Topic: Can the world be without poverty (Read 10039 times)
There will be no poverty in the world as long as fiat is not printed and increases inflation and corruption. We see that fiat is a unit to measure people's life and economy. If each country's government can protect, achieve high efficiency in the fight against unemployment, fight poverty, health care and education…etc, this is the dream of the whole world but wish which is increasingly being destroyed by covid19.
Riches comes through determination, dedication, self discipline and hard work, even those that inherited wealth know that someone pay the price for that generational riches. Poverty will still exist because some are not ready to do those things that will make them rich. Even though you distribute one million U.S dollar to everyone in the world some will still become poor in few weeks.
Poverty will always exist, this is a natural law that cannot be eliminated, many things are done by poor people so that between rich and poor there are mutual benefits, if there are no poor people then no one becomes a farmer, laborer, fisherman, construction worker and so on.
Riches comes through determination, dedication, self discipline and hard work, even those that inherited wealth know that someone pay the price for that generational riches. Poverty will still exist because some are not ready to do those things that will make them rich. Even though you distribute one million U.S dollar to everyone in the world some will still become poor in few weeks.
If that really happened then we will not need currency to trade it with the material and stuff. Neither we will need it to pay for the services, May be for food etc. Think about the ancient world when there was no monetary system. What they did was miracle, they lived altogether they did not considered humans as different caste, or level of living standard. Everyone was the same, they used to live together so that they can survive from the wilderness of nature, animals and what not.
The good thing was they never separated on the basis of who got what in their wallets. Because there was no such thing.
Sadly, over the time things got complicated. Dominance got created so that someone can live the lavish life and rule the others for their benefits. Today, world lives by differentiation of castes, literacy, developments and many more things to count on.
To make everyone rich or discard the poverty everyone will need to live together with one pager understanding which seems impossible at this point.
The good thing was they never separated on the basis of who got what in their wallets. Because there was no such thing.
Sadly, over the time things got complicated. Dominance got created so that someone can live the lavish life and rule the others for their benefits. Today, world lives by differentiation of castes, literacy, developments and many more things to count on.
To make everyone rich or discard the poverty everyone will need to live together with one pager understanding which seems impossible at this point.
One of the best ways to reduce poverty is to reduce inequality. A lot of ultra rich people do give money away voluntarily, and try to solve some of the world's problems, the Gates Foundation being an example. But it shouldn't really be voluntary, if taxation worked properly. Jeff Bezos for example has around £200 billion. It's very difficult for us to visualise what that means, as the number is so far beyond what our human brains deal with in everyday life.
Bill Gates is like the worst possible example. Do you know that he caused a $20 billion loss to the United States treasury by moving his shares to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation? Since these shares have been moved to a charity organization, they will never be taxed. Also, Bill Gates divorced his wife, just because they wanted to decrease the tax bill further. I am not saying that he hasn't contributed to charity. But refusing to pay $20 billion in taxes, and then using a fraction of that amount to charity is not very ethical IMO.
One of the best ways to reduce poverty is to reduce inequality. A lot of ultra rich people do give money away voluntarily, and try to solve some of the world's problems, the Gates Foundation being an example. But it shouldn't really be voluntary, if taxation worked properly. Jeff Bezos for example has around £200 billion. It's very difficult for us to visualise what that means, as the number is so far beyond what our human brains deal with in everyday life.
The role of the state is needed to overcome poverty, the state must provide the best education and health facilities so as to make the people able to improve their standard of living, in my country poverty is a political object because it is always an issue when there is a general election.
I agree, the state has the urge to initiate reduction in poverty rate. But for individuals, if they understand their situation, they don't have to wait for the government's help. Although the state really has an important role to improve the quality of life through those that you've mentioned. They also have to look at the business sector and as well as employment.
Reducing the level of poverty in the country is indeed the government's task, but the government's task so far is only in the form of dropping out of work because overcoming poverty, the government's version so far is to provide subsidies, even though with the existence of subsidies, poverty is maintained because it will not provide mental education for the poor to try to get out of the poverty line. The role of the government is not enough without the will of the individual.
If they will come along with it and wanting to have a good economy, they'll for sure give an impact to their economy as well as people living in the poverty line to have that self reliance.
The role of the state is needed to overcome poverty, the state must provide the best education and health facilities so as to make the people able to improve their standard of living, in my country poverty is a political object because it is always an issue when there is a general election.
I agree, the state has the urge to initiate reduction in poverty rate. But for individuals, if they understand their situation, they don't have to wait for the government's help. Although the state really has an important role to improve the quality of life through those that you've mentioned. They also have to look at the business sector and as well as employment.
