World Hunger and Poverty

SocietyGuardian.co.uk recently reported that many families with disabled children live in poverty. I include an excerpt:

Almost all families with disabled children are suffering from financial difficulties, according to a report published today.

Many struggle with the extra costs of raising disabled children, which is calculated to be three times higher than other children, and they face barriers to working, said the Every Disabled Child Matters (EDCM) campaign, an alliance of Mencap, Contact a Family, Council for Disabled Children and the Special Educational Consortium.

More than nine in 10 (93%) families reported some form of financial difficulty, with only 6% saying they were comfortably off.

The report said more than one in five families with disabled children cannot afford to feed their family properly. Such families are 50% more likely to be in debt than others and 50% less likely to be able to afford new clothes or school outings when compared with other families.

Steve Broach, the EDCM campaign’s manager, said: “It is scandalous that families with disabled children are forced to choose between going into debt or going without.

Though the above report comes from the UK, the same problems exist in the United States.

Leaving disabled children and their families in debt will cause the disabled child to receive inadequate education and life skills. If society instead invests in these disabled children, they can develop into very productive members of society.

The average family struggles to survive. In fact, the average American family lives in debt. If they cannot afford average life, they definitely cannot afford the extra expenses of a disabled child. Ending the social corruption that causes working class families to live in poverty will give them more resources to take care of disabled children–as well as other similar obstacles.

More to the specific issue, we can directly help the disabled children themselves by providing them with student loans. These student loans need to include money for food, clothes, shelter, and healthcare, and healthcare needs to include costs associated with their disability (e.g. wheelchairs, seeing eye dogs, etc.).

Like all children, disabled children have great potential and complete access to full student loans can create an environment that lets these children reach their potential on their own and without charity. They can then take care of themselves and pay their own expenses, including paying off their student loans.

A recent Black Star Editorial explores the relationship between crime and poverty. I include an excerpt:

There is a perfect correlation between crime and poverty. Much has been written about the recent brutal murders of three college students and the wounding of one other in Newark, New Jersey, by a gunman or gunmen.

While some suspects have now been arrested initially it was believed by many –and this in itself is a revelation of bias – that the suspects were young African American males; following a pattern we have seen in many distressed urban areas primarily populated by African Americans.

All the articles we have so far seen focus on the need for “better parenting” and the need to “take back the streets,” and the need to “get in touch with our spirituality.” All these are well and good; but they amount to mere flagellation without tackling the root of most vices—poverty. This isn’t to say that those who commit violent crimes should not be punished; yet, at the same time, we must face the reality of the conditions that produce such depraved murderers.

A parent can only “parent” to the extent that he or she can provide, at a minimum, the basic needs –health, food, drink, or nourishment, education, clothing, housing- of the child. The minute a child becomes aware that the parent is not in a position to provide these needs, there is no “parenting.” Similarly, it is difficult to “connect with spirituality” when one is surrounded with poverty and despair. Cynicism and anti-social behavior, including violence, become the norm.

The editorial goes on to point out how the Bush administration spends billions a day rebuilding Iraq, instead of working on U.S. cities.

I agree that the Bush administration’s policies help contribute to poverty. However, I see it as futile to try and change the federal government. Instead of wasting our resources futilely appealing to the government, I suggest we use those resources to solve problems ourselves.

Unfortunately, we have little power to stop the Bush administration from wasting trillions of dollars in Iraq. I suggest we boycott taxes, and put our money towards our needs.

Theary Seng runs the Center for Social Development in Cambodia, a non-governmental organization that monitors 7 courts, advocates good governance and accountability, and conducts grassroots dialogue with villagers all over Cambodia on Justice & Reconciliation. At one point during a recent speech to a crowd of 80,000, he made the following statements:

I stand united with you today to resoundingly proclaim: Poverty is not fate. Poverty is not destiny. Poverty is man-made; it results from the greed and arrogance of power, poor governance and ill-conceived policies. Today, we join voices against the scourge of poverty and to urge the G-8 leaders to be more mindful of Cambodians and the less fortunate of this world.

