Pages:
Author

Topic: We can totally eradicate poverty if we TRULY want to. - page 12. (Read 1954 times)

legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 1273
Giving money to the poor can only help in a short amount of time it doesn't improve their lives in the long run because you don't know what are they going to do with the money. This is the risk when helping people so others turn to charities but helping charities has its own risk too because you can't track everything and what they're going to do with the money (lack of transaprency).
Quote
give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime
Charities is a good way to help the poor because it directly provides what they need. Not all charities foundation that doesn't inform what the donations are being used. For an example, the water foundation gives you a report for a donation you made.

It does not work that way, the rich distribute their wealth to the poor will significantly reduce the poverty rate. It needs a self-improvement to make ourself a better person in term of economy.
sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 290
So many people are interested in amassing wealth without giving a dime to the less privilege around them, yet they will still be among the first to criticize the government in its failure to eradicate hunger and poverty in the country.

No matter how much you provide for the needy around you, but you cannot finish their poverty as long as the government is not doing something for that. If the government is not doing anything to provide them an opportunity to work (unless they are handicaps) and earn for themselves, it deserves to be blamed for it.

If you are lucky to be wealthy, you should see it as a social responsibility to help the less privileged people in the society.

Not everyone get their wealth out of luck. Maybe a few get lucky enough to earn a lot of money in a very short period of time, or some may get it as an inheritance from their ancestors, but the majority of the people having a lot of wealth are the ones who have seen hardships in their lives as well but they came out the other side with a better lifestyle, and that's because they worked hard. And to be honest, the ones who get their wealth by luck, would rarely understand the situation of a person in need while if someone's wealth is hard-earned, he would definitely understand that without even saying.

do you feel comfortable driving past several beggars on the street when you have billions of money in your account that you or your entire family may not be able to exhaust in the next 100 years?

Though giving money to the homeless and needy people is a good deed, but that would absolutely not eradicate poverty, not at all. Passing by such people and giving them money, food, supplies or anything every day would simply give them enough for the day, but that wouldn't finish their poverty. As long as they don't get a source of income for themselves, they won't be stable, and that is what people or the governments should be looking forward to do. Only distributing wealth won't make the world a better place for the less privileged unless you provide them with a source of earning it of their own.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 518
So many people are interested in amassing wealth without giving a dime to the less privilege around them, yet they will still be among the first to criticize the government in its failure to eradicate hunger and poverty in the country. You should also know that the duty of eradicating poverty must not be left to the government alone. You must also contribute your quota.
 
If you are lucky to be wealthy, you should see it as a social responsibility to help the less privileged people in the society. If I may ask, do you feel comfortable driving past several beggars on the street when you have billions of money in your account that you or your entire family may not be able to exhaust in the next 100 years?
 
Think about this seriously. With the so much money in the world, poverty can greatly be reduced if not totally eradicated.
 
All that is necessary is the distribution of this wealth.

There is enough to go round.    
The employment with good salary is the only way to eradicate the poverty from this world but it won't happen because people never give free money to anyone even the right salary to most of their employees.And to be honest if all the people were equally distributed in wealth then no one will do work so the world will get stuck at its place since no one will go for their work so only smart people who have the knowledge to make money.
jr. member
Activity: 106
Merit: 6
There are a lot of wrong statements in your post. A lot of wealthy people worked hard for that wealth, and no luck was involved. They deserve to live a comfortable life. A lot of poor people are not poor because they were unlucky, some are just lazy.

A typical example of this was when the Berlin Wall was broken down. Some of the people who was living in East Germany was simply not used to working hard and they were lazy too. So when the Wall came down, a lot of them went into poverty, because they were too lazy to work or they were not used to the concept of hard work = higher income, like in the west.

The Communist system in East Germany made them lazy and some of them could not handle the change. So, Capitalism is not all bad, people are encouraged to work harder for a chance of a better life.

I give more than 10% of my income to charities that are helping poor people find jobs and a way to sustain them until they reach that goal. Teach them how to Fish!

Absolutely ridiculous, this is the type of bootlicking that is destroying the world.  THE MAJORITY of wealthy people get rich off the work of wage slaves.  All the pfoits go to the shareholders and Executives.  You are seriously dillusional, the hardest working people on this planet are dirt poor. Wake up! You are very brainwashed.
sr. member
Activity: 1932
Merit: 442
Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!
Poverty will be eradicated if people help themselves, if there's a government that help people out of the poverty, then they should help themselves too, it's a choice though, if you really want to leave out of poverty. But some people don't want to, it's like they want to be rich, but they don't help or find a solution or a way to become a rich person.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 526
So many people are interested in amassing wealth without giving a dime to the less privilege around them, yet they will still be among the first to criticize the government in its failure to eradicate hunger and poverty in the country. You should also know that the duty of eradicating poverty must not be left to the government alone. You must also contribute your quota.

What makes you think the government is set to eradicate poverty? On the other hand, who if not the government can actually do something about it? They accumulate taxes which are supposed to redistribute wealth in the society, to help a little those who are stuck in poverty, to give them choice. Otherwise, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink, which means that you can give someone an opportunity to get out of poverty but you can't force them to take it if they don't want to.

So it is a multifaceted, multilayered, and very complicated question, which cannot be reduced to claiming that we should be helping the less privileged people in the society in the way you mean it. Did it never occur to you that those beggars on the street you make mention of don't actually need your help, apart from asking for a few coins which they are going to waste that very evening on booze?
hero member
Activity: 3052
Merit: 606
If you are lucky to be wealthy, you should see it as a social responsibility to help the less privileged people in the society.
A lot of wealthy people worked hard for that wealth, and no luck was involved. They deserve to live a comfortable life. A lot of poor people are not poor because they were unlucky, some are just lazy.
Poverty will end only ,if all laziness,procrastination,ignorance and daydreaming ends.
@Kakmakr @davis196 I agree with both of you! people work hard for his wealth, or at least their parents did Wink 
luck has little effect on wealthiness, but laziness certainly will get you in poverty
even if you get big inheritance, you could lose it all in a blink of eye if you are too lazy to manage it

All that is necessary is the distribution of this wealth.
that's true but not in the sense of distributing/giving cash to people
most of the time they will just spend it in unproductive things or activities
you can distribute wealth by giving people opportunity to work and earn money
Exactly.Providing such opportunities to let poor people work in your company that will give a decent income monthly to sustain their family needs.Surely it will be a great help if not eradicate poverty,atleast it will be minimized.Giving them instant cash will only help them in a short term while providing them job opportunities can truly help them in a long term.
member
Activity: 486
Merit: 27
HIRE ME FOR SMALL TASK
OP,  you have the point and i appreciate it, if you ever heard about the story about the lost native americans, they are annihilated without a clear trace of who is the suspect to that case. Money is also an option to help poor to sustain their needs, but as long as people who has a profile of being rich since birth and has the thinking of greediness and power, this will not end the case. Crypto can help us to be anonymously living outside government laws but doesn't mean that it can be a 100% option.
hero member
Activity: 1232
Merit: 738
Mixing reinvented for your privacy | chipmixer.com
If you are lucky to be wealthy, you should see it as a social responsibility to help the less privileged people in the society.
A lot of wealthy people worked hard for that wealth, and no luck was involved. They deserve to live a comfortable life. A lot of poor people are not poor because they were unlucky, some are just lazy.
Poverty will end only ,if all laziness,procrastination,ignorance and daydreaming ends.
@Kakmakr @davis196 I agree with both of you! people work hard for his wealth, or at least their parents did Wink 
luck has little effect on wealthiness, but laziness certainly will get you in poverty
even if you get big inheritance, you could lose it all in a blink of eye if you are too lazy to manage it

All that is necessary is the distribution of this wealth.
that's true but not in the sense of distributing/giving cash to people
most of the time they will just spend it in unproductive things or activities
you can distribute wealth by giving people opportunity to work and earn money
legendary
Activity: 1792
Merit: 1283
Giving money to the poor can only help in a short amount of time it doesn't improve their lives in the long run because you don't know what are they going to do with the money. This is the risk when helping people so others turn to charities but helping charities has its own risk too because you can't track everything and what they're going to do with the money (lack of transaprency).

Other poor people rely heavily on the government for their needs instead of relying on their own. They've accepted their fate living in a poor lifestyle and doesn't want to change for the better. With that being said we can't eliminate poverty, reducing it is one way to maintain/improve the problem from getting worse.

That's simply not true, there have been experiments that have shown quite the opposite.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/free-money-might-be-the-best-way-to-end-poverty/2013/12/29/679c8344-5ec8-11e3-95c2-13623eb2b0e1_story.html?utm_term=.be4929fcefc1

Quote
In May 2009, a small experiment involving 13 homeless men took off in London. Some of them had slept in the cold for more than 40 years. The presence of these street veterans was far from cheap. Police, legal services, health care: Each cost taxpayers thousands of pounds every year.

That spring, a local charity decided to make the street veterans — sometimes called rough sleepers — the beneficiaries of an innovative social experiment. No more food stamps, food-kitchen dinners or sporadic shelter stays. The 13 would get a drastic bailout, financed by taxpayers. Each would receive 3,000 pounds (about $4,500), in cash, with no strings attached. The men were free to decide what to spend it on.

The only question they had to answer: What do you think is good for you?

“I didn’t have enormous expectations,” an aid worker recalled a year later. Yet the homeless men’s desires turned out to be quite modest. A phone, a passport, a dictionary — each participant had ideas about what would be best for him. None of the men wasted his money on alcohol, drugs or gambling. A year later, 11 of the 13 had roofs over their heads. (Some went to hostels; others to shelters.) They enrolled in classes, learned how to cook, got treatment for drug abuse and made plans for the future. After decades of authorities’ fruitless pushing, pulling, fines and persecution, 11 vagrants moved off the streets.
 

Something similar in Finland, they are giving free homes to homeless people (unconditionally):
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/12/finland-homelessness-rough-sleepers-britain

Then there's also the idea of giving an unconditional basic income to people, that would completely eradicate poverty if implemented worldwide.
Even now there's a huge number of bullshit jobs that could very well be done by a robot in the future.

We really won't be able to provide jobs for everyone, so I see it as beyond inevitable that some form of benefits or basic income is granted to citizens.
full member
Activity: 952
Merit: 104
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
So many people are interested in amassing wealth without giving a dime to the less privilege around them, yet they will still be among the first to criticize the government in its failure to eradicate hunger and poverty in the country. You should also know that the duty of eradicating poverty must not be left to the government alone. You must also contribute your quota.
 
If you are lucky to be wealthy, you should see it as a social responsibility to help the less privileged people in the society. If I may ask, do you feel comfortable driving past several beggars on the street when you have billions of money in your account that you or your entire family may not be able to exhaust in the next 100 years?
 
Think about this seriously. With the so much money in the world, poverty can greatly be reduced if not totally eradicated.
 
All that is necessary is the distribution of this wealth.

There is enough to go round.    

So, how are we going to gather so much money that you think we can't spend in the next 100 years? Yes, it's easy to say that we can eradicate poverty with so much money in the world. But at least share some ideas on how to realize that.
hero member
Activity: 3150
Merit: 937
Poverty will end only ,if all laziness,procrastination,ignorance and daydreaming ends.
Some people just want to work more and earn more.The distribution of wealth will take resources from them and give money to the lazy,ignorant people.Is this fair?
The people,who are extremely rich,due to breaking the law should be punished.This is the only justice I know.
jr. member
Activity: 112
Merit: 2
Why is that when somebody is rich, that person has to be demanded to give to the poor? If the rich person earned his money ethically then I don't see any problem with that. If that person gives back to the community then great. If that person does not give back, that is his/her choice.
What should be demanded is for the government not to be corrupt and to spend hard-earned taxes from the people into giving it back in terms of education and everything that will lead to job generation. The government should also demand from corporations to give the right pay to their workers and not just whatever amount that is not fair for the type of job that they have. If they are contributing to the pollution, then the government should demand from businesses to offset that in other terms.
Needless to say, there are a lot of companies who are abusive and just focus on profit. Those are the ones that should be focused on. Like the recent case of a pharma company raising a drug price to up to 400% for no other reason but to profit, highly unethical.
hero member
Activity: 1274
Merit: 516
I think giving money to the poor won't solve poverty problem, because it can only help the poor for temporary, for long term the poor need steady job, so they can become independent and some if the people could become lazy if knowing they will be supported without need to do anything, so I think job opportunities is more important than giving money to them
10c
full member
Activity: 658
Merit: 100
BuyAnyLight - Blockchain LED Marketplace
At all times there were both poor people and the rich, so I think even if people wanted to eradicate poverty, they would not have succeeded.
sr. member
Activity: 2366
Merit: 332
First, I think OP should edit the eradicate in his title pose to either ameliorate/curtail or reduced, give it a soft landing because it can not be eradicated in any society. And, if I have to make inference from the bible, do we still remember the rich man and the poor man story?

There are a lot of wrong statements in your post. A lot of wealthy people worked hard for that wealth, and no luck was involved.

I think that there is also the place of luck in our lives and being rich. The difference is that, being ready to identify the luck; in which case, the rich could have been ready. Off course, when being ready/opportunity meets luck, it takes one to wealth.

So we have to live ready.
legendary
Activity: 2170
Merit: 1427
Donating to charities is only partly solving the issue.

It's not even partly solving the 'issue'.

If we look at how much money globally has been donated to charities of all sorts, and the problems these charities are meant to tackle but aren't tackling in reality, it's pretty much a waste of time and money. How is it that after a few decades you still don't see that you're not solving the underlying problem, but just delay it at most in some fields?

People need a platform to build on so they can develop themselves and spread that positive vibe (remember, positivity and productivity incentivizes others to follow), not be pampered with pocket change and be left in the same situation for many more years. Or perhaps it's part of the system to keep people poor, because remember, poverty is a form of suppression in itself.

The more financial possibilities people have, the more power they obtain, and governments might not want that to happen.
hero member
Activity: 3080
Merit: 603
Like the saying "Teach them how to fish".

I'm not with anything with those wealthy people and the only lucky ones are those that were born in a rich family but look on the background story on how those people reached success and the life they are living now. Actually, they have no obligation for those less fortunate and I'm sure that they are helping them in some ways but they don't want to broadcast it. The problem also lies to the people who don't want to get out of the rat race and is all asking for help all the time but without making any efforts on their own.
sr. member
Activity: 574
Merit: 251
It is still poor people who are making wrong decisions in their life and nothing else. If they ever got educated then they can have jobs in their hands and with that job they can literally start overcoming their life situation which is currently so called poor. I don't think that we should be doing something for them though we had money because you know what will happen after this? They will get used to it and they will start relying more on us rather than feign something by themselves. If they have got the art then tell them to do it and then pay. There is nothing like poerty in this world, there is only your own mistake if you are poor person.

Steve Jobs said once , if you born poor then its not your mistake, but if you die poor then its your mistake.
legendary
Activity: 3542
Merit: 1965
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
There are a lot of wrong statements in your post. A lot of wealthy people worked hard for that wealth, and no luck was involved. They deserve to live a comfortable life. A lot of poor people are not poor because they were unlucky, some are just lazy.

A typical example of this was when the Berlin Wall was broken down. Some of the people who was living in East Germany was simply not used to working hard and they were lazy too. So when the Wall came down, a lot of them went into poverty, because they were too lazy to work or they were not used to the concept of hard work = higher income, like in the west.

The Communist system in East Germany made them lazy and some of them could not handle the change. So, Capitalism is not all bad, people are encouraged to work harder for a chance of a better life.

I give more than 10% of my income to charities that are helping poor people find jobs and a way to sustain them until they reach that goal. Teach them how to Fish!
Pages:
Jump to:
© 2020, Bitcointalksearch.org