why can't we remove poverty totally???and also unemployment?

Answer 1

we cannot find a total solution for both,this two things are related to each other,mainly due to high population and the resoucers are sacre to meet the ongoing demands,natural calamities and wars also do their part in world wide proverty and unemployment.only to some extend we can provide relief to the affected millions.may be birth control and carefull famaily planning is the only answer,rest upon god.

Answer 2

First, unemployement will always be present. Why? because there are different types of unemployment. For example someone who is between jobs but still in search is "Frictionally" Unemployed. Someone who plows snow in the winter would be "Seasonally" Unemployed in the spring and summer seasons. The unemployment rate also takes people under the working age into consideration as well. So will there always be unemployment? Yes there will.
As far as poverty goes that is a totally different issue. Poverty cannot be totally removed because there are rarely as many jobs available as there are people willing to fill them.
To remove poverty from a society would be to create a perfect society....it could just never happen.

Answer 3

A certain amount of unemployment (say, 2 - 3% unemployment rate) is not only unavoidable, it's GOOD. It means there is labor mobility -- people have the ability to switch jobs, go back to college, come back from having children, try to switch careers, etc. And they are not afraid to do these things.

It will always take at least some amount of time for such people to identify appropriate and satisfying jobs, and so there is always a few such people counted in the unemployment rate. For this reason, even in a perfect world the unemployment rate would not be less than 2 or 3%.

Answer 4

Lets look around the world now. In Iran they have had a generation of women who where instructed to raise as many children as possible for a revolutionary army. These amounts of people cannot be absorbed by Irans economy easily.

There is estimated to be a real 30% unemployment rate, and great rual and urban poverty in Iran in relation to the countries resources and many plans to create jobs.

In a few years time, as more workers from the 1980s boom, enter the workforce, the real unemployment rate may rise to 50%.

Without the ability for people to have a decent share of basic real resources - housing, food, water, energy, clothing which act as a basis, people are reduced to beggery and are unable to produce the other goods and services in an economy.

As these resources are limited, the best solution to relieve poverty is to limit population growth. But thats hard to enforce.

Answer 5

Because of trade-offs.

Why can't you eliminate all mistakes that you make? The only possible way is to avoid doing anything. However the trade-off of doing nothing is usually not worth the risk of making a mistake, so you do things.

Similarly, eliminating poverty and unemployment, would likely require trade-offs that most wouldn't want.

One cause of unemployment is that some businesses close down because they do a poor job of satisfying customers. When the business closes, those employees lose their job. The only possible way to keep these businesses open is to force customers to buy products that they don't want. Most would agree that the customers' freedom to choose who they do business with is much more valuable to society than completely eliminating unemployment.

Another cause for unemployment is that incompetent people are fired. You wouldn't want to use an incompetent brain surgeon or plumber just to eliminate unemployment, would you?

Answer 6

I believe that Poverty is a symptom not necessarily a cause, I believe that although on a human level it seems unfair, it develops a spirituality money could never buy. A Persecuted Church always seems a happy Church. Gods Law is Just, not fair, fairness is a Human understanding. Look at it this way. If we equalised the Earths money and shared it equally, I guarantee that in a generation we would be back to where we are now or at least on our way, some people are better than others at managing money, but the Love of money leads us all into some bad situations. God uses the poor to grow, the one thing a Rich person fears is death. A poor person fears many things but grows through that fear and truly experiences what is trully important in life

Answer 7

Some of these answers sound like Fidel Castro put them up to it! He did eliminate poverty in his country. Take everything away from everybody, everyone is equal, re-define what it means to be poor. (I have Cuban friends who escaped from there.)

The poor will always be with us - Jesus said that.

Why would that be? Because of the desire for security and how the fear of loss freezes people in their place. Look in the old testament where the Hebrews are complaining to Moses about the lack of good food in the desert (they had just been FREED from being slaves for 400 years) They spoke of how good the food was back in Egypt!

To get out of poverty/slavery requires going through a desert of sorts. People on welfare are afraid to get off - their road to the promised land is (1) leaving welfare (Egypt) and then (2) going to work at McDonald's or the like (the desert), then (3) moving up to the point where they are happy and living well (promised land).

The problem is that people want the security of knowing that at least where they are, they can eat, and have health insurance. On welfare they have food, clothing, a place to live, health care. Between welfare and "owning my own home and business". Is a very scary and dangerous desert - low paying jobs, no health insurance, you are responsible for the rent, etc.