He went on to point out some of the causes of poverty, including lack of education, war, corruption, environmental destruction, and landlessness.

I agree with Theary Seng’s statements. I believe providing quality education to everyone can help fight poverty more than anything.

Additionally, I think that we need to recognize that the world has more than enough natural resources to provide food, clothes, shelter, education, and healthcare for everyone. For example, the world has more than enough food to feed everyone. In another example, the number of abandoned houses outnumbers the number of homeless people. Poverty results from the unfair distribution of natural resources. On one hand the poor do not even have an inch of land; on the other hand oil barons control the world by usurping control of natural resources and then selling them.

Barb Kucera recently wrote an article, in which she points out that the higher minimum wage won’t eliminate working poor. I include an excerpt:

On July 24, the federal minimum wage rose from $5.15 to $5.85 an hour, with subsequent increases to $6.55 in 2008 and $7.25 in 2009. Minimum wage workers in Minnesota and 28 other states won’t see an immediate increase because their pay is already $1 more than the federal minimum, but they will enjoy increases in future years.

Even so, the minimum wage remains far below what it should be – and doesn’t do anything to address rising health insurance and other costs, advocates said Tuesday at a news conference at the state Capitol.

For the last 10 years, American workers earning the minimum wage made $10,712 annually – “nearly $6,000 below the poverty level for a family of three,” said John Noonan of Americans United for Change, the group that organized the celebratory news conference. Similar events were held in 35 states and Washington, D.C.

The minimum wage does little to combat poverty. People who earn the minimum wage still live in poverty, for one. More importantly, minimum wages and other government intrusions on the free-market end up causing more damage then they fix. A hefty minimum wage would hinder small businesses and raise unemployment, for example.

A minimum wage ignores the underlying problem. We need to change our society so that we do not need a minimum wage (or any form of government assistance). We need to eliminate the causes of insufficiently salaried employment.

First, we need to make sure every child receives quality education, and that no child gets denied any education simply because they come from poor families or live in poor neighborhoods. Beyond that, we need to make sure every student has access to stuffiness food, clothes, shelter, and healthcare throughout their education, because we cannot reasonably expect a student to learn properly if the student suffers from hunger, homelessness, or illnesses. Additionally, the education must include job training and job placement.

If we make sure every person has access to student loans that cover all the costs of the requirements mentioned above, then ever person can get a job (or start a business) that pays enough to cover the future living expenses as well as pay off their student loans. In this way, we can end poverty for free.

In addition to educating and sufficiently employing everyone, we need to eliminate socioeconomic corruption. Namely, we have to stop megacorporations from using government to steal the wealth and labor of the masses, and otherwise exercise their selfish wills with the coercive power of government. For example, we have to stop companies like Halliburton from stealing tax-payer dollars through government-contracts by manipulating government policy.

I would estimate that the average person only can work half their life. Most people cannot enter the work force before 20, and then they have to retire around 60 years of age. To get better training and more qualifications, many people stay in school well past 20. Additionally, many people have to retire early due to poor health or job-related injuries.

Unfortunately, most poverty rates only consider people poor if they make less in a year than a years worth of necessary expenses. In other words, if a person’s yearly salary can purchase a years worth of food, clothes, and shelter, then the poverty line does not consider such a person poor. However, in reality, since a person only can work about half their life, a person needs to make twice that amount.

Of course, that makes sense.

A person needs to make enough to pay off student loans and all debt collected as a child. Additionally, the person needs to save for their retirement.

Of course, a person may have reduced childhood debt if their parents paid for their childhood expenses. Nonetheless, the poverty line works out the same, because that means instead of paying that money as debt payments the person has to pay for their own children.

The government already sets ridiculously low poverty lines. For example, it expects a family of four to be able to live on only $5,000 each per year. It not only needs to more accurately reflect the cost of living per year, but it needs to recognize that a person usually only can work for half their life.

We need to double the poverty line.

Amy Reinink recently reported about, no kidding, using soccer to solve homelessness. I include an excerpt:

The teams are built upon the premise that physical activity can help alcoholics and other substance-abusers stay sober, and that the structure of team practices and the accomplishment of working toward a goal can give a life new shape – a concept Lyons said deserves a shot in Gainesville.

[...]

Success stories from homeless soccer programs abound. After the 2005 Homeless World Cup, 77 percent of the players reported making life improvements through employment, housing, education and drug or alcohol treatment programs, according to the organizers. Twelve players went on to become semi-professional or professional soccer players or coaches.

What a great idea! We need this type of originality to fight homelessness and poverty in general. Like I have often said before, the old ways have not worked. With number of homeless families on the rise, we need to come up with new ways to fight homelessness and poverty.

I bet they could maximize the potential of the soccer program by partnering it with helpful services. For example, they could bring in recruiters for addiction groups and job placement organizations.

Any sane person would prefer to live in a world without poverty than a world with poverty. We prefer to live by each other’s happiness, not each other’s pain. Of course, this makes it odd that poverty continues. What can you do to fight poverty? Most importantly, talk about it!

We cannot solve a problem without talking about it. We need to get on the same page, so we can work together to put an end to these problems affecting our world. We can share ideas, and have enlightening discussions about these serious issues. You can discuss hunger, poverty, and other serious social issues at the Hunger & Poverty Forums. It’s completely free! I don’t want your money; I want your mind.

You can find the forums at the following URL:

http://millionsofmouths.com/forums/

We not only talk about hunger and poverty, we also address other related topics, such as education, healthcare, HIV/AIDS, homelessness, humanitarianism, and politics.

I’m really not trying to sell you anything. I just want this as a personal favor. Join the Hunger and Poverty Forums and share your thoughts with the other members and with me. We’re all in this together!

I look forward to discussing these important topics with you.

Thanks,
Scott

Douglas J. Besharov recently wrote about measuring poverty in America. I include an excerpt:

Each year, the Census Bureau reports on the nation’s poverty rate, based on the number of people with incomes below the official poverty line, adjusted annually for inflation. In 2005, the poverty line, which varies by family size, was $15,577 for a family of three, and $19,971 for a family of four. By this measure, in 2005, about 12.6 percent of the population, or about 37 million people, were reported as poor, including 17.6 percent of children and 10.1 percent of the elderly. That’s essentially the same as the 1968 rate of 12.8 percent–which is a big reason why people think so little progress has been made against poverty.

While a 12.6% poverty rate seems bad enough, it drastically underrates the problem. Honestly, what kind of family of four could live off less than $5,000 each? You could barely afford shelter for that much, let alone food, clothes, healthcare, education, transportation, and everything else required to survive self-sufficiently in America.

The poverty line has so many problems. For one, it only considers people’s immediate needs. If a person makes enough this year to pay for a years worth of expenses, then the government does not count them as poor. However, a person can only work for about half their life. The person also has to pay for any debt accrued while growing up and going to school. Additionally, a person has to pay for their retirement. Among so many other unincluded factors, we have to include student loans and retirement costs in the cost of living when determining the poverty line.

Additionally, the poverty rate doesn’t appear to include needs such as healthcare. For example, the government says that only 35.9 million people in the United States live in poverty, even though 41 million people do not have health coverage.

If a child does not get quality healthcare and quality education, then let’s consider that child poor and recognize that that child does not have the same odds of success as a privileged child–which is not only unfair in and of itself, but also leads to more non-meritocratic inequality.

Despite any differences they may have had personally, Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Aniston and both join in their support of OmniPeace; an organization devoted to ending extreme poverty by 2025.

In June, David Arquette and Courtney Cox hosted the launch of the OmniPeace shirt. OmniPeace recieves 50% of the profits from the shirt’s sales. Other celebrities have supported this, including Common, Sienna Miller, Kevin Constner, Shawn Wayans, and Naomi Campbell.

I like to see celebrities use their fame to raise awareness about serious social problems such as poverty.