At the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates said that we need to revise capitalism so that it also serves poor people, which he calls creative capitalism.
I usually avoid suggesting “capitalism” as a way to alleviate poverty, because so many people have such different interpretations of what the word means, and because “capitalism” usually seems to include a monopolization of natural resources which contributes to poverty and limits freedom. Nonetheless, I generally agree with Bill Gates’ sentiment.
At one point, Bill Gates said, “If we’re going to find a sustainable way to help those who can’t pay, we have to use self-interest and caring – capitalism and philanthropy – to direct attention to people who have been left behind.”
I agree.
Practically speaking, we cannot realistically expect people to do anything that harms themselves, even if for the so-called greater good. We have to find ways to alleviate poverty through mutually beneficial arrangements. We need not only try to help certain people or just the poorest among us. Instead, we need to find ways to build a better world for as many people as possible. People will agree to mutually beneficial arrangements, but they will oppose proposals that would cause them harm.
For example, consider micro-credit. It has helped millions of women escape poverty with loans of only $50 or so, and the bankers and lenders have profited from it. It works because it benefits everyone involved.
Simply put, we need to find win-win solutions for the problem of poverty. Bill gates can call it creative capitalism; you can call it whatever you want, but we need to do it no matter what we call it.
What do you think of what Bill Gates calls creative capitalism? Post your answers to that question and your comments on this post in this thread at the World Hunger and Poverty Forums. The forums are completely free to use, and all viewpoints are welcome.