The poor always exist, they are those who are unable to work such as the elderly, the disabled, the sick...
The causes of poverty come from national policies, wars, exploitation, epidemics, weather, climate... leading to food shortages.
I think if the world no longer exploits, makes money on other people's pain, people live ethically, help each other, the world can be better. The world is reducing the number of poor people as humanitarian organizations are working to save the world's poor.
Topic: Can the world be without poverty - page 9. (Read 10039 times)
In world, there is hierarchy, that is why some people are rich, some are average, some are not that rich but still having good living some are poor, while the poor still look at some and still appreciate life because they are poorer. I am beginning to thinking laziness can be the result of some people not having good living, while some is purely due to ignorant an lack of knowledge and exposure, some even only lack information.
I am thinking with how people is, is there a way possible for everyone to live without being poor, though their can be hierarchy but in a way no one is poor? But I am thinking it is not possible. If anything happens today that the poor are richer and got richer than the rich people, the rich people will become poor too because life is not just balance.
Economically, can there be a way people can live and no one will be poor?
This is not destiny , everyone can change the fate of his life from poor to rich if he wants to try and work hard and in prayer . When he is persistent in achieving what he wants, it will surely be achieved. And vice versa if people are destined to be rich, but it turns out that he is just a lazy person, I'm sure his life will also be poor. Even in the book I read, God will change a person's life if he himself wants to change his destiny. I am thinking with how people is, is there a way possible for everyone to live without being poor, though their can be hierarchy but in a way no one is poor? But I am thinking it is not possible. If anything happens today that the poor are richer and got richer than the rich people, the rich people will become poor too because life is not just balance.
Economically, can there be a way people can live and no one will be poor?
A few years back, there was a proposal for Universal Basic Income (UBI). At that time, the proposal didn't received much support from the general public. But I can see that many of the governments are slowly moving towards having such a system. Here in India, the farmers are being given a fixed amount every year. Some of the other groups also receive similar payments form the government. And the US government is also sending stimulus checks to most of the population (the justification is that pandemic has affected income generation).
And asking out on the world doesnt have have poverty? This is a problem that cant really be resolved.There would be always those people who are on the peak,
Wherever you see people's poverty, rest assured that there are corrupt government. When all government are not involved in corruption, poverty is much lower. It is true that there is always someone up and there is always someone down. However, it would be very unfortunate if developed countries also have poor people.
And asking out on the world doesnt have have poverty? This is a problem that cant really be resolved.There would be always those people who are on the peak,
Wherever you see people's poverty, rest assured that there are corrupt government. When all government are not involved in corruption, poverty is much lower. It is true that there is always someone up and there is always someone down. However, it would be very unfortunate if developed countries also have poor people.
I have an interesting question. Do you think that wealth or prosperity is part of happiness or are they separate entities? Or is money synonymous with WIDE OPPORTUNITIES? And happiness can be independent of the availability of money?
The reality today is that money can buy everything, although money can't always do everything. A person can live without money, but as if dead and unable to move when there is no money because in reality nowadays everything is always valued in moneyI would not say that happiness can be measured by money, but someone who can live happily with poor status also need money because the government has categorized him as someone who is a taxpayer.
Money cant buy everything but this is one of the solely needed for you to be happy even with the simpliest thing that you would do does basically need up some funds.
And asking out on the world doesnt have have poverty? This is a problem that cant really be resolved.There would be always those people who are on the peak,
I don't really believe the word can be without poverty because I believe must countries with highest population of poverty are the countries with high population. And I believe the countries with high population the corruption level of the countries are also high, the money that are suppose to be used for development mostly are been embezzled by the people at the top which makes the country undeveloped and increases unemployment and poverty in a country.
I have an interesting question. Do you think that wealth or prosperity is part of happiness or are they separate entities? Or is money synonymous with WIDE OPPORTUNITIES? And happiness can be independent of the availability of money?
The reality today is that money can buy everything, although money can't always do everything. A person can live without money, but as if dead and unable to move when there is no money because in reality nowadays everything is always valued in moneyI would not say that happiness can be measured by money, but someone who can live happily with poor status also need money because the government has categorized him as someone who is a taxpayer.
I have an interesting question. Do you think that wealth or prosperity is part of happiness or are they separate entities? Or is money synonymous with WIDE OPPORTUNITIES? And happiness can be independent of the availability of money?
If we look back when our ancestors still lived a nomadic life. their social status is equal. no one is rich and no one is poor. each individual does work by the expertise to get food (survival) and each result is divided fairly according to their respective needs.
If today every country and government has a fair lifestyle, I believe there will be no more poverty.
in my country such a system seems less suitable, where nowadays there are always the rich and the poor. the rich will need the power of the poor, and vice versa the poor will need help from the rich. Even though the government itself will look after the poor, I don't think it's very effective, where in the end we ourselves have to fight for our own welfare.If today every country and government has a fair lifestyle, I believe there will be no more poverty.
The developments that being acquired by those mentioned countries gives them the opportunities to increase thier economy.
extreme poverty though still exist from those places mostly in africa, as the government who rule this place needs to work out and try
to immitate those countries who made a good success.
Poverty still being felt, there are still places who needscertain lift from the help of the government.
extreme poverty though still exist from those places mostly in africa, as the government who rule this place needs to work out and try
to immitate those countries who made a good success.
Poverty still being felt, there are still places who needscertain lift from the help of the government.
A few days back, I saw a map which showed the 25 poorest countries in the world. 23 of them are in Africa and the other two are Haiti and Afghanistan. Now one thing is common with all these 25 countries - uncontrolled population growth. These nations have very few natural resources, and the exploding population makes it difficult for the governments to provide essential services to everyone. The only real solution to eradicate poverty is to implement a strict family planning policy across the third world nations.
It depends on your definition of "poverty".
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
I agree that in general income levels are rising. But the most important thing to remember here is that it is the income levels of the lowest tier, which is rising at the fastest rate. You can check the levels of extreme poverty around the world. Countries such as China has managed to eradicate extreme poverty and it is no mean achievement. Even in third world nations such as India, those who are living in extreme poverty has decreased by 80% or more during the last two decades. Now extreme poverty is mostly limited to certain geographies, such as Sub-Saharan Africa and Haiti.
The developments that being acquired by those mentioned countries gives them the opportunities to increase thier economy.
extreme poverty though still exist from those places mostly in africa, as the government who rule this place needs to work out and try
to immitate those countries who made a good success.
Poverty still being felt, there are still places who needscertain lift from the help of the government.
It depends on your definition of "poverty".
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
I agree that in general income levels are rising. But the most important thing to remember here is that it is the income levels of the lowest tier, which is rising at the fastest rate. You can check the levels of extreme poverty around the world. Countries such as China has managed to eradicate extreme poverty and it is no mean achievement. Even in third world nations such as India, those who are living in extreme poverty has decreased by 80% or more during the last two decades. Now extreme poverty is mostly limited to certain geographies, such as Sub-Saharan Africa and Haiti.
It depends on your definition of "poverty".
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
If you have an absolute standard in mind ("Daily income more than $10/day in inflation adjusted dollars") then absolutely, yes. Worldwide incomes are rapidly rising including among the poorest of the poor.
If you mean" people in the bottom 10% of the income distribution" , then by definition no. I don't see a way to have all people earn the same amount, at least not with real humans on the real Earth. Maybe in the 23rd century with free energy and replicators but that's far enough from reality as to be irrelevant.
Yes, absolutely yes. Poverty to me is the state of the mind. Poverty is not impose on any individual but accepted by an individual by desire.
Equal right was given to all at birth but environmental factors will alway play a vital role at every point of growth in the life of every individual. Being poor does not mean not having much money because money is not happines but not finding happines is poverty.
Hence everybody can be rich if and only we realize that lack of money is not poverty but lack of happiness is poverty.
Where are environmental factors and population in your classification of poverty as emotional abbreviation? Happiness and sadness don't represent wealth and poverty but it is inherent emotional tendencies posed on the ability to feel satisfied. Even a poor person could be happy having just a meal per day and his rich counterpart could be sad having triple square meal a day.Equal right was given to all at birth but environmental factors will alway play a vital role at every point of growth in the life of every individual. Being poor does not mean not having much money because money is not happines but not finding happines is poverty.
Hence everybody can be rich if and only we realize that lack of money is not poverty but lack of happiness is poverty.
To the OP, it is not totally possible to eliminate poverty even in countries where their economies are very viable, there are homeless people, people still starving due to one environmental factor or the other. So, I can't say poverty can be totally eliminated.
The people cannot choose the system that they want to get in. It is the society that will choose the people who's in and out. This is the sad reality, even if you're trying hard and working at your best.
There's inequality that can be found in the social status of everyone. But if you're living in a fair system, whether you'll be the rich guy, middle class or poor guy. As long as there's an equal share for opportunity, that would be the ideal system.
There's inequality that can be found in the social status of everyone. But if you're living in a fair system, whether you'll be the rich guy, middle class or poor guy. As long as there's an equal share for opportunity, that would be the ideal system.
That is obvious. If you are staying in a capitalist country such as the United States, then you can't demand that the country should implement socialist policies (politicians such as Bernie Sanders want to do that, but I really doubt whether he will be allowed, even if he gets elected as the president of the United States). Similarly, if you are residing in a country such as North Korea, then you need to put up with the Socialist system. Most likely you will end up in abject poverty, and may only be able to have food once a day. On the other hand, Kim Jong Un and the ruling elites will be munching on imported Beluga caviar and parmesan cheese. You can't demand that a capitalist system should be implemented there. If you do that, most probably you will end up dead along with your family members.
Yes, absolutely yes. Poverty to me is the state of the mind. Poverty is not impose on any individual but accepted by an individual by desire.
Equal right was given to all at birth but environmental factors will alway play a vital role at every point of growth in the life of every individual. Being poor does not mean not having much money because money is not happines but not finding happines is poverty.
Hence everybody can be rich if and only we realize that lack of money is not poverty but lack of happiness is poverty.
Equal right was given to all at birth but environmental factors will alway play a vital role at every point of growth in the life of every individual. Being poor does not mean not having much money because money is not happines but not finding happines is poverty.
Hence everybody can be rich if and only we realize that lack of money is not poverty but lack of happiness is poverty.
We believe the world will not have poverty. It was a dream about a warm life. Truth, every country has rich and poor people. If you are rich as a charity or share, help others so that the world is no longer the poor.
I think being rich and poor is a standard created by man to different between people and it has become a natural phenomenon that we have all been living with that has created division among humanity.
Been reach or poor also depends on country as you have said. Mr A might think he or she is rich in country A but when compare to country B with another rich person, he/she may be power because of inflation and exchange rate.
Rich or poor is something that will stay until the earth fold up over time.
There can be two scenarios. In capitalist system, we will be having 3 classes of people - around 5% who are rich, another 90% who are in the middle-class with a relatively comfortable style of living, and then the remaining 5% comprised of "poor" people. The in socialist system we will have only two classes of people - 1% of the population will be ultra-rich (mostly the ruling elite) and then the remaining 99% of the people will be poor. It is up to the people to chose which system they want in their country.
The people cannot choose the system that they want to get in. It is the society that will choose the people who's in and out. This is the sad reality, even if you're trying hard and working at your best.There's inequality that can be found in the social status of everyone. But if you're living in a fair system, whether you'll be the rich guy, middle class or poor guy. As long as there's an equal share for opportunity, that would be the ideal system.
There can be two scenarios. In capitalist system, we will be having 3 classes of people - around 5% who are rich, another 90% who are in the middle-class with a relatively comfortable style of living, and then the remaining 5% comprised of "poor" people. The in socialist system we will have only two classes of people - 1% of the population will be ultra-rich (mostly the ruling elite) and then the remaining 99% of the people will be poor. It is up to the people to chose which system they want in their country.
I see. indeed it cannot be separated from the point of view of the government officials who set it. in my country using a capitalist system, which means it is impossible to eliminate the poor, the poor will always exist due to inequality. Even though the state has guaranteed it in the law, the evidence is that until now there are always poor people, and the number can only be reduced Jump to: