There is a belief by many in this country that poverty cannot be eliminated -- that it is just somehow a natural state and there will always be poor people regardless of our efforts. I have never believed that, and I do not believe it now. Poverty exists because of human greed, and the fact that we have chosen an economic system that rewards greed (and results in an unequal distribution of this country's resources).But even though we have chosen such a system, this is a wealthy country -- the richest country in the world. And we have enough wealth to eliminate poverty if we really wanted to do that. The problem is not that we cannot afford to eliminate poverty, but that we just don't care about the poor/underprivileged and therefore do not have the political will to eliminate it. And the really crazy part is that the lack of political will is the strongest among those who most loudly proclaim to be "christian".
The chart above is from Mother Jones magazine. It shows the U.S. poverty rate compared to that of some Scandinavian countries (who have chosen to do more to attack the problem of poverty in their countries). Here is some of what Kevin Drum had to say in the post accompanying the chart:
Several Nordic countries have made great strides in ending poverty, but it's not because they have some kind of magic bullet. It's because they give poor people more money and more services.
The chart shows raw poverty levels in blue. The Nordic countries are basically about the same as the United States. There's no Scandinavian miracle that provides high-paying jobs for everyone. However, once you account for government benefits, the poverty rate in the Nordic countries is about half the rate in America. Universal health care accounts for some of this, and other benefits account for the rest. Some are means-tested, others are universal. There's no single answer. The only thing these countries have in common is a simple commitment to taking poverty seriously and doing something about it. . .
This situation is only going to get worse as automation improves. Still, we're plenty rich enough to address it if we want to. There's nothing stopping us except our own will to do it.
posted on 26 April at 08:29
For what it's worth I have outlined the way poverty can be eliminated. This will not happen through charity or taxation and requires political action to change our economic institutions. For my purposes the definition of poverty is fairly straight forward; it is not defined by numbers (although numbers do have their place). I define poverty as the denial of the legitimate opportunity to contribute whatever you have to contribute to the economic system and, therefore, the denial of an equitable share of that system's goods and services. Just because an individual's income is below a certain level does not make them poor if they have a legitimate opportunity to make their contribution to the economic system and share in that system's goods and services but choose not to exercise that opportunity. An individual is poor only when they are denied the opportunity to participate equitably in their economic system. This denial is never the fault of the individual; it is and always has been the fault of the economic system itself. We all choose the economic system that we support and, therefore, we all create that system and the poverty it generates (or not). And I have defined a set of rules of economic engagement that would eliminate poverty but do not expect these rules ever to be implemented. They can be found in: http://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/povertyandthefoundationofeconomics