2007-07-31 05:07:07 · 9 answers · asked by Joe D 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Sure. Just make money obsolete.
Poverty has nothing to do with wealth. That sounds odd, but you can be wealthy without having a money-based economy. However, you cannot be poor unless there is a money-based economy.
Look up "post-scarcity" economics. It's a model that moves beyond supply-demand, and uses available technology to change the model and eliminate poverty.
2007-07-31 05:10:59 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You can never eliminate poverty if you understand how it is defined. Basically, the federal government takes a census. Listing households by income, they draw an arbitrary line and consider everyone under that level as living in poverty. The next time they take a census, since too many have moved above this line, they just redraw the line so the same amount of people are always below the poverty line.
The number of 'mega-wealthy' has little to do with it. I mean, if you draw the line for what makes someone mega-rich at a higher income level, you will have fewer mega-wealthy, right? No, the quality of their lives does not change. It is the same at and below the poverty line.
That is why there are a lot of people in America that are living below the poverty line that would be considered middle class in most other countries. In America, we have the wealthiest poor people in the world!
.
2007-07-31 05:23:43 · answer #2 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
IF the wealth of all themega rich were to be distributed each would land up getting a few notes. IT is ultimately the wealth generating oppertunities and capacities which matter and this will never change. By the way wealth is never stagnant it keeps rolling and changing hands, so do not worry if you take the right decision at the right time you might be there..
2007-07-31 05:13:24 · answer #3 · answered by jittender k 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is the wealthy and the mega-wealthy who work realistically to eliminate poverty by continued investment and job creation.
Picking their pockets to distribute to the dependents only institutionalizes the dependency and insures future generations of dependents.
2007-07-31 05:15:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Not thru the government, because it becomes dependency, and enslavement. Anything you pay for, you'll get more of. Politician's love this; "if you vote for _____, instead of me they'll take away your food stamps, etc., so, the poor vote for a living.
Better would be private organizations, assisting, with job training, food, and assistance, where there would be some accountability for the recipients.
2007-07-31 05:17:47 · answer #5 · answered by liberalus_destructus 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Poverty is a relative term. You compare the "poor" in the US versus the "poor" in other parts of the world, and you might wonder if there are any poor in the US.
2007-07-31 05:13:43 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
yes poverty can be eliminated just controlling the greedy people and equal distribution of natural resources
2007-07-31 06:22:50 · answer #7 · answered by AMRIT LAL M 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes, and you don't have to make money obscolete.
You can just allow everyone to have a certain standard of living, and everything else is up to you and your motivations.
2007-07-31 05:14:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Nope. It requires everyone to become conservative, stop thinking of themselves as victims and getting rid of their entitlement mindset.
2007-07-31 05:14:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