MANY people will never leave slavery even though the physical chains are unlocked. I'm not blaming them or saying they need to change. Just being factual.

Answer 8

If unemployment rate is too low, it is likely to cause inflation, which in turn lowers the standard of living for most of us. Having enough people unemployed limits the pricing power of retailers. We need to maintain a healthy level of unemployment to keep inflation under control.

To fruitceller3: Many rich people become rich because they are risk taker. They are afraid of boredom more than they are afraid of death. They make money because they enjoy the excitement of making money even though they know that they will die someday.

Answer 9

The possession of wealth is a decisive advantage in the competition for more wealth. Having money is more enabling, in pursuit of profits, than any human attribute is: money counts far more than strength, dexterity, diligence, good behavior, or even intelligence.

Wealth buys political power because people who are given, or who grab, political power are usually willing to trade it for a sufficient amount of economic power (money). Hence, politicians can be bribed in various ways by capitalists.

If a society is socioeconomically polarized, with a few rich and a lot of poor, the rich will be able to buy the laws they want, and the poor will just have to accept their circumstances as inevitable.

You'd think that "democracy" would balance the power of the rich, but it is not so. The group that controls the press and the TV networks decides who can win the elections before the voters even hear the candidates' names, so the voters' choices are limited to candidates who are acceptable to the elite group. Those candidates will, after being elected, serve the agenda of the rich elite that elected them, since, if they do not, the media bosses will see to it that they never hold another elected office again. For that reason, mass democracy is not a check on the power of the rich.

In a capitalist society, ownership accrues not to the people who make things (workers), but to the capitalists who own the tools that the workers use to make things. As a general rule, a capitalist's only contribution to production is his restraint in not using his legal right to prevent production by keeping "his" tools out of the workers' hands. In other words, the capitalist undertakes the huge task of staying out of the way and letting the workers do their jobs, and in exchange for his graciousness in "providing jobs for the workers" he gets the ownership of what they make.

You get the idea? The capitalist, by pretending he is due the reward for labor done by others because he "provided them with jobs," is like an artist standing proudly in front of a gorgeous sunset and claiming the credit for what you see. When asked "Why is the credit for the sunset yours, sir?" the artist replies: "Because I could have built a wall between your eyes and this beauty, and I did not."

(The "Ayn Rand" school of economic philosophy disagrees with the assessment that I just made of capitalism. They paint the picture of capitalists as supremely great men, without whose super intelligence the world would quickly come crashing down to barbarity. It's rubbish that proves only that you can write a story with comic book superheroes in it, and whether their names are Hank Rearden or Clark Kent is a detail.)

The capitalists see nothing wrong with maximizing their profits while the poor workers lack a decent living. When a seller chooses a price for his goods, his choice is intended to maximize his profits. That's not the same thing as selling in the highest volume or to the greatest number of people. Some buyers are always priced out of the market in a calculation of this kind.

Labor is the exception because its supply cannot be separated from the people who lack wealth, so the rule is inverted: those who seek to sell their labor attempt to underbid each other as a way of getting any income at all. When two people dicker for a sale, the one that can do without the deal the most easily is the one who controls the negotiations. The one who needs the deal the most is at a disadvantage.

By keeping the demand for labor low in relation to the supply of workers, the capitalists make more profit than they would make by employing everybody.

Actually, labor can be separated from workers: it's called automation, a method of getting work from fossil fuels, the supply of which can be owned by the rich. Automation worsens the problem for human workers by further lessening the demand for them.

You'd be wrong to assume from this critique of capitalism that I'm a Marxist. Nope! I've also criticized Marxism. And what Ayn Rand said contrary to Marxist socialism is much better than, because more accurate than, her apologetics for capitalism were. If I see the proper question, I'll happily criticize Marxist economics in an answer to it, but it would be out of place here.

Answer 10

It is inherent in human nature to want more than the next guy has; "Bigger, Better, Faster, More" as my brother puts it. Those with power take from those who don't.

Rush has a song that says it perfectly: The Color of Right
"A quality of justice,
A quantity of light,
A particle of Mercy,
make the Color of Right.

Gravity and distance,
Change the passage of light,
Gravity and distance
Change the Color of Right."

Simply put, greed and apathy.
Sad, but true.