know that the end of their taxpayer-provided transfer of wealth is in sight.

Answer 6

While there is a trade network goin on (I was gonna say free trade but there's no such thing) there will always be areas and nations that are less well off but industrious and those that are well off and import from the industrious nations. There will also be those that are neither because of bad climate or bad government and many other reasons. As far as I can see the end of world poverty is an impossible dream.

Answer 7

Erased? No. Reduced? Absolutely. And reducing poverty is a very important way to reduce crime, injustice, national health costs, malnourishment, etc.

No country or organization has ever managed to pull off erasing poverty within any reasonably sized population, so it's best to keep one's goals realistic. But that doesn't mean trying to help as many people as possible is somehow a fool's errand.

Answer 8

Unfortunately, even the even distribution of the worlds wealth will not eradicate poverty. And as one of the prior answers stated, "Wealth is relative". As long as different beliefs exist surrounding private equity, private property, social responsibility, borrowing and lending, etc. not even all the governments in this world would be able to begin to identify how to tackle this or even where to start. The unfortunate fact is that the world economy as it is today is simply a series of best guesses and speculations based on the current knowledge of past observations and what economists considered to be human nature and psychology of the Masses.

Answer 9

yes they could have a national system, where by everyone who falls under poverty line, its left to become homesless and 'disapear'
That, when these people try to beg for money, we treat them like scum, in order to try and encourage them to work.

We need to have a catch 22 situation, where by you cant have a job- cuz you no bank account to pay your wages into.You cant get a bank accoutn as you need a home and you cant get a home without a job.

When they go to the council to ask for help, they will be given a list of B+B's that are havens for drug-adicts and prostitution to encourage them to stay homeless.

The police will move them on, and the rest of society ignores them and looks at them like it must thier fault they are homeless.
Most councils will not openly admit to high amount of poor and homeless people.Some mayors deniy the existance of poor and homeless being an issue.
mmmm??

Answer 10

no, it can't and will never be erased because it is too profitable for the government. They can get increases in budgets for more programs to supposedly help the poor and poverty-striken by way of taxing us to death and do these programs every REALLY yield anything good? No. Just more programs and increased spending.