Bitcoin Forum

In what ways have the people living in poverty impacted in the economy?
Share your ideas on the importance of the poor masses in economy sustainability.

If people in a country are poor, it means the country is not in good hands of the government, it means the country's economy is poor. It means there is huge unemployment in the country. It means that what the country is producing and their man power is low.

Poverty is not good and it has no importance to the economy. It can only make the rich people in such country to be more influential and be more respected by the poor people. But speaking of an economy, poverty is the opposite of a good economy.

So what category of impact are you talking about and what class of individuals do you classify as poor?


You may need to give more insight as to what you mean by that term usage and if I can get any understanding from your question, poor means those living below average, and if that is what you meant, I will say that class of people does not contribute to the economy directly since there don't belong to the workforce and only a few percentages of this people work with the government and the rest may engage in minimal job or business just to sustain themselves.


So you see the poor have nothing to contribute to the GDP of the economy since they don't belong to the national workforce.

In as much as the poor people, at some point, can't afford the ends they need That does not change the fact that everyone has a role to play in the growth of an economy, but the rich and the poor have their parts to play.
No matter how poor one seems to be, there are still some things that the person can afford, so the buying of goods contributes to some extent to the country's economy.

But another major thing that I believe the poor usually offer to society is cheap labor. That's to say, since they don't have money, they will likely do work that requires a higher pay and take a low pay as payment since they are, at some point, just after any payment that can just foot their bills for that day.

So providing cheap labor is one of their other contributions to a country's economy since payment, which could have been used to pay 1 laborer, could now possibly be shared among 3 for different jobs. Companies reduced expenses.

True, when people don't have high-paying skills, they can still do simple jobs (but with low salaries). Without people who take that kind of job, the economy would slow down or maybe the society would even crumble. If no one cleans streets, toilets, etc., it would be a disaster. Also, most people are poor at some point in their life, and they can escape poverty by continuously learning and working hard. In other words, it serves as competition and competition is good for the economy.

Poor people are great at making the rich even richer. That’s the purpose of their existence. They work in low paying jobs and they buy the shit they don’t need because they know they will never get rich saving money so they spend every penny they get. In most cases they don’t even have enough money left to spend after paying the rent and bills…

Poverty is not a good thing, sometimes in this aspect, your can not blame the governments in times of poor people in his country, the population of the citizen is also the keep factor to consider, governments can't provide all their citizens with white-collar job because when the population of a country is bigger than the resources and 50% of the population are eager to work for the government. Let us stop deceiving ourselves almost 95% of countries cannot provide for their citizens even 50% of their needs . For the development or improving the economy of the country even the ordinary individual need to participate in the development of the country not all the government. Poor people have zero percent in the improvement of the economy of a nation.

Poor people don't have any contributions to the GDP of the economy this is quite okay, but saying it because they don't belong to the national workforce, I disagree with this statement because individuals don't need to belong to the national workforce before you can contribute to the growth of the economy, for instance in my country only a few percent like 30% are working for the government, now how can this percentage improve the economy, this will be done in the addition to the foreign investors

When a person is poor, he has few opportunities to succeed, so he has nothing to lose. The more poor there are, the worse the state control machine works. And what is happening now is that artificial intelligence is taking away jobs (no matter what anyone says), reducing opportunities to get out of poverty as jobs become fewer and fewer. And cleaning toilets, etc. - many toilets are already automated.

I think that the poor play a big role in some economies, because if you are poor, it is very likely that you are also uneducated, and in that case you are subject to very easy "management" by those higher up in the hierarchy. If you take the example of China, which has a very cheap labor force (comparing it to the US or the EU), then it is very clear that without the cheap labor force, that country would not be competitive in the world compared to what it represents today.

Let's further take the example of many African countries that are very rich in resources and at the same time most of the people are poor or living on the edge of poverty - while at the same time their politicians do their best to keep the people where they are because that way they can easily manage the country and use resources for their luxurious life.

Unfortunately, poverty is something that many people turn their heads away from, for the reason that they simply do not care, or it is in their interest that the poor remain exactly as they are.

All people are useful in a community, we also saw what happened in France, Paris if I remember correctly, when cleaning workers went on strike. The whole city fell apart and was full of rubbish. Everyone plays an essential role in a community, not all people are to be doctors, lawyers and generally have an academic career. We also need handymen, such as plumbers, electricians, cleaning workers and so on for the community to function properly.
I disagree, people barely making a living contribute to the country's economy, as I mentioned earlier, they are a vital gear in the community, without them, cities wouldn't be able to function properly. On top of that they contribute a great deal in the economy, because a large number of them are unable to save money and spend every bit they earn, while wealthier people tend to save and invest instead of spending them.

The poor are people that lack skills and education. Lack of skill leads to low wage which breeds poverty. The poor are the main laborers of the country. They work for the rich and receive wages from the rich. They end up giving back the money they earned to the rich through taxes and bills. Without the poor, there will be no cheap labor to work in industries and other sectors. The poor contribute immensely to the economy of the country through taxes and bills. Some bad governments treat the poor as slaves. When they want more money they increase taxes and the cost of essential services. A clear illustration is what happens in the ant kingdom where the poor are the worker, the soldiers are the middle class and the queen are the rich. The workers and soldiers live to serve the Queen.

No one wants to be poor, at least we all want to be off the hook. I don't think this topic is too negative when it comes to what the poor can do, because we are all equal by nature and I don't make too much of a distinction between rich and poor. It is possible to talk about the responsibility of each of us in each position we are working, specifically as ordinary workers, they will also accept satisfaction and gratitude for the work they have, as well as the responsibility of the leaders must find a way to make things fair and in the interests of development.

There is always a symbiosis at some point, and there are always benefits for the poor. If in the economy the poor can also be utilized as a market.
In this category, poor people also earn a little or a lot of income and they also certainly have needs for their lives, so you can sell your products to them as the lower class at the economic level.
In my opinion, one of the benefits of the poor in the economic field can still be used as a market for your low-quality products, can be used as labor for hard work (road construction, building construction and others, we can still take).

To maintain the economic system of a country, people of all classes are needed. If there were no poor people in the society then the social system would not run like this. We generally mean poor people who are landless and daily wage earners. Now what you need to know is how they play a role in economic development. Suppose you need 10 10 workers in case there are no workers in your country then how will you fill the shortage of those 10 workers. Due to lack of workers, your work will surely stop due to which you may face financial problems. Again suppose you need some van drivers to take some of your goods from one place to another. If those van drivers were not there, how would you move your goods. That is, every professional person plays a role behind the economic development of the country from their respective positions. A country will be prosperous only when there are people of all professions in that country.

Take it like this, what happens if most of the people in a country are rich? No one wants to be a workforce, everyone wants to stay at top and that will result into lack of workforce and that's the demand will increase for having a lot of jobs that no taker has. We're just discussing this for the sake of discussion and we don't intend to look down on them because I admit that I am not rich.

So going to the discussion, they're the workforce that gives labor to different industries. Without labor, how can an economy move? Most of these wealthy people wouldn't move as well but they can take that and it won't matter to them because they're wealthy, they can buy all their needs even if the economy of their country is shattering. Coming from taxes to consumerism, labor/workforce, etc.

I want to ask again, do you really understand what poverty is?
I know there are many things about this issue such as material, spiritual, health, knowledge, ....
If it includes and economic story, then I really don't know enough to explain that relationship, but I think you are referring to the material value more.
Let's assume the more specific case of people who do not work and are struggling with life, of course we do not see them adding any value to life, but that does not mean that they are not loved and respected. Instead, we need to try to create more opportunities than criticize each other on the issue of quality of life. It doesn't matter if everyone loves and shares to have a balanced life.

If everyone is rich, there will be a big imbalance, nobody would want to be the employed, but the employer. You will find no one available for meagre jobs and those that provide meagre services will be unavailable creating a deficit in society. People who are financially poor play the role of keeping the economy balanced because there will be an imbalance if everyone is rich. So there will always be people who are considered poor even if the criteria to classify someone as poor changes.

This is crazy and I don't expect you to ask this kind of question. Is the people that are people meant to be more in the country or does being poor has a significant use in an economy? The level of poverty is not suppose to be significant that is why a country that has high rate of employees would also have a favorable economy to his citizens which will increase the number of foreign expertiates that will becoming to the country to create more businesses and bring more money to the economy. Many of the Muslim countries have a favorable economy that is why investors and business owners always go there to do business.

We always need poor people to work in the jobs that we do not like to work on, and that causes a bit of a trouble for everyone but also helps them as well. If everyone was rich, who would do the jobs that pay less and doesn't get much respect when it should. Remember pandemic? All those minimum wage workers helped us stay alive, and yet when we are talking about them overall we are seeing them not do that great unfortunately financially. This is why I believe that poverty is out of question, but we should definitely have some people who would work in those jobs, if we don't have anyone doing them, then its going to be a big trouble overall, the infrastructure wouldn't work at all and everything would collapse, its all held by them at the foundation.

The work force is can be contributed by the poor to the economy.Because to survive,they can work hard to earn.So the capitalist people can use them to increase the economy activities.When the production was increased by the poor people,the capitalist will pay them more taxes to the government.By the government increase taxes,they can use the money for the new scheme to help the poor people.So finally poor get benefit by their work.

What roles does the poor play in the Economy? Answer – They run errand for the rich 😆.

On a serious note, the ecosystem isn't complete without the poor just the same way it isn't without the rich. Every society MUST have these two to be whole. The poor have always existed from time immemorial. They may be poor but there's something I've noticed with that class of people and that's their ability to spend more on food items than the rich. They say the poor pay more for stuff and that's true. Just look at this quick instance, a rich man buys whatever he needs in bulk and at discount but a poor man buys in bits and that expectedly tends to make it costlier than picking it up at once. Food stuff are typical examples of this.

Individuals who belong to the category of the "poor" are most of the time employees and workers for capitalists. Also, there are cades whetein they are the beneficiaries of the government. If it is being a worker for bigger indiviuals, then for sure they are contributing to economic growth in terms of man power and production of goods. There are also tendencies wherein the poor are making their way in the pyramid which is the better side of this instance, further contribute with economic growth. They won't be in such position if they have the capability to start on their own, therefore poor ones are making use of their circumstances in order to be a better individual.

No matter what data of the economy you calculate, you cannot find the real value of that data without including the poor. Even a poor person shopping at a market in a village or a slum has a role in the economy. There are thousands of markets in a country like the market in that village or slum. There are millions of people shopping in these thousands of markets. If we put these people in the poor category, it means that millions of poor people shop every day. So even with this simple example I can say that poor people have a big share in the economy.

The main problem is that, although they have a large share in the economy, they never have a say in the economy.

Poor people are the backbone of every infrastructure built in a country, maybe it was designed by someone but who actually works there are poor people. So more poor people means it will be easier for richer to make money cause they can hire workers for cheap as always no matter the inflation is hitting the sky.

Over the years policy makers made things which is fair for everyone but still people from overseas are misused in many countries especially in the infrastructure development by importing lots of people and make them to work for less money than what government decided as minimum wage. On the contrary we can never get financial equality like everyone is same financially stable so what matters most is to bring the difference in inequality to lesser.

Poor people are always of stupid quality because of which the rich get richer by exploiting them. so a poor man contributes to a rich man. and rich people help to develop the economic side of the country. So I would like to consider these and say that poor people also play a good role in the economic side. But it may be less than rich people. But the economic contribution of poor people cannot be denied.

What are you even saying, @OP? The question I would ask you is: What is the government of their country doing to help eradicate the poverty of those people? because I know very well that some people try all their best just to fight poverty, but they end up giving up once things are not working out the way they planned. Some people would also give up because there is no one to support their efforts financially or otherwise. But what you should know is that everyone has a role to play in society and the economy. Everybody is important in their society, whether they are poor or rich.


One role of the poor in the economy is that most commercial farmers use the help of those poor individuals by employing them to do some jobs on the farm, and if they are not available to do those duties, some things could still go wrong on the farm. Please know that everyone has a role to play.



Cheers 🥂, Dr.Bitcoin_Strange 👺👺

Well firstly no one hopes or pray to be poor it's just a condition they find themselves at, and I must say they have an important role to play in the economy of many nation.

Truth be told it's poor people actually play an important role in the community, most manual labours of any countries are done by the poor, the hardest of the manual labours in industries are done by the poor. The dirtiest but very important jobs of the world are done by the poor, it's sad that even though this set of people are payed less they play and important role in the labour market of any country.

First of all, if a poor class exists in society it's a signal the economy isn't working properly. The correct would be that every citizens had minimal dignity conditions to be part of the middle class, at least, since everyone can't be equally rich or millionaires.

Anyway, the poor plays a role in our economy like every other classes around. They usually compose the cheap labor force and get jobs on the most basic areas, such as delivery, attendant, maid, gardener, waiter, servant, auxiliary and so on for minimal wages.

They have a huge practical impact on the society and move large sums of money on the local economy, since it's the major class in most countries. The poor are also the main target of businessmen and media when launching their catchy marketing campaigns focused on mass consumption.

I hate to say it, but the poor masses are generally the fillers of the grunt work in the economy to make sure that it runs. They fill in the position of dangerous jobs in the economy and are usually the 'expendables' in the grand scheme of things.

Also, a lot of poor people in an area signifies something isn't really working in the economy, because if everything is working as intended, no one will be poor, or at least their numbers aren't as alarming as they are. The menial jobs will pay much higher, and companies will actually care more about those workers in those jobs as they have the capacity to do so, unlike those in the areas wherein poverty is rampant and people are willing to work for a job that is hard and pays less just to get that paycheck for their family.

Op let me ask you this question before I answer mine. Now, what role do play for the development of the country economy in your locality? Probably you do the following, you buy things and possibly you are a business man buying and selling goods and services in your area.

If you have dog, hen or cat as a pet, you will give them foods even the ones that you eat remain will be giving to the pets to heat. That means you won't waste any food n your house. Because they will be helping you to eat the remnants.

Without the poor people in the society the rich can't live. All the rich people are doing one business to the other and the consumers of those goods are the poor so the poor has the most important role in the development of the Nation or the world economy. Without the poor the economy can't even grow. The poor makes everything good for the rice. The poor help themselves by buying and selling goods and services among themselves.

The poor uses the least amount of resources while also being the ones that can self-sustain themselves the best as many of them can plant and grow their own food, while at the same time they are the economic motor of the country as in most countries they are the most numerous sector of the population, and the ones needed the most to be employed at the many different jobs available through the country, still the treatment they receive by society at large is lacking as they are treated as if their poverty is caused by their laziness, when in fact it is caused by our economic system.

Admittedly or not what you say is quite true and in the end the facts are like that,
just imagine if there were no poor people, of course no one would want to work in a dirty place or whatever with hard work and not big wages,
It is clear that everyone has their own role in life.

Mutualism symbiosis, both need each other and are equally beneficial.
The question is the same with the role of consumers and traders and other some things like that.

However, when things are out of balance, it is clear that there will be impacts that may not be good. In the economic development plan, the government needs to resolve the problem of poverty that occurs in the country or at least pay attention to poverty first so that the percentage is lower. The lower the poverty rate, the better the economic development of a country. So in general, poverty affects economic growth, so it will hinder progress if not handled properly.

Consider how a country would be if everyone was wealthy. I believe they will end up hiring robots to do the tedious labor for them, which will be costly.

The poor masses are incredibly beneficial and crucial to a country's economic growth and development.
They handle the workforce behind the important infrastructural development of a country because rich people cannot undertake hard labor in any production industry; additionally, the usage of robots would be more expensive than manpower.

Poor is the service provider in my view poor plays an important role even more important role than the Rich class or you can say simply the elite class. What I meant here can be explained simply by the example, consider the poor as Plats who provide us with food similarly poor are the producers, constructors or you can say developers of the services we consume daily.

It's a balanced system by nature because the poor are eating because of the rich ones and the rich ones are rich just because of the poor, what if poor people stop providing their services there will be no rich no poor everyone will make their own efforts to survive.

Yes, if there are a lot of poor people in a country it means the country's economy is not doing well but it does always mean the country is not in the good hand of the government because the country's mineral resources will determine that.

Yes, but poor people play more significant roles when it comes to the economy than just respecting the rich because they will also pay taxes and also hold the key area in the country's labor.

Somewhere in Asia, there are underpaid cheap labour workers working day and night around the clock assembling the latest iphone so you can have a comfortable life.
Somewhere in Africa there are underpaid, underaged cheap labour workers working day and night around the clock in mines looking for diamonds and other precious stones so that they can improve the economy of other countries.

These are poor people who if they had better options, they wouldn't allow themselves to be exploited by these companies for pennies. They have an important role they play in the economy. In Asia and Africa, the assembly and mining done by the poor improves their economy by making them one of the most industrialized nations in the world. It brings money into the economy. Want to know how they impact the economy? Read this article - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/technology/apple-iphone-china-foxconn.html

Rich people can't live without poor people as they will hire them to work and serve them. It was the fact that the poor people can't be eliminated in the community, they still exist because even though they wanted to improve their living but their thought about being contented to work with rich people who were also good to them, they stop dreaming big. Their labor participation helps the economy become sustainable as their role is to give service who are in need and we give thanks to them. That is why we must also be kind to them, not by taking advantage of their status.

Agree. Without poor people, there will be no cheap labor in a country. Although it seems like very unfortunate for them, they deserve cheap payments due to limited skills and knowledge. If all people in a country are educated people with rich status, there will be no cheap labor. And we may see a slow growth of companies because they require a lot funds to pay their operational fees.

I don't think it is the purpose of poor people existence. Rich people get the advantage of poor people because the poor people have no choice. Actually, the rich people can increase the minimum payment of the poor. But they don't do it because they don' want to spend too much money. While the poor must want sufficient payment, they accept cheap payments because they can't do anything.

Being an end consumer with affordable product prices.

For individuals facing poverty, it's challenging to compete as producers due to a lack of initial capital to start a business. They also have to contend with well-established companies in the industry. There are limited opportunities unless they engage in small-scale home-based production.

As distributors, individuals in poverty often lack knowledge in this area. The world of sales is ruthless, filled with resilient individuals who fight daily for sales and revenue.

If I can’t say much on this then I’ll tell you only one thing,
The rich thrives on the poor. Without the poor, the rich can’t survive or stay in their status.

That’s how vital the poor are for a stable society. They actually create the wealth many enjoy by buying in bits and pulling up their resources both human and natural to make systems work.

It’s a good thing everyone can’t be rich but, we do hope for less suffering in our world at least. Means to a near comfortable dwelling for many.

there are so many jobs for them that rich or middle-income families don't want to get a dip on. so yeah, everyone needs the service of the low-income earners. and sometimes, it is the source of some abuse from their respective employers. as they don't have the education, some are taking advantage of their lack of understanding of their rights.
small shops requiring person/s to attend to, housekeepers, construction workers and other blue-collar jobs, they need these people. if all are rich, who would take those jobs? this is why they are also important to our community.

The poor bears the brunt of the whole hierarchy. It might comes as a surprise to everyone, but the poor pays all. Let me explain how.