Reducing the level of poverty in the country is indeed the government's task, but the government's task so far is only in the form of dropping out of work because overcoming poverty, the government's version so far is to provide subsidies, even though with the existence of subsidies, poverty is maintained because it will not provide mental education for the poor to try to get out of the poverty line. The role of the government is not enough without the will of the individual.
The role of the state is needed to overcome poverty, the state must provide the best education and health facilities so as to make the people able to improve their standard of living, in my country poverty is a political object because it is always an issue when there is a general election.
I agree, the state has the urge to initiate reduction in poverty rate. But for individuals, if they understand their situation, they don't have to wait for the government's help. Although the state really has an important role to improve the quality of life through those that you've mentioned. They also have to look at the business sector and as well as employment.
The role of the state is needed to overcome poverty, the state must provide the best education and health facilities so as to make the people able to improve their standard of living, in my country poverty is a political object because it is always an issue when there is a general election.
That hasn't worked so far. Those governments which focus on improving education, infrastructure and medical care are increasingly being voted out of power, in favor of populist governments which distribute freebies. The latter is not a sustainable option. Freebies can't last for lifetime, while education is permanent. And the problem with freebies is that it results in indirect slavery. The poor are forced to vote for the political party, so that they could continue to receive the handouts. And on the other hand, it means that the politicians also have a reason to keep the lower class in the same financial state.
It is true that poverty is the biggest problem in every country, even in developed countries there is still poverty. Therefore, care is needed from
the government to overcome this, although to reduce the number of poverty is not an easy job. The support of big companies is also needed to
help the government reduce poverty, especially with the pandemic situation that is not over yet, increasingly difficult to overcome the problem of
poverty. So the conclusion is a world without poverty is very difficult to realize, but at least the number of poor people should be reduced every year,
if the government can implement the right steps.
Yes, a world without poverty is impossible in the modern world, because poverty, like wealth, is a relative concept and if there are rich people, there will definitely be poor people. Therefore, the task of any government is not to eradicate poverty, because this will not lead to anything good, and such attempts can simply lead to the fact that everyone will simply be poor. Therefore, the task of the Government is to prevent poverty from taking horrific forms that offend human dignity and to take measures to raise the incomes of the poorest strata. It is also necessary to intelligently organize the activities of the so-called social elevators, so that there is a constant movement between the social strata of society.the government to overcome this, although to reduce the number of poverty is not an easy job. The support of big companies is also needed to
help the government reduce poverty, especially with the pandemic situation that is not over yet, increasingly difficult to overcome the problem of
poverty. So the conclusion is a world without poverty is very difficult to realize, but at least the number of poor people should be reduced every year,
if the government can implement the right steps.
Because poverty will always exist, but that does not mean the government allows poverty to continue to increase. Although poverty cannot
be eliminated, its number can be reduced. So human life will be happier and more prosperous, if the number of poverty decreases. Actually,
there have been many government programs in various countries of the world to be able to reduce the number of poverty. If we feel that
we are poor, we must actively participate in the program that has been established by the government. Likewise, if we are rich people,
we must do something to support government programs. This means that overcoming poverty cannot expect what the government does,
but it requires the cooperation of all parties.
Poverty is one of the most problem in the society or in the country. Having a poverty is difficult because of the high population people suffered the lack of supply an shelter they can not provide their own needs cause some of them are young and child who got entered a relationship .More teenager now got affair and stand for their new family so this time the poverty involve on this.
It is true that poverty is the biggest problem in every country, even in developed countries there is still poverty. Therefore, care is needed from the government to overcome this, although to reduce the number of poverty is not an easy job. The support of big companies is also needed to
help the government reduce poverty, especially with the pandemic situation that is not over yet, increasingly difficult to overcome the problem of
poverty. So the conclusion is a world without poverty is very difficult to realize, but at least the number of poor people should be reduced every year,
if the government can implement the right steps.
Poverty is one of the most problem in the society or in the country. Having a poverty is difficult because of the high population people suffered the lack of supply an shelter they can not provide their own needs cause some of them are young and child who got entered a relationship .More teenager now got affair and stand for their new family so this time the poverty involve on this.
It is true that poverty is the biggest problem in every country, even in developed countries there is still poverty. Therefore, care is needed from
the government to overcome this, although to reduce the number of poverty is not an easy job. The support of big companies is also needed to
help the government reduce poverty, especially with the pandemic situation that is not over yet, increasingly difficult to overcome the problem of
poverty. So the conclusion is a world without poverty is very difficult to realize, but at least the number of poor people should be reduced every year,
if the government can implement the right steps.
Poverty is one of the most problem in the society or in the country. Having a poverty is difficult because of the high population people suffered the lack of supply an shelter they can not provide their own needs cause some of them are young and child who got entered a relationship .More teenager now got affair and stand for their new family so this time the poverty involve on this.
There is a proposal!
Suppose that in a certain country, they decided to make everyone rich. Let's say that 1% was super-rich, we don't touch them, we throw them out of the scheme. But everyone else, the state, begins to pay the same amount of income every month, regardless of whether a person is working, unemployed, middle class or hereditary poor.
Now let's simulate such a society in our heads! And how will it behave? What will happen in the future? What will happen to the economy? Will a sustainable and high-quality result be achieved?
The answer will explain why the world will always be divided into richer and less richer
Suppose that in a certain country, they decided to make everyone rich. Let's say that 1% was super-rich, we don't touch them, we throw them out of the scheme. But everyone else, the state, begins to pay the same amount of income every month, regardless of whether a person is working, unemployed, middle class or hereditary poor.
Now let's simulate such a society in our heads! And how will it behave? What will happen in the future? What will happen to the economy? Will a sustainable and high-quality result be achieved?
The answer will explain why the world will always be divided into richer and less richer
In my opinion, poverty is the lack of basic human needs and it is not possible to meet the basic needs of the people worldwide, but in many cases, it can be eradicated. It is absurd to totally reduce poverty in the world, however, it is feasible to decrease its rate. The biggest obstacle to poverty eradication is the inequality of people's moral thinking, rich-poor inequality, and lack of unity of social values. If the people in power and responsible people of the world work together, they can improve the overall condition of the people below the poverty line.
Poverty cannot be eradicated unless the standard of living is improved poor is very difficult to eradicate poverty. if the rich people of the society help the poor people of the society then they will be able to improve their quality of life but there are many differences between the rich and the poor in order to alleviate poverty, inequality must be eliminated and the poor must be given their fair share without being exploited. This requires strict legal action by the government.
The main reason the poor are still struggling to make a living is that they think someone could help them eradicate the poverty and make a good life, instead of them making a change for themselves as everyone is up against themselves and everyone needs to struggle to make a good living. The only different is that how much hard work you are doing in a smart way and uplift the life.The inequality is a myth, if you working hard and study when you have the opportunity then you do not need anyone's help to be successful in life and no one will control your life. If you spare that when you got the time to study then you will struggle in life and then what is the point of blaming others for the misery. I am telling this because i have heard about free education in third world countries for financially backward people and i am not sure how many are taking advantage of that a making a change for themselves.
Poverty cannot be eradicated unless the standard of living is improved poor is very difficult to eradicate poverty. if the rich people of the society help the poor people of the society then they will be able to improve their quality of life but there are many differences between the rich and the poor in order to alleviate poverty, inequality must be eliminated and the poor must be given their fair share without being exploited. This requires strict legal action by the government.
If you always look at the higher standard of living you will never find a piece, but if you look down.. no matter how poor you are... you will always feel enough and even rich to live a good life.to make a world without poverty.. simply put that mindset to each of them and do a real action to those who starving especially.
Totally agree with your opinion. Because indeed I believe in all countries have struggled to eradicate poverty , but poverty still exists . This proves that poverty cannot be eliminated 100%, not the government's fault either. But the individual's willingness to change is also the most important factor.
Poverty doesn't exist in a handful of smaller countries such as Monaco and San Marino, but overall I agree with your views. But it is also important to remember that there can be two metrics to measure poverty. The first one is in an absolute sense. If someone doesn't have the ability to take care of his basic necessities (such as food and housing), then you can call him as poor. This absolute poverty doesn't exist in developed nations such as US and UK. The next metric is to use a relative measurement. If someone is earning below 25% of the average national salary, then you can label him as poor. This type of poverty exists almost everywhere.
but not all small countries are rich countries depending on government management in the economic sector.
and many countries whose governments have made a mistake in taking action, especially in the economic sector. just an example is the country nauru. a country that is indeed very rich in natural products but they are wrong in managing their finances and the result is now they are on the verge of collapse.
There are places in the world or countries which might really be excluded into this situation but we cant really avoid the fact that there are still poor people who do reside on each country.
Thing here is that government does really have the steps and plans on at least resolving, it might not be totally but even just on the slightest try.
Yes it can, just remove the negative elements in the government and economy but mostly government like corruption, power hunger, discrimination, violence, and militarization, and I think that we will be good to go. And we can also be ruthless against big corporations like Amazon to pay their taxes and it can't be exempted and written off and no bribery or lobbying can get through the people that creates the laws, making those and we will be one step further to eradication of poverty. Creating a sustainable farming and abandoning religion could help too. I added religion because most wars are waged because of God hence the abandonment of religion, and what happens when there's war? That's right death and poverty.
Jump to: