I was just wondering if there would be anymore poor people in the world.
2007-01-30 10:58:54 · 11 answers · asked by Pike Fisherman 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
Based on the scenario you describe, a percentage of the poor would overcome their troubles with financial assistance and others would remain poor. You see, at some time along the continuum, the concept of poor transcends ownership of necessities and becomes more of a cultural issue. The term "culture of poverty" was coined many years ago.
Furthermore, some folks are poor, not because they don't have access to work or money, but because they have "other" big issues. Examples are: mental illness (many homeless people are mentally ill), drug addictions, desire to fly under the radar (not be found), inability to manage money, etc.
Last, what about the poor giving 10%? Then they'd even be poorer! lol Who is chosen to give and who receives? Who is poor and who is not?
2007-01-30 11:20:51 · answer #1 · answered by americansneedtowakeup 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What a lovely idea. I think they would spend it and still be poor. The old saying that 'Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, but teach a man to fish and you feed him for life' makes a lot of sense. Maybe we need to teach people how to budget, and earn a better income. Some countries have rulers that don't care about their people and don't give people the opportunity to prosper for themselves. World politics is the only hope for helping these people long term. Supporting education in undeveloped countries is a good use for spare money. Good on you.
2007-01-30 19:23:52 · answer #2 · answered by Ripplediane 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
People well in the U.S already give 30%+ of their income to the government, so why should they give 10% more to the poor? I for one would never do that, because the poor got themselves where they are today. If they weren't lazy they wouldn't be in the position they are now. I'd rather give 10% more of my income to the Government, not the poor.
2007-01-30 19:20:29 · answer #3 · answered by D.O... 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, it would just be a vicious cycle of us giving more and more money to the poor. Heck, I might even become poor if I knew I was getting free money for nothing.
2007-01-30 19:10:49 · answer #4 · answered by pikachu is love. 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So-called organized Charities would have one heck of a pay day and their would still be kids starving in all the world's desolate places. When you give $1.00, a child might only get about a quarter of that! What's Up with that?!
2007-01-30 19:10:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The poor would have 10% of the wealthy's money. I dont see any significant outcome from this.
2007-01-30 19:03:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, you'd just create more poor people, that's all.
Plus, the greedy poor people would soon expect and demand we hard-working but non-rich people support their lazy ways!
2007-01-30 19:07:22 · answer #7 · answered by Rissa 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
there would be less poor although I have serious doubts about going through organized charities !
2007-01-30 19:04:53 · answer #8 · answered by revdauphinee 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If i did that, I'd BE one of the poor.
2007-01-30 19:17:14 · answer #9 · answered by lavendergirl 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, yes, because then we would all be poor.
2007-01-30 19:19:12 · answer #10 · answered by swade903 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