We all know that stuff is twice as expensive if you're poor, since you'll be forced to buy products and services that aren't that great, and when they fall short and break you'd have to buy them again and again. They also are one of the biggest consumers in the market, surprisingly. Since compared to middle-class and rich people who could purchase services and products with money they could take a loan out of in the bank (which is still money generated anyway but I digress), the poor will always be forced to buy stuff with cash and facilitate monetary circulation. They also are the easiest to please out of the three since you just need to give them the basic necessities for survival and they're all set.

Ever wondered why the government's not doing anything of substance to eradicate poverty? Well there's your answer. They need the poor to be there otherwise there won't be anyone to subject to these kinds of ethically inhumane practices.

I have a thought, if according to what you say, our world needs poor people, they play an important role in developing a country. Because without them, there would be no one willing to do the jobs you mentioned, and society would go into chaos. Is the government and the rich making this world more divided, and is the gap between rich and poor becoming more prominent? That way, there will always be poor people to work with, and that's how the world works today.

What role do you expect the poor to play? When they can't even help to pull themselves out from their poor state of living.  I expected you ask what is the role of the government to poor people in bad economy. Poor  people have no role to play to make the economy better, instead the government gave so much role to play to make the economy better which will reduce the rate of poverty in the society.  Poor people needs empowerment and it is never their fault to be poor but it could be the fault of the government most times.

I don't see anything wrong with the OP's question. Like you have already said, everyone has their own role in society, like the poor in the economic development of a nation. So the OP just wants to know the exact position of poor countries poor citizens in a nation.
 

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. China tried to eradicate poverty, which they have not completely achieved. Last time I checked the track, it was still in the range of 2-1.7%. Even when the government tries its best, there are still citizens who are not willing to do the little they could have done to lift themselves out of that level. The government has a primary role to play in poverty reduction, as do the citizens; it's a right-hand-help-left-hand kind of thing.

as much as unfortunate it is, the poor people are quite literally the workforce that keeps the economy running.
their roles are really important, since without them whos gonna be doing all that heavy works?
even then they are poor for reason, one of them because their works never really being "considered" and thus their low salary.
here's the thing,without them, economy will fall, no one does the job that these so called educated people would not want to do.
they are the reason the economy keeps running.

What role does the rich one or the citizens of a country holds will be there with the poor people. Every country have got particular amount as debt and we used to make calculations how much each one needs to pay, so that the debt can be ended. Here the poor people will also have the same amount as the rich ones. When there is increase in the poor people, it means the government is not good in its role and the wealth distribution isn't happening around. In most of the countries it is the problem, the poor people will be hidden from the outer world and the growth of specific percentage of rich people on the top order were considered as the growth of the country. This is completely wrong. A country's growth should come out of the combined progress, few individuals growing their wealth in terms of 2000% and 3000% and poor people increasing in numbers on the same way on the other side is the worst of any economy.

Those who are poor has one way or the other to help the economy, know one thing that people who are poor are not dum or aren't educated, some people might be teaching in schools be it Creche, Nursery and primarily or even secondary we still have some poor teachers over there they are helping to impact on the society. When classifying poor there are categories of poverty, poor helps in cleaning some drainages and repairing some bad road in order to get paid. This is common in part of my country, so they are being classified as poor beggers yet are really helping the country.

I don't think it's by design tho, but just naturally happens. People have different skills and some skills get paid more while some get paid less. Even if let's say everyone gets the same training for a position/job, people would want the best to fill the position. It means competition and the less competitive would fill the lower-paying bracket, aka look for another job.

Huge! The poor masses have so vital a function in the economy. In the first place, they are the milking cows of businessmen. I can only speak for my country, though.

Here, the masses comprise the huge consuming public. The capitalists here are providing products which are mainly adjusted to the lifestyle of the masses. The masses are poor. They can't buy goods in large amounts, for example, so everything are offered in tiny amounts, in sachets, in little packets.

Moreover, these poor masses are the ones who can easily be exploited as cheap labor force. Businesses here offer tiring jobs with very low compensation. The masses can't easily complain because they need to eat. Jobs are scarce. It would be a larger disaster for the worker and his/her family if he/she is kicked out because of whining. 

Another thing, the regulators can't just fight for the welfare of the poor masses. They're paid. The leaders? They're also on the payroll.

That's the art of life, sir. For example, for the completion of work that is manpower in nature, you definitely need the name of a worker who can complete the job according to the required technical specifications. Now. what I'm thinking now is whether there are rich people who want to work like poor people. Of course not the answer. Because their social status is the same. that's why rich people must also have taste, don't ever think they are their cash cows.

Manpower, or employees, is really the role of us—the work force to run the business or even the government, even if they are not regular on their work, is still a big factor. Let's say the contractual employees in government tend to finish a project without them; those regular employees in the government can't do it without them, as well as making buildings and roads. Any kind of stuff that needs people to build is because of us. Just imagine if all were rich. Who is going to do those things?

That's not art for me. I'm seeing exploitation, oppression. But I'm not simply speaking of laborers working. That's not necessarily unfair. They got their level of skills. They gotta find work where they function best. That's all right provided they're not overworked in an unsafe and inhuman condition, and extremely underpaid.

How can you not consider the masses the cash cows of businesses when they are comprising almost 60% of the entire population?

The poor people do give major contribution in the economy, maybe all we know the poor people are just an expense for the government, but it's actually opposite from what you've thought.

Poor people don't have money to buy something expensive with cash, they will choose credit and they need to pay interest. Poor people like smoking, drunk and drug, they're make the companies become rich and the companies will pay income tax. Poor people can't enter university and they don't mind to get paid lower than minimum salary on the country where they live, etc.

Either poor people and rich people are make the government rich, but middle class people don't give a lot contribution.

Not necessarily means poor but the average people (usually lower to lower middle class) are usually the ones who provides labor. Without these people, businesses won't function, because who will do the work for those businesses? They offer their skills either by using their body or their knowledge. I think that's the role that majority is providing for the economy. Another thing is that they act as the end consumer for those businesses. They are usually the target customers that buy goods to stores that helps the businesses in making sales.

It means a votebank is there to appease and raise votes and sustain the same governance over years to come and that the middle class would suffer from it.

Majority of democratic countries run like this, they identify minority groups, poor and less educated populations living in their own superstitions. This leads to the following groups not improving themselves but instead spending their votes on a shit governance that cannot be toppled at all and further worsening of their conditions.

This is how minority politics work, the poor remain poor while the rich remain rich, the middle class always suffers. Thus economic struggle continues as it started.

I want to look at this issue more openly about a specific audience, because OP's question is really misleading, I can see how the poor play an important role in the economy, because as they are part of the labor force and consumption of the economy, that may be limited by poor luck in accessing the economic resources and infrastructure needed to sustain life. The poor can provide a source of cheap labor that businesses can use to produce products and services at a lower cost, and this can help increase competitiveness and reduce costs for consumers use.
And the poor can also create a consumer market for cheap goods and services to meet their consumption needs. In particular, in some cases, the poor may have difficulty accessing the resources needed to develop their economy and improve their quality of life. Therefore, social and economic policies designed to support the poor, help them develop their economies, access employment opportunities and address health and infrastructure problems are very important.

If everyone was rich then who will do the dirty jobs, take for example the Mexicans in America, they're the ones doing the dirty and low paying jobs. If the Mexican and other migrants didn't go to the America then the streets will be dirty, factories jobs and other minor jobs that this migrants do won't have been done and the economy will be on a hold. The poor are needed in every economy and might be the most important class of wealth in an economy.

If everybody was rich then there won't be helpers in the rich mansion and public servants to help the society stay secure and in order. The poor plays the rules of maintaining the economy, they're the ones the government taxes because the rich has found a way to avoid taxes.

The poor masses are always more easily exploited by those who are already rich. For example, when a boss or owner of a certain company is in need of several employees for certain positions within the company. Of course the company will prefer poor people to work in the positions it needs if indeed the poor people have the skills needed.

That is a very real impact on the poor masses in this world, apart from that there are also other impacts such as those who are still poor will be forced to work every day in order to be able to make money in their life. And this will certainly have an impact on the economy which will continue to rotate every day in all communities. I think those are the only two impacts that can arise from the large number of poor masses in this world

The Poor play a very crucial role by providing major portion of labor force for various sectors of the economy. They take up labor intensive jobs, in construction, manufacturing and service sectors.Thereby contributing for the continuous functioning and growth of the economy. Their dedication and hard work in these roles help drive development and sustain various industries.

It is essential to acknowledge and express appreciation for the contribution made by poor to keep our industries and services functioning seamlessly.

I'll just add more details to this. Once they get their salaries or wages then they can at least purchase their basic needs or even their wants. This means that the money continues to circulate within the country. This group's consumer spending also play a vital role in measuring a country's overall Gross Domestic Product score.

To some point, all I see is Nature. Although I don't know by what standard you guys consider one to be poor, just because one is poor doesn't mean he or she will not have a choice; that does not mean they will be maltreated; that does not mean they will be oppressed.
 
There are still some Rich companies out there that regard every human as one, irrespective of what level they are at. When I talk about my point regarding low pay for labor, this is based on level of qualification, not oppression.
 
To me, if I were to employ labor to come work for me in any industry, I would rate their pay based on how they present themselves. There are people who know what they are actually doing, but because they lack the opportunity to showcase their talent and are always afraid of losing their opportunities, they themselves request a low pay on a job that they could have charged a high price for. So when such an opportunity presents itself, as a good economist, you will always choose the option that will cost you less. But they will be respected, not oppressed, because they have nothing.
 
There are also people out there who use any little chance that they have to oppress those they believe they have more power over, either financially or in their position; they use their position natively. We have a lot of such people in the labor market and in every society, but that does not define how everyone else will treat their employees, and that's not how the poor are also wrongly treated everywhere.

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.

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.

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. ;)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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

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.

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 👺👺

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

This could've been specified on what was being mean by living in poverty and being poor?
Are these people employed or not? Are they earning below the minimum wage or struggling to get a good job?
Because if poverty means unemployment, then I guess these people has no contribution to the economy as they are only after the governments benefit, so they are just another people fed by the tax payers.
If they are employed but with minimum or below minimum wage, then they are basically contributing to the economy as the product they've produced will be a subject for tax deductions and the product they buy in the supermarket will also have a tax, just like what the people in the lower and middle class had, except that people who earned more will have to had a tax on their payroll.

The classification of poor in other countries is very different per country. For example, in a 1st world country compared to a 3rd world country, because of the cost of living in that country, they are struggling and can't buy food, but they are earning huge if you put them in a poor country. Whereas in a 3rd world country, it is really poor, but they can do things that can still help them survive, like growing their own crops or going fishing, as most of the 3rd world country has crops and rivers where you can catch fish, but still they are both doing the dirty jobs.

people who live in poverty mean they don't get a large income in their life, or can be said to have no income in their life such as unemployment, or it could be people who earn but their expenses are greater than their income.

so the role of the poor in the economy in my opinion is where the situation is below. but if life is in a state of poverty, it means it's time to build the economy and learn from failed experiences.

The increase in the poverty rate due to income below the limit, one of the causes of the poverty rate to increase due to the influence of commodity prices which are widely consumed by people whose monthly income is below the limit. When the purchase price of basic necessities increases, the poverty rate will also increase.

A good government will not let its people suffer with uncertain conditions, the solution is on the government's side to reduce the economic squeeze on the lower middle class. The government has an obligation to eradicate poverty because it is something to pay attention to in the midst of uncertainty like today. After the wheels of the economy were squeezed due to Covid, then followed by inflation and the era of high interest rates that are now hitting several regions.
In essence, poverty cannot be eliminated, but education from the government on several skills can reduce the poverty rate in a country.

As you know, poverty today is a socio-economic problem; it is both a hindrance and a challenge in the process of socio-economic development, improving people's living standards. While world civilization has achieved obvious achievements in scientific and technological progress, significantly increasing material and social wealth, and greatly increasing human wealth, the tragedy that plagues On the back of man is still poverty. Although there are many organizations of the United Nations and of the international community that carry out this glorious mission on a planetary scale, However, the reality shows that, although this is a job of global concern, still hungry countries are still hungry, and the community's help for a poor part of the population is just like salt from the sea. sufficient, not exhaustive.

Exactly, the poor are not exempt from taxes, what the rich can contribute to the national economy, the poor can too. Furthermore, I would argue that the poor play a more important role in the economy of any country, especially those with an export industry. Because the poor provide a large amount of labor to create goods and quality products for us to use. Their role is undeniable, but unfortunately, our society only looks at the surface to evaluate people and treat each other. They criticize the poor and only compliment the rich for each other.

poor people role in economy is more than rich. lets suppose for some time there is no poor in one country. now who will work in land to produce food? who will work in factory as a labour? who will serve rich people

The answer is no one because when all peoples rich, no one will be ready to work hard because all there hardwork are just fir making money and when someone has already lot of money then why need this. lack of poor will make rich lives difficult. Tax is not main role in making economy but other factor too play big role and without poor people its not possible to get it.

You have modeled the situation very wrongly. We can assume that there are two strata of the community left in the country: the Rich and the Middle Class.
And believe me, the work you wrote about will be done by the middle class, but at the "rates" of the middle class.
In a normal society, no one would take the place of the poor if they disappeared. There will simply be a reassessment of the market, with adjustments for the fact that this work will become more expensive. Although it is possible to have immigrants from other countries who are willing to work for little money...

I don't think the role of the poor in the economy will be more significant than that of the rich, but I agree with part of what you say. What would happen to the world if everyone was rich and didn't need to work? That is why there is always a section of the poor in any country.

The poor also contribute and play an important role in the economy because they are responsible for producing the products, goods, and necessities for all of us. But having too many poor people is also not good for a country's economy because for a country to develop, its people must have a full life.

In a simpler sense, the poor are people who live life without a sense of contentment, so it can be underlined that those who are poor are those who always feel lacking in their lives. While those who always live well, are those who belong to the rich class even though they don't have a luxury car in their house. But for those who are unemployed, I think it's very clear that they are poor people who have no income, but we also have to check again about the unemployment status. Because there are also unemployed people who are caused by their laziness to work, although most of them are unemployed because they don't know where to work and don't know what to do.

I think the role of the poor in the economy is to drive the wheels of the economy at the lower levels so that they can cause the wheels of the economy at the top levels to run as well. Because it would also be useless if all the rich people produce goods and sell goods on a large scale without targeting the market and people at the grassroots level. Because those who are rich certainly will not get any results from their sales after they produce goods in large quantities to be distributed to the market.

The fact is poor people are needed by rich people. and the rich will even live in trouble without the presence of the poor in this world. because there are rich people because there are poor people.

Even poor people are very meritorious behind every company development of rich people and the progress of a country's development. Because they are willing to work for a small salary. They work harder but for less money. So on the one hand poor people have very important services.

There's less or nothing at all of a positive impact the poor plays in the economy of any county order than been a burden to the government. The poor are there just to make the wealthy more wealthier in the sense that they are used as stooges by the rich to perpetrate certain unlawful activities.

The poor are a threat to tranquility and security in the society and that's why every government needs to tackle poverty as much as they can to beat it to it's barest minimum. Cause where there's so much poverty there bound to be increase in crime rate cause majority of these poor populace may only see crime as means to daily survival.

The people living in poverty have a profound impact on the economy. Their participation and contribution are vital for its sustainability. If they are empowered and their poverty reduced, they can become potential consumers, workers, and entrepreneurs. They become active participants in economic activities, boosting growth and fostering a more equitable society. It's crucial to recognize their value and provide them with opportunities to thrive.

Simply we can say that if there were no poor people there would be no way to become rich. As we know that light is worthless without darkness. If there were no poor people, the word development would not even be uttered. The status of the rich can be understood because there are poor. If poor people stop their work for a day it will be very easy to understand the importance of poor people. Poor people are working today so that the rich can enjoy luxuries. The poor are working to produce goods and various works the rich are getting advantages by their work. And the biggest thing is that the rich are able to keep their positions because the appearance of the poor.

The World Bank defines "poor" as those who lack the ability to afford food at a rate of $2 per day. Currently, the UAE does not have anyone in such a state, indicating that they are performing well. This demonstrates that poverty is not an inevitable condition in a country if it is effectively managed

Not all poor people are a burden to society or will become criminals who disrupt the peace of society.  what you are saying about the poor is a bit excessive and unacceptable.  my family is also poor, but we are not people who cause harm to society, do not ask anyone for anything, no one wants to be poor to be despised by others.  I don't know if you are rich, but you despise the poor so much, they are poor, but they are still human beings like everyone else.  the poor need to be treated fairly.

You misunderstood me mate, no doubt we will always have the poor around us and by poor here I mean indigent people that add no value or whatsoever to society like beggars on the streets. You can be said to be poor but with a skill you render as service to the rich in return you earn money but when you're poor and comfortable in it then you're a threat to society cause such persons will always see crime as the only easy means of survival thereby breaching the peace.

As long as anyone can provide shelter, clothing, and food for themselves which are the basic necessities of life then they ain't in this category of poor as meant here in this thread. And to be explicit, your family are not poor neither am I against the poor.

Yes, I agree with you on this very statement of yours, as both the rich and the poor is needed to create balance in the world, because if everybody is rich, who will be the personal drivers, the cleaners and the security guards, and likewise if everybody is poor, who will be the employers, the directors and entrepreneurs, as all need one another for the society to function effectively.


Generalizing that the poor are threat to the tranquility and security of a society is very unfair and rude if I may say, because we have people who are poor but yet hardworking, respectful and well behaved in the society who never take what is not theirs if not given, because is cause as a result of greed and not being satisfied with what an individual has, of which both the rich & poor steal.

There must be a positive impact, because the rich and the poor have become a cycle that cannot be separated because they both need each other for economic growth in various fields.

Actually crime is not synonymous with poverty, even bigger crimes are committed by rich people and state officials by means of corruption and so on. The state's task should be to reduce its citizens so they don't live in poverty. But the problem of poverty is very complex, because poverty is sometimes also caused by factors beyond the ability of the individual, one of which is due to inherited family poverty.

So not all poverty is an individual's fault, there are still external factors, but fortunately I have parents (only my mother, my biological father is divorced) who are not mentally poor, they care about education, while my mother's parents (my mother's) are parents who don't care about the future. He thinks women don't need education, this is a wrong idea.

Apart from that, poverty is caused by the absence of jobs, the cost of living is expensive, and the scope of poverty is due to the high rate of corruption. The government must change the mindset of a consumptive society to be productive. Ensure that development is carried out on a priority scale that can improve living standards. Make sure that government programs tend to be more productive, don't subsidize the consumptive sector.

Just the label poor starts the argument off on the wrong foot, a reasonably accurate conclusion is unlikely to occur.    We might be born poor possibly but nobody stays the same their entire lives and considering a population by how rich or poor they are is wrong imo.    People can move from poor to rich and even the opposite rich can become poor.
   The bulk of a countries population is always how the taxes and work is done, thats how I'd view it.  If people are unable to pay your tax burden then overly large ambitions will not likely work.  Im trying to be brief but people can be rich and capable in other ways besides capital value, if all people in the economy are educated and able to make riches that countries economy should be able to do well.

It was the indicator that leaders in that country does nothing help to improve their status but a corrupt leader. It's a big shame but as a citizen of that country, we should also have to find a way to get out of being poor and lift ourselves alone rather than relying on the government that never think good for its countrymen. And it ended up just a labor force to other countries as that is the only they can offer due to lack of education and skill. But despite the status of their life, their participation is also a big help in a way of being an employee.

What's your definition of poor, financially incapable??
What role do you expect the play??
Every class of personality is actually important in a society, the financially capable and incapable have their parts to play but that doesn't make them less human than the other.

If governments were benevolent, there would no longer be the poverty we see all over the world. If wealth were better distributed, there would be no more insane income disparities. We have to believe that maintaining a certain proportion of the population in poverty, or even misery, is a deliberate choice: less educated, more docile population, lower life expectancy.

It's the poor who gamble their way out of poverty (and the state which takes its big share). Sometimes too much poverty breeds delinquency too, but the very rich aren't the victims most of the time.

Without poverty, there'd be no more delinquency (or less), no more need to migrate to another country, no more homelessness, no more gambling addiction, no more despair, but also less slave labor to do dangerous, underpaid jobs. And more risk of global revolt.

Poverty is a weapon of the very rich.

Let the government do their job and do your own because if we rely on government then for sure we will start. This is also whatI've noticed right now because unlike before, I've seen a lot of people joining rallies towards the government, but right now there are only a few and others prefer to find some money so that they have to eat. They are now working on their own to be able to find food on the table, and if the government helps them then it's just a bonus for them now.

Exactly what you said friend. Both are like two sides of a coin which cannot be separated as units of a coin. Both will always exist side by side and need each other. The rich are actually the ones who need the power of the poor the most. Even rich people would not have servants in their homes if there were no poor people willing to work for them. This is why between rich people and poor people still have to respect each other. nowadays rich people are much respected because of their wealth. but very few poor people are honored. but I personally also see that the poor also deserve respect because they make important contributions because they are willing to do menial work that maybe we can't do it. The bottom line is we need each other.

Since I don't fully understand what you mean when you say "poor people," I think you should provide more context for the topics you want people to discuss.


Do you realize that without the poor, even today's wealthy people couldn't enjoy their wealth?
However, when we talk about the impact that the poor have on the economy, I think the main one in my opinion is farming. Mate, have you ever seen a rich man working in the farm? The fact that the poor today work for the rich, in my opinion, is another area where the poor today contribute to the economy. Even if they do farm labor, they search for the underprivileged to work for them and receive payment for their efforts.

However, in my opinion, when you consider these circumstances today, I feel the poor are well contributing in many ways, as well as the fact that they go farming, do farming, and then take their produce to markets to sell it, who are those buying it? Even if it's just that one, I think the wealthy folks.

I agree that poor people are not unruly class, in fact if we were to look into who hurts the economy of a nation more, we will realize that wealthy people hurt it multiple times more than what the poor does. Even if you consider poor people taking welfare and all, we have rich people stealing taxes, how? They just make it look like they haven't made as much by increasing their spending, and putting it on silly stuff.

Look at Nike alone, they have a different company that they use for licensing, and they pay that company a lot, to make it look like they haven't made that much, just one example. This is why poor are the unfortunate class that is getting the short end of the stick, whereas wealthy people are the main reason why economy sucks.

Have you seen any rich guy doing trades, manual labor, working as a cashier, postman or fighting in a war? No, they don't. This world would collapse without poor guys and you know what's the whole magic behind to make poor people work and work? Just pay them enough to live and when they get skilled, improve their salary, make it enough to live slightly comfortable salary but not so much that they will retire soon or start a business. Oh, also, make sure that houses cost a lot and rent prices are high too, to make them even more dependent on their jobs. Also, tax everything, their salary, foods, etc to even make them more dependent on their job. Also, make them tire to not be able to do/think more when they finish their job.

At the same time, I want to say that it's not like rich people do absolutely nothing and enslave people and that's the way it works, no, rich people, who own businesses and actively manage it, are good at business management. It's not easy to start a business, keep it and improve over time, turn small business into a big corporation, that's not as easy as it looks from outside, that makes some rich people prominent from poor people.

Both the rich and the poor make important contributions to a country's economy, and depending on the lifestyle of each person will have different effects on the economy. It cannot be said that the rich are doing more harm to the economy while the poor are not. It is possible that some rich people evade taxes, but not all because the tax that the government collects is still largely from businesses, not from individuals. Meanwhile, without the poor, we wouldn't be able to have the workforce to do the heavy lifting to make products for our use. But poverty is also elementary to lead to social evils, and that is not good for society.
Therefore, depending on whether each person will be harmful or beneficial to the economy, it cannot be said that the rich or poor are harmful to the national economy.

Not only did I misunderstand you, but you can see that many people are objecting to what you say.  i don't know what you're trying to say, but blaming the poor is unfair.  I do not deny that many poor people are having a negative impact on society, but not all poor people are like that.
The rich also have a lot of bad guys, corrupt politicians, and tycoons exploiting the labor of the poor...to judge the impact of a person on the country's economy, we can't just rely on their appearance, and rich or poor is not a yardstick to judge whether people are good or bad.

I personally think poor people are always paying the biggest bill/cost in economic crisis. Their main role is to join labor, work hard, make economy better, but in return get very low return. Its sad for them. But this is how market economy works. There should be majority working class people so rich can live better lives. I am not leftist in this but I feel like laborers should at least have more opportunities to reach higher ranks/classes in society.

Because of those people who are consider as a poor makes that foundation of houses in which wealthier people lives. There are lots of jobs which will not be possible without these people so I think that instead of wealthier people the poor people play very important role in the economy of a country.

If the percentage of poor people are greater than wealthier one then this implies to the fact that the resources in that county is not maximum to fulfil the needs of people. I think that if there are lots of people who cannot afford to eat well, dress well and completed their needs but they buy something which the wealthier people often rejected to buy therefore it can be says that poor people also play an active responsibility in economy of a country.

We should respect them and should give courage to the work of poor people because if everyone become wealthy then there will be lots of work which will be pending and may be many activities will be uncompleted without help of these people so we should appreciate them and respect them.

Certainly, white-collar crimes, such as corruption, bribery, and misappropriation, often outshine the crimes linked with the financially challenged. This reinforces the need to rethink our dialogue on crime and poverty, shifting from stereotypes to a comprehensive understanding of systemic and structural factors. However, your words suggest that poverty reduction is mainly a state's task. While the state has a duty to protect its citizens' welfare, poverty's roots are intertwined with societal norms, cultural values, and economic systems.

Consider the belief that women's education isn't essential - a remnant of patriarchal societies. A government initiative alone won't extinguish such deep-rooted notions. We need a societal transformation towards gender equality and empowerment. As for corruption, its association with poverty is convoluted. While corruption indeed impedes economic growth, it's not the only poverty source. A more encompassing approach to poverty reduction would also tackle income inequality, education quality, and healthcare access.

I think thats just the balance of nature and its always there because everyone should and would not be rich no matter how the government and economy strives, there are still going to be some class of folk that will always live under the average way of living in every economy and these sets of people are the ones that do the dirties for the nations economy.

That's right.
Because if one of these things is removed then of course this will hamper the existing wheels of life because basically when talking about rich and poor this is the same as a symbiosis of mutualism that requires each other.
When poverty, for example, is eliminated, then everything will not go according to its portion. when everyone gets rich then who will become employees and life won't go well of course so with conditions like this it is clear when talking about rich and poor all have the same portion in position it's just certain that all of us want to be in a rich condition and don't want to be in a poor position and that's natural, I think because we really have a level of desire to live a better life.

It is really always there, and the government is mostly focusing on and in a loop of helping poor people by providing food and money for them to survive, but still, it is not the solution, as others said, as it will make them more lazy on that method. That is why others prefer to give them jobs rather than giving them money, as they will always come back to ask. But again, there are really classifications, as those on lower classifications like us will be the manpower for the world.

Yes, right. Everyone needs and relies on each other. Because basically the poor help with labor, and the rich help by creating jobs.

Well between the poor and the rich have an important role in the economic cycle. But unfortunately in some countries the number of people who fall into poverty is far more than the number who become rich. But we really can't blame anyone. because basically everyone struggles in their own way. The most important thing is that we must continue to be motivated to raise our standard of living by continuing to work hard and make innovations that can bring improvements to our finances.

Poverty cannot be separated from people who do not have the skills or capital to develop an improving economy, most of them do not have permanent jobs which makes it difficult for them to build an economy. It's not that they are not struggling to survive, every day they are trying to earn a few dollars to provide for the family.

Actually, when viewed from the deepest conscience, the poor are part of the beauty of the world. Rich people will find it difficult in any way if there are no poor people. Imagine if everyone in this world became the boss, then who would be the employees. Rich people and poor people always play their roles well, even though poverty is not someone's goal, they are not lucky with the current conditions.

When an economy is poor then the whole system controlling it is poor and this is indirectly saying that the government leadership is being poor on the same vein, a poor economy system is as a result of how the government take charge and control every day to day activities of the economy and how their regulation is being effectively utilized, the poor people will suffer most because they can perform than the level of what they have acquired and this makes the standard of living there so low but the moment they are determined not to rely on government, they can go self sustainable through their local way of productions with a organizational structure of division of labour.

Indeed, the poor play crucial role for agricultural and industrial sectors which are heavily labor intensive . In particular agricultural sector, which is the back bone of economy, as it provides food for human and animal consumption for their daily needs , as well as raw material for various industries to keep their wheedles ruining. It is important for factories and corporate farms  owners to prioritize well being of their workers by providing them reasonable salaries and access to health care facilities for smooth functioning of their business.

Your point is good, because definitely some people who are poor today can become rich in the future, and they can contribute to economic growth just like you have described, but it's not only when the poor become rich that they could contribute to the economy; there are some great jobs the poor do in our society today that they feel are contributing to the economy. An example is the sweeping of the road. The people that are being employed to sweep the road in the city where I live do the sweeping every three days in a week, start their duty at 4:00 AM, and finish by 6:00 AM. The people that do the job are poor people, and if they are not there to clean those roads, they will be littered with sand and papers. Also, there are usually people hired to clean the drainages to avoid blockages that could cause erosion. There are more that poor do and it contribute to the econom, either directly or indirectly.


Cheers 🥂, Dr.Bitcoin_Strange 👺👺

Imo, the economic hero in a country is in the sector of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs). the majority of whom are the poor and it is they who are saving the economy during an economic crisis. Even though during a NON CRISIS they are not something that can be relied on, because they are not the biggest taxpayers.

I think we can only give more appreciation to micro, small and medium business economic actors. If a country has succeeded in collecting MSME taxes. if indeed MSMEs contribute 62% of GDP. This means that the tax revenue must be 62% of MSMEs as well. Even though now many countries are still lame in this regard, if this inequality is resolved then we can believe that MSMEs can support a country, MSMEs can contribute to the country's economy while it is still growing. So in conclusion the role of the poor for economic growth actually exists, even though it is not visible. This is not to mention when we talk about the agricultural sector.

Beside becoming additional problem the poor don't contribute any meaningful thing to the growth of an economy. Rather, they become a problem seriously needs to find a solution to because if their a large number of poor people in a country, it means the economy is not productive enough to increase the standard of living of majority of it's citizens,  and that a large part of the economy are controlled by the few elite or are sabotaging the economy.

For the economy of society to move, there is the engagement of the poor in it. Without poor involvement, the economy of a country won't move the way it supposes to.

Let's take for instance, a country whose economy is mostly on raw materials products or agriculture, etc  The poor are the ones to be used to get the raw materials products or harvest the agricultural product is done, which the rich can't do.

In a country where the poor doesn't contribute anything to the economy country should be highly checked upon whether there are poor people in that country. Because if there are no poor people in that country, who then would work as carpenters, farmers, drivers, hair stylists, mechanics etc?

In other words, the poor complement the rich in society and they do offer a lot of services that keep society going. If I should say, no one is supposed to be addressed as poor even though he had no cash, but he has services to render that can go a long in helping the rich.

The poor is very important to the economy they have a big importance, imagine if all people living in the country are rich who will work in the farm? and who will work in some working place that owned by millionaires, if all are rich the working force in different places is surely become imbalance so poor people is very important.

But then I was wondering : we do need hairdressers, delivery drivers, bus drivers, teachers etc etc, they don't have the highest salaries so how do they manage to find a flat in a capital or big city today with indecent real estate prices ????

Ops have failed to outline the specific role he is refering to because in economy there are various aspect and segments, the poor may not be able to support the budget financially since their lack the cash liquidity to do so, but then also there are roles that each individual could players in the economy such as man power supply and the rest.

So bith the poor and the rich have a role to play and fheir role are widely separated in other to make room for peaceful coexistence.

The poor are always available to work to earn a living when it comes to labor, but looking at current events, is more of the economy having an impact on the poor. One major issue that man faces is being able to afford food and shelter, and having access to this is challenging. My issue with the beggars in my area is that the majority don't have any deformities but will refuse to work and prefer to beg with this they will definitely be affected by the economy, I am aware of a few instances when the government has attempted to empower people by giving them tools or other methods of generating income, only to wind up selling it off.

The poor doesn't add any value in economy what I believe but I don't know any other person way of understanding, so I believe that economy sustainability it depend on entrepreneurs and flows of goods and services that come from other countries and economic productivity of a particular country,  so I have seen any thing or impact that a poor can add for economy support of any country. But government can make employment opportunities available to the poor to manufacture products that will help to increase the economy of the country by using them to work and also pay them a salary that will motivate them to be active to work for the success of balancing economy of a country, except such way no value the poor can add to economy of a country

Poor people's play or role in the economy is the same with any other people, they also pay taxes and do other things but always being neglected because rich people think that they are just slaves. If poverty is one of the main problem in a certain country, for sure their Government is lacking something very big.

Poor people are always the hard laborer, they work their asses out more than 8 hours a day and still get underpaid, which is not fair for me, that's why they never get out of poverty.

Poverty on it's own is also a tool in the hand or sight of the  bourgeois because they always capitalize on the scarcity of the poor to extract labour from them.

According to the postulation of Karl Marx which opines that man is a material being and as such before man will think of anything else outside the economy he must first meet his material needs.

For man to meet his material needs he ought to produce by entering into a relationship with other men which is where the class factor sets in, between the rich who owns the means of production and the poor who owns the surplus value (labour) .

Conclusively, I am saying that the poor has a big role to play in the economy because without labour in an economy production can not be complete.

The only way poverty can be eliminated in a country is to make employment available to the poor,  their no country that doesn't have a poor citizen's any country that doesn't not have poverty or poor citizen will be in trouble financially, for my first posting here I stated it Categorically that's to eliminate poverty in a country government have to make sure that employment is everywhere so that the poor will not feel marginalised in any form.

The poor play several roles in the economy both positive and negative. The poor provide a source of labor for many industries, such as agriculture, manufacturing and service sectors. They also create demand for goods and services, which helps to stimulate economic growth. The poor can serve as entrepreneurs and create their own businesses, contributing to job creation and economic development. Poverty can lead to social economic instability, which can have negative effects on the overall economy. Poverty can also lead to crime which can increase the costs of law enforcement and reduce the attractiveness of an area for investment. Poverty can also lead to health problems, which can increase healthcare costs and reduce productivity. Poor play an important role in the economy, they provide a source of labor, demand for goods and services etc.

A poor country isn't specifically poor and has no money at all, they might have less resources than other countries but they will surely have enough money to at least run their own country in a good way if they know how to manage the minimal resources that they have so that they can generate good enough revenue for the country's economy, even a poor country should at least have people living up to the standard of their country.

I would blame the government if a country is poor and its citizens are suffering from hunger or not having basic necessities of life, if they want, they can at least provide the basic necessities for their people which isn't really a lot to ask, but they don't do it themselves maybe out of greed so that they can keep any money that comes to them.

The opinion you say is quite logical, because even though micro, small and medium enterprises are not the largest taxpayers for their country, basically small and medium-level business actors are the driving roots or foundations of the country's economic sector. Because they must always try to run their business so they can fulfill their own needs without caring about the conditions that are happening in a country.

In fact, the MSME sector must really be paid attention to by the government because with the progress of the MSME itself, of course the state will also get greater benefits in economic progress starting from the lower levels to the upper levels. So MSMEs are the basic drivers of the economic sector in order to make the whole economy move simultaneously at the same time so that the poor are also very beneficial for a country even though there are many people who are tired of continuing to be poor in their own lives.

If a country has a lot of poor people, then it is definitely the government's fault, they are not only greedy but also foolish, so they do not bring any benefit to their people. But if only a small part of the people are poor, it is not entirely the government's fault, but it may be because those people are lazy. Because the government won't have enough money and resources to distribute everything for free, what they can do is create jobs for everyone, and we need to seize our opportunities. If we are lazy and only expect support packages from the government, it is our fault that we become poor.

I think honestly poverty cannot be completely eliminated even by giving job vacancies it only solves the above problems,
the problem of poverty is so structural and must be resolved from its roots which is not easy,
What is certain is that the cooperation of all parties is important.

Yes, it is not easy to eradicate poverty completely, there will always be a small portion of the poor, even in the most developed country. Because poverty has many causes and the government cannot control them all. If a person becomes impoverished by bankruptcy and begins to sink deeper into a crisis without reviving himself, the government cannot help him either. If we want to get out of poverty, we must first try our best, not blame or rely too much on the government.

To me it's call balancing, every rich and poor people have a reason of existence, there is a major role the poor people play in the lives of the rich people and there are roles that the rich people play in the lives of the poor, to me one side is benefiting from the other if you think about it very well.

The rich still needs the poor to make some things work, like the hard works, and they get paid, to me the rich will always need the poor and the poor will always need the rich.

It's left for the poor and middle class to decide to be rich, and that's if they want.

Because poverty seems difficult to eradicate at its root, the task of the government in every country at this time is to provide job vacancies for those who are still poor and unemployed. Even though this will not eradicate poverty in the country, at least those who are poor have been helped a little to meet their own needs through the results of their own work without having to beg other people every day.

Thus, poverty can be overcome, although it cannot be eliminated because those who are poor only need work to become more independent in their lives so that they do not have to depend on other people continuously. And I think the purpose of cooperation from all parties for this kind of thing is the welfare of the people in the country, even though the caste of some people in the country is poor.

I think it is not good to classify people as poor, poverty in its own sense is relative but in terms of financial status, I will like to say people with limited means of income. Some of the government policies have encouraged people to be contented with this state believing the government is going to take care of them when you look at the big picture poverty is a business to politicians because when you can take care of yourself you will be free of their influence and you can tell those politicians the truth. Here they come during election season sharing things to the people and during this time they will forget their state and believe another messiah has come to save them. The thing is that the poor people are just tools for these politicians because they can easily direct and use them the way they want.

No one chooses to be poor, and if anyone is given the opportunity, surely everyone will choose to be rich. But the whole point lies in how much a person knows how to handle money, this will determine his status in society. For example, if all people are given 10,000 dollars each, then after some time the society will be divided again and there will be those who will have the most money, someone will have half, and there will also be a poor class, who has nothing left in the end. It depends on how a person knows how to handle money.

Poverty has a negative impact on the economy. Poor people living in poverty will provide less consumable power compared to the others. But together, they do provide something for the economy. It's so little compared to others who are providing more. If the numbers are more than enough, it will have a bad impact on the economy. The unstable economical situation is one of them. In the long run, it has the power to completely ruin the economy. Poverty is a sign of a bad economic situation. If we want to improve the economy, we will have to address this first.

But we can not solve it completely. We can only control it to some extent. Without the dark, you will never see the value of the light. The same goes for the society. Without the poor, you can never be wealthy. You can never grow without them.

When government stimulates the economy of the country, they will create jobs that only the poor will take. Like construction laborers who will toil all day and night to pour cement on bridges and roads. The money they make keeps the economy alive that's how the money circulates as they buy stuff during paydays.

The poor guys are making all the efforts so the rich can rest assure they stay rich. This keeps the balance that's why the government always make sure there are poor people.

The sad part about employment is that you can still be poor even if you have a job. In my nation if you are making a minimum wage, that means you are making much less than what you should in order to survive, people in the big city pay bigger amount to rent than minimum wage, that's the difference between a normal wage and a minimum wage.

So, if government makes sure that there is going to be something that needs to be done, we are going to end up with the bad result of poverty even with the wage, because some of the minimum wage amounts in some nations are still in poverty levels and there won't be any person who will live a comfortable life just because they are employed. You need a decent job to survive, otherwise you are going to do badly.

This is what they say that poor will only became poorer. Rich or poor, all of us has their own roles on making the economy better. It's just that poor people are more exposed in labor works. For Christ sake, they should earn better than most of us whose job is not that strenuous. Saying this is normal seems unacceptable.

If only I have a massive wealth, I will help many poor people and I will encourage every company to increase their salary. No need to wish for a rich person to have a better life because they already have it. Some opportunities are not accessible for the poor but they can try other opportunities for a while. It's still possible for them to improve their lives as long as they believe on their selves that they can do it.

Well, the circulation of money is even more swift in the lower middle class. They earn and spend it right away because they need it right away to buy all their basic needs. so that the circulation of money among the lower classes runs faster which keeps the economy in balance as a result of this circulation. Very few poor people make money and can put it in savings or investments. because sometimes their income and expenses are not balanced. or mediocre.

It seems to me that this is the goal of the world's "elite". As they say at the WEF: "you'll own nothing and be happy".

Ensuring that the poorest people can't save to invest is the surest way to keep them enslaved, isn't it?

It reminds me of a drawing of freed cotton-field slaves: when they are freed, they are offered salaried work, but all their wages go to pay their rent and food ...

Well, it is true that this illustration is indeed suitable for describing how the condition of poor people today is that they are only given a salary that is only enough to meet their daily needs which makes it difficult for them to increase their financial level. Unless someone has high motivation to work harder and can make extra money from side jobs outside of their working hours by sacrificing the rest time they have.

Except that in this case, he risks losing his health and has no time left for his family, if he has one. We see it every day: people even migrate to other countries to work on big projects and try to send money to their families, and then it's a work-related accident: fatigue, difficult working conditions etc... One death among many... And few people care.

There are some very brave people who want to get by, but the (very) poor are not considered and their disappearance goes almost unnoticed, it's sad.

Because they are trapped in the same situation as a poor person who can only receive a mediocre salary that is only for his daily needs, they will find it difficult to get out of this zone because they cannot what they do, maybe their mindset only thinks of working for needs and for other things such as saving and investing they do not have thoughts there because they are aware of the conditions they are experiencing.

If they want to get out of this trap then they have to think about increasing their income in any way and indeed side jobs are very much needed for them, let alone trying something new to determine their future fate, even if they sacrifice a lot of time but if they already know what to do then that's the best way for them to get out of the poverty zone.

Well, that is really what people are doing right now because, again, one job is not enough and the prices keep increasing. As you can see right now, a lot of people are asking the government to make their salaries increase so that they can cope with inflation, which other business owners disagree with because they are also affected by the inflation. That is really a problem right now, which is why others are finding multiple jobs and sacrificing their sleep so that they can earn more money for their families.

I think the poor plays important role in the economy because without the manpower coming from them the businesses in different countries will not move or will not operate. They can contribute positively in our economy because as consumers they can  impact on the purchases of goods and services which is much needed by the businesses to be able to survive the economy. The demands create by this people from basic necessities like food and clothing and the likes would definitely run our economy. That is why the poor play an important role in the economy.

The poor you mean, are the poor people who have jobs, or the poor who don't have jobs, because in my opinion there are also different levels of poor people. So if you mean the poor person who doesn't have a job. If you look at it as a whole in life, more or less it is certain, it will have an impact on the economy. Because even poor people who don't have a job must have needs and needs in their life, such as food and clothing that must be owned. And it's all definitely a must buy.
That way, it means that even the poor who don't have a job still have a contribution to economic turnover, although not too big.

And what about the poor, but who have jobs. The poor also certainly have an impact or contribution to the world's economic cycle. Moreover, these poor people have a job, but maybe with a salary that is not big.

So it can be concluded that poor people also have an impact on the economy, because if there are no poor people, it is sometimes difficult for rich people to find workers. And the poor are also basically the same, have needs and requirements that must be met. But the difference is only in terms of the amount of money and how often the need or needs are met.

Indeed, on the one hand, we need a lot of work to live, but on the other hand, balance in life is also necessary,
meaning if we are crazy to work and have less rest time, of course it will affect our health,
so in the end we need treatment and it costs a lot too.

Do you think this jobs done by poor people as labourers is helping the economy of the country not to spend much on machines?? The government can still have the money to afford machines and decide to use labourers and the government will still steal the money into their pockets.  The only role I know the poor people plays to help the economy is that they create jobs for themselves to survive,  most of them don't really have any hope for the government to empower them, they do minimal jobs by themselves and I think this effort from them Really plays a good role in the economy.

Everyone from the unemployed who continue to spend what little money they have on items in an effort to stimulate the economy to the "working poor" whose efforts are crucial to the nation's economic success. Their presence illustrates the inequality of wealth, but also the interconnectivity of our economy. Nonetheless, the last argument deserves close scrutiny. While it is true that the wealthy often hire the unemployed, this fact in no way implies that poverty is an acceptable means to financial success. Poverty is not merely a lack of money; it is a social problem that prevents people from sharing in the benefits of growth. Where does Bitcoin fit into this picture? However, Bitcoin presents an alternative financial structure that, in theory, may make access to money more equitable for everybody. However, before it can help the poor, pressing issues like lack of internet access and digital literacy must be resolved.

Yes, I totally agree with your opinion. In any country, there must be poor people, even if it is a rich country. Everything depends on each person himself. Poverty will always exist in any developed country, because poverty is a problem that is not only related to work, but also mentality. Indeed, there are several countries where there is a lot of poverty due to the failure of the government to prosper its people.

I've read about geographic politics
Whereas countries or regions that have abundant natural resources are usually lazy, because they feel they don't have to work hard to get what they need. Meanwhile, countries with minimal natural resources will try hard to meet their needs, as a result they become accustomed to working hard and don't want to get into trouble because they know what problems mean.
A small example is a country with subtropics or winter will think of looking for food before winter arrives. Stock up on food for months to keep him cool through the winter. Meanwhile, tropical countries do not think to do that because natural resources and food stocks tend to be abundant, so they are used to working hard.

Well every nation has the poor people and they are part of what makes thing function. There are poor people that do the work that the rich and middle people do not want to do.
It can be the dangerous jobs or the ones that you do not need any skill. There is rich people who want workers for them and this will be for poor people to do.
If we lived in an perfect world we would all be rich. But this just is not real life and there is going to be poor people always.

It's not possible for all the jobs to be done by machines, that is the reason why almost every single industry requires labor work laborers, and also, the cost and maintenance of the machines can be way higher than the wage a company might need to pay to its labors from the poor side of the economy, we all know that a poor person will get ready to work for a very minimal salary because they don't have anything else to do and this becomes their only source of income.

If it wasn't for the poor, these industries and companies would never be able to earn as much profit as they do because they get all the work done by them and pay them way below the minimum wage or what they deserve, I'm not sure about all the countries but that happens in most countries.

they create labour which creates labour and wealth distribution, they play a vital role.

Irrespective  of your social status, either poor or rich, we still have our different roles to play and I don't know your standards for defining someone as poor but i think just as @Nwada001 has already said, that one of the major impact the poor can bring  to a society is the fact that they can actually provid cheaper about as co.lared to using machines for same jobs especially  if the job isn't a large scale one.

The poor also provide a whole lot of services the rich can't even provide and I even think the poor based on what many might classify as poor, are the people that even make life much more easier for the common man from agriculture to transportation down to even shelter building.
Generally,  I don't think the world can do without the poor

Cost of Labor is usually represented by the available working age population of a country.  The fighting force, the developing talent the next generation of support in the economy.  Ironically the common poor are the core of a country and most important.  If people are not educated or well fed and able to work its a poor country overall unable to produce properly and unlikely to be effective overall even if there's commodity wealth its not likely stable if the people are not part of the success in a nations economy.

The poor plays a very important role in the economy of a country although it does not make sense when there is high numbers of poor masses in a country. A country that has large numbers of poor people will suffer crime and corruption if time is nit taken. The poor people are those ones that will want to do Petty jobs to make a living like doing the work that rich can not do and since they have the money to pay for the services of the less stable financial people, then they will be forced to work for themselves and make a living to feed themselves and families.

There's no such thing as one sided on this world but rather there would really be something like called "balance".If there's rich then theres poor people and this is something that would be inevitable.Poverty is something a
global problem which cant really be solved out completely despite on being a rich country, there would be those people who would really be living on being poor which is something that would really be that normal.
Poor people on the economy and their role? If everyone is rich then no one will work into those businesses around because everyone would really be making their business since they are rich. Then who would really be the
employees or the ones who would really be working if everyone does have the money? There would be no cycle and there would be no balance and we know that there's no such thing about perfect world.
This is why lets just accept the fact that there are people who are rich and there are poor and there are those who are in average.It is really just depending on how we gonna handle ourselves
on making our lives better and not having that financial problem afterwards.

It should have balance because if not, the crime rate will increase, like in other poor countries where the crime rate is really high, but again, the poor sector is not only manpower but also consumers, meaning they are the ones purchasing goods and other stuff for their daily needs, which means that's keeping the economy in cycle. Though I don't really want that, just stay in the sector if you can improve yourself and be in a better position.

As a worker, it really influences the economy, but I don't think it's the poor, there are many categories of poor people and I think it's difficult because they continue to want to eradicate poverty in a country so that it makes many parties think about many things, including advancing the economy to eradicate poverty in the country.

This issue of equality can not happen this issue of segregation started during the stone age was only the chiefs and there slaves and all does status were giving according to there possession and through to the industrial era and now down to the modern world, no more slave but considering the fact that everybody can not be rich because the truth is that the rich will always need the poor to work for them and I don't think this world or anyone there will have bunch of rich people all fingers can not be equal, the only thing I see has a problem is when you don't improve then you keep woking for people.

The role of the poor in economic development is many development of various kinds in the country usually comes more from the poor class. They increase productivity and create employment in the society, values emphasize the acquisition and accumulation of human capital, which is the main instrument of economic development and consume more and they engage in various developmental activities to get a little more quality goods or services. The work of the rich is done by the poor if they stop working the rich will become helpless and the country's economy will be hampered. Poor people do all kinds of work, development of industry construction of infrastructure everything is done by poor people.

You are able get your vegetables and food because of the poor who are working under extreme conditions to cultivating and harvesting the farm yields. I know it has been said that the rich are the thinkers and strategist but the poor are the doers. Without them the economy would crumble. How do you think the UAE and other Middle Eastern countries became what it is today? The poor built that country and by extension their economy with their life. I don't even want to bring up the building of the world cup stadiums etc. The economy of many nations would crumble without the poor doing the dirty jobs.

People living in poverty can significantly impact the economy in various ways. Their limited purchasing power reduces consumer spending, affecting businesses and economic growth. Lower tax contributions from impoverished individuals reduce government revenue, potentially hindering public services and infrastructure development. Social welfare programs aimed at assisting the poor can strain government budgets. Poverty's toll on workforce productivity due to limited access to education and healthcare can hinder overall economic progress. Moreover, higher crime rates associated with poverty lead to increased law enforcement and justice system expenses. Addressing poverty through targeted policies can help alleviate these effects and foster a more inclusive and robust economy.

Well they helped a lot there, especially in terms of development as you mentioned above. Rich people have sufficient capital to carry out various developments for their business needs and poor people will have a role as someone who will help carry out their plans. The point is that everyone, rich or poor, will always need other people, meaning they will not be able to live without the help of others. They will need each other in every way and as a result they will mutually benefit from each other. So the core conclusion is, if the higher the level of poverty in a region or country, the lower the level of economic growth in that country or region, and vice versa if poverty in a country is low, the economic growth in that country will also be better.

Poor people play an important role in the economic growth of people who need labor around their lives, the presence of poor people in the midst of society has created a situation of mutualism symbiosis. The rich and the poor always have a close relationship that is difficult to separate, if in one area inhabited by the poor then life will be destroyed. If on the other hand, in one area there are all rich people then life will be completely difficult.

The poor have labor, while the rich have resources, the relationship of mutual need cannot be separated from everyday life between the poor and the rich. Poor people are like salt in food, without salt food will be bland. Likewise with the poor, without the poor life will be completely difficult because no one helps the rich who are very busy taking care of their business.

I think poor contribute only to rich. They can get things done with low payment but sells then in other country with high price. Like clothes and shoes are made in poor country but look at their prices. Those country do all they can to keep people on poverty to use them.

Yes indeed, without the laborers that work for them they are also nothing as they are the mind but not the doer. I don't even consider them as poor which classify by the society because we all have the same role which is to contribute and get paid for it. I only differ them with the education since mostly from the poor doesn't have proper education that's why some of the rich people could take advantage from it for example if the poor work for them, they could split the profit to 70% to the rich while the 30% for the poor since they are not aware from that situation. Because mind itself wouldn't even do the work, you'll need people to help you finish some project so those people who doesn't have educational attainment would apply for that role since it doesn't need any requirements as degrees.

Agreed, the rich and the poor are closely related and both play important roles in the economy. To me, their role is the same, no one has a more important role than anyone to help the economy develop. The poor have labor power, but their education level is not high, they cannot think of ideas, plans, methods...While rich people have those things, but they can't turn ideas into reality on their own. So both need to work together to survive and help the economy grow. The world cannot be without the poor, nor without the rich, this inequality will always exist if we want the world not to be destroyed.

It was part of a line of business pursued by poor people who were struggling to get rich. Because the contribution of those who are still poor is through their own efforts and that is regardless of which technique they will use at this time, and the example you gave is an example that makes a lot of sense and still happens this year where countries those who are able to process raw materials into ready-to-use goods will always buy raw materials in poor countries to be sold at a higher price after being processed through the technology they have.

The government can't eradicate poverty even if they wanted to because they aren't generators of wealth. They could take wealth and redistribute it if they wanted (in fact, many countries throughout history have tried it, it's called socialism), but it fails every time. Take any level of stimulus and inject it into the lower class through direct payments or otherwise, and the poverty levels don't actually decrease over time. The immediate wealth of the lower class increases of course, but again, over time you don't see decreasing poverty rates.

People generally need incentive to work themselves out of poverty and the government isn't part of the equation. As long as they have access to free markets and education, the rest is up to them and not the government.

Rich people will even have difficulty in life if there are no poor people. Imagine if the rich built a very large stately home. Imagine if they didn't have any servants in the house, of course the rich would have a lot of trouble cleaning and taking care of their magnificent home. They even have to cut the grass in the large yard by their own hands. Bottom line Rich people sometimes they are very dependent on cheap services from people below. But so do people at the bottom, they also need job vacancies from rich people. So in essence both of them need each other. So between the rich and the poor both must respect and respect each other because they need each other. The market turnover is even faster because there are more consumers from the lower classes. Which means that the lower class also plays an important role in economic growth. especially in the flow of money circulation.

This post ought to be a call for crisis between the Poor and the Rich.
The poor has no sustainability impact to the societies other than being used as a tool by the riches to replace machinery duties, suffering extortions and oppressions, intimidations, slavery and bullies

Or should I say death rates as a case to reduce populations brings sustainable impact to the society?
If yes, then cool.
The poor produces the highest death rates to impacts and sustains the societies by reducing it's population for the profitable allocations of the society to go round the rich as dead strikes these poor through a medium of starvation and poor nutritious foods, poor medications and no medical cares, low mentalities as a fact of no quality education.

As long poverty is not a good thing, there is absolutely no way a right can be made from the wrong.

Very big influence on the economy, especially at the level of purchasing power. In my opinion, there are three kinds of poverty. poor capital, poor mentality, poor knowledge. If he is smart and has expertise. surely he will survive.

The poor sector is really the biggest consumer. Imagine that rich people have businesses like a store or supermarket, and most of the people purchasing from them are poor, meaning they are also gaining profit from the poor sector. It is really an exchange between both of them, and both have their own advantages. Right now, there is already a balance that both should have, but that doesn't mean that those poor people will stay there. Let's also strive more so that we can live a comfortable life.

Poor are those who control economy while being controlled. I mean that amount of poop people always prevails the amount of rich. They are all voters. Offer poor people a tiny benefit and he would vote for what you want, even though that could worsen their financial situation in future. Poor are the instrument, with which help rich influence on the economy.

Mind trick playing games on them, poor isn't generally a bad thing, I said this because some found peace been poor, come to think of it, there is a much larger problems awaiting the rich people, most poor people are more happier than rich people, what they have is real apart from expensive things the rich can do with ease.

Poor man's mind is for how long is it going to take, this is why it's hard to advice a poor man to start investing, I've been there for some poor people, I saw what they are going through and I couldn't keep my eye off them, I tried to help, not with money but ways they can turn things around for themselves but they picture the journey as been too stressful.

Some poor people believe that the journey of turning things around for themselves is evil, because they will do things they don't want to do, sadly people with this set of mind still lives around me, there ain't no fixing for them, they are good the way they are.

Moreover, there are many businesses that are progressing today because of poor people, and some businessmen have said that in a country where there is a struggle is not good for companies that build costly items, you need to build affordable things for such people to use or consume. You are serving the poor people, a business man I know said this too. 

I think he is right, before coming up with a business idea, first look at your surroundings, don't build what people won't be able to afford.

Poor people have a bigger role they play in rich people's lives.

It is true that most consumers always come from the lower classes. And the rich do need these consumers. There is a process of reciprocity and mutual need in this economic process. And this is where there is a harmony between the two circles that are mutually beneficial to each other. Because both have their respective roles in economic growth.

The worst thing about this situation is that despite the fact that poverty does not actually contribute at all to the growth of the economy, quite the contrary, the people in power prefer to keep it this way, for the same reason that You indicate, they get richer, and they may camouflage their true