Topic: What roles does the poor play in the Economy? - page 7. (Read 1611 times)

Even the world's biggest countries such as America and Britain also have poor people, as they can never be eradicated from any society but just that the level of poverty in each country varies from one another, as they play a vital role in making life comfortable for the rich and middle-class citizens and themselves by creating an enabling environment for them all, as they are the ones who do the dirty jobs, (i.e petty traders, cleaning jobs, drivers, security guard & e.t.c).

Poverty... This word is often found here under "economics. Poverty is.... Hmm. What is poverty to begin with ?
Not enough money ? Destiny ? Upbringing? Something else?
Many people will say "not enough money." But I say "not enough money" is the consequence of other reasons. And those reasons are the subject of a separate topic. Those who wish can create, we will discuss.

But the place of the poor in the economy is a topic for discussion. I'm going to write things that not everyone will like, but in my opinion this is true. Firstly, we must accept the fact that the poor is a layer of the population that exists in all countries, the difference is only in the "thickness" of this layer. When this layer is more than 50%, it means that there is a systemic problem, the level of the state. When this layer is almost invisible - it means a high standard of living, and "but some are unlucky". And the classics - when this layer exists, but not 50% and not 0.1%.
And this "classic" variant is probably worth talking about. In an "average" country, with an "average" level of poverty, this layer consists of people with different fates, but one outcome: they either lost or failed to reach the level of the "middle class. What is their place in the economy ?
If we talk about the "positive" points: This is all the "dirty work" that a resident with an average income does not want to do, i.e. work that must be done but costs "pennies". Another place in the economy is "social sanitation" - this is the collection and recycling of garbage, waste and other things.
The negative component is:
- social ballast for the national budget (consumers of social programs, not creating income, products, services and taxes),
- as a rule, grassroots mass crime, illegal trade (drugs, stolen goods, ....) .
- And they are the most unprofitable audience for the economy and the market. They do not consume constantly and a lot, because they do not have "extra" money.

This does not sound very nice - but in general terms - they are ballast for the rest of the population, and an ineffective "layer" for the economy and market of the country.

High numbers of poor people is an indicator that shows how government does their job in one country. High number of poor people shows government priority in creating country’s budget. However, there are moments when poor isnt an indicator to show how good or bad government works. Country by itself can be poor; for example they might now have any recourses except land or labor force.

People living in poverty does not mean they are free of paying taxes. I know few developed countries provide the financial assistance to there most poor sectors and even they have progressive tax system (in which poor are provided with relaxtion in tax while the rich ones are highly burdened with taxes).

But most of the countries do not provide these facilities and yet they also have regressive tax Taxation system (in which poor and the rich both are equally burdened with taxes).

In both cases, poor contribute to economy by making goods and by providing there services while in regressive tax, poor also pay taxes like me, and thus it is considered as contribution to the economy. And i just talked about taxes, there are lot of best teachers, mechanics, Engineers, Doctors, etc. Who belonged to poor sector and now due to there hard work they are making money and some of them giving it back to community by different ways and many are contributing to economy with taxes, donations and by helping in development plans.

I can imagine if a country no longer has poor people, then the country will only depend heavily on imported products and materials. Nobody wants to grow crops, rice, wheat, vegetables and many basic necessities have to be imported from other countries. And when a country is very dependent on other countries in the case above, then other problems will arise.

The poor are those who run the wheels of a country's economic life. The balance in many ways comes from them, they are needed, but the balance in numbers must also be observed. When this balance is reached, the wheels of a country's economy will also be balanced.

It's a bit of a loaded and twisted question, nobody wants to be poor after all. It's not a role they play by choice but all sorts of factors can conspire against people which make it harder for them to earn a higher wage. They might be a "hostage" to family circumstances, they might not have been able to get the higher level of education they sought or they may simply live in an area with limited job opportunity and are unable to improve that situation. I think most people, give the right opportunities, would take steps to improve their earning potential in life - unfortunately it is not always that simple.

I think poor play one important role which is to make sure the socialistic schemes of the governments don't really stop. If it wasn't for the poor i highly doubt that there would be any schemes by government to distribute freebies, these things ensure equity in the economy I feel. Moreover poor in the economy also act as the necessary labour force required for the manual tasks in the economy ranging from construction industry to manufacturing industry.

I think some questions are not asked out of curiosity or maybe because the person wants to learn anything; some threads are just created for no real reason or maybe just to add to their post. I unlikely find it difficult to believe that the OP doesn't know the role of the poor in the economy, but well, let it slide. At least now he is aware.

 

I always argue that poverty can't be completely eradicated in an entire nation; no matter how hard the government of a nation tries, they can only reduce the poverty rate of that country, but they can't eradicate poverty.
[/quote]


Yes, you are right. There are a lot of challenging factors that make people fail in the pursuit of wealth, and most people really tried their best with the little help they could get from the government too, but most times it wasn't enough for them. Also, some people end up misusing the opportunities they also get, either from the government or a private firm. I will give you an example of what I mean. In my country, there was this time (some years ago) when the government gave scholarships to some students of a university in my country for them to go out of the country to go and study on a project that could make them excellent when they return back to our country with the skill and education they have acquired, but truth be told, out of about 500 students, I think it was only a successful endeavor for about 50 students or less. Most of those students misused the opportunity, and today even some of them are just tuktuk drivers and motorcycle drivers in my country. In essence, the government can't really help everyone in society. The reason why I asked the question was because, in some country or society where quite a lot of people are very poor than the rich, the question will always be there: in what way has the government helped them?



Cheers 🥂, Dr.Bitcoin_Strange 👺👺

Unfortunately the people we usually consider as poor are usually the guys behind the scenes doing all the labouring  or the dirty work to get things running..and them being poor is not always that they aren't working or arent skillful, but because of low paying salaries because of cheap labour coming from growing unemployment!!

Either way, poor or not these guys do a great job contributing towards the growth of the economy one way or another, also depending on how the country does its taxation the rich could be the high contributors or its the same for everyone.


Agreed, it all comes down to everyone playing their part and contributing towards the economy,  though not everyone will agree to this because  they feel their governments do not give back to the people and are better off not paying a dime to the govt.

in terms of economic strata, there are indeed the poor and there are the rich, because that is the nature of the creator, but many rich people are not happy, while the poor can be grateful for life so they always feel happy. Both of them have their own problems, so they actually have to help each other. many rich people feel jealous of the lives of poor people, for example they can gather with their families as a whole, where rich people are actually preoccupied with the activities of each family member so gathering with family is a very precious moment

When viewed from an economic perspective, the relationship between the rich and the poor really need each other. Another example is the most basic and this concerns survival, because the rich and the poor will need each other for demand and supply in traditional markets, this could be a matter of basic needs, such as food, fruit and fruit, of course all of these are agricultural products the poor.

On the other hand, the poor also need goods or services which of course are provided by the rich because they have many companies, such as clothing, housing and health services. That way these companies will produce goods and services needed by the poor, this will also create very broad job opportunities for the poor here again both of them need each other. And vice versa, the rich need consumers from all walks of life, including the poor, to buy goods or other products. So it's true, as you said, the dependence of the two cannot be separated because the cycle is like that, they are interconnected.

You have to assess other aspects of the impact of poverty on the economy, look at the economic level of China as the second country on the list of the best economies in the world, the government has reduced poverty above 70% including people in remote rural areas because the government is concerned with people getting a stable economic status for their daily needs, so Do you think there are no jobs with low paying costs? of course there is because there are still small groups of people who still have poverty that has not been handled with government assistance.

But know every country wants to eradicate poverty to improve economic status, but I'm not sure why you say such a terrible idea if there are no poor people, I hope you don't forget the history of the covid pandemic in the past few years, all aspects of the economy are paralyzed and most of your businesses are not running because they don't have money to buy anything they need.

Even education is based towards "poor", sure you can be better than others when you compare yourself with the people you study, but the education for the rich kids are insanely different, its not even remotely similar. We do become "rich" in comparison with education if we are hard working and smart, like doctors and lawyers, or maybe a good engineer (bad one could be poor too) so all in all education can get you out of poverty. But the education system is not built for you to get rich, nor is it built for you to balance the wealth gap. Wit the insane gap we have between the wealthy and the poor, even if one person ends up becoming rich, there are still billions who are either poor, or won't have money to buy what they need. So all in all, poverty is a needed concept, poor people are needed in the system, without poor people none of this would work.

You are going too religious here since you are already into it. Let me argue based on my knowledge.
I don't believe God made anyone Rich and others poor. That's just like saying God made some people human and others less human.
To me, everyone is created equal; we are now the ones who work hard and make a part for ourselves; it's the steps we take that help us most of the time half way to the level we could be seen at.

No doubt there are people who are born into a family where they don't need to stress themselves much for them to be able to secure a stable cash flow Job. But that's as a result of what their family background has labored for and set aside for them not to pass through the hard times that their fathers did in their youthful age.



You are right on this one. In life, we all need each other to survive to some point; either directly or indirectly, we are all helping hands to one another. But some people still argue that there is no such thing and claim to be purely independent.

It's true, that's the fact, and I believe that this is all part of life,
God seems unfair to give a role to the poor but God knows better how to live a more balanced life,
what is clear as humans we need each other so never underestimate anyone.

I mean yeah, no one desires to be poor, but imagine if everyone became rich. No one would want to work for anyone and that would be really a horrible shape in the economy. I also had thought of that back then, but then I found out that it isn't really a good idea to have everyone rich.

This is true just like what I mentioned on why having everyone rich would be a horrible idea. Just imagine building a business and no one would want to work for you because..... well they're already rich. What would they want to work for if they're already  economically sated.

Every person who works without sitting on the bench they must contribute to the economy. Those people doesn't any contribution on economy who sit idle without doing any work.  Our society consists of people from all classes, rich and poor, everyone has a contribution to the economy. If you own a company, you must employ people to run the company so that they also contribute to the economy by working. I think that in order to keep the economy of a country sustainable, the people of the country should not sit at home and work from their own positions, and as a result, when the number of unemployment decreases, then the economy of that country will be strengthened.

The people doing the menial job?  they are the low standard people and are always regard as poor because their earnings are far below standard of living and without them, the economy will not function, without them, the rich will do the hard task by themselves, without their influence, the politicians wouldn't have manifesto to campaign, without them there wouldn't be grant for low level people and in short without them, you will have to do the farming work your self, the driver who do commercial work, the barber who cut your hair, the dry cleaners who wash your dirty clothes.

There are more I can mention about poor people impact on the economy but I will drop my pen here.

The problem in the way the op formulates the main question is that the answer would lead to justifying the existence of poverty. That's why I want to start by saying that I believe it's important to work on ending poverty. It doesn't mean that everyone should have the same income, but it means that nobody should be below the reasonable minimum, required to cover basic life expenses. People who are poor often aren't unemployed and actually work a lot. The jobs they do can be very important, as manual labour gets a lot of things we take for granted done, such as food being organized and put on shelves of the supermarkets, streets being cleaned, etc. I believe that people who work full-time must receive salaries that always keep them above poverty. But that often just isn't the case, so people work, do their best, and yet remain poor.

As another example, we can prove that not all the work of the poor can be done by the rich, and vice versa. Even if there are no poor people there are no so-called rich people. Apart from that all social status is only a status and will complement each other so that there is an economic cycle where the rich need the services of the poor to complete their projects. Without the position of the workforce, whatever the rich build will never be completed.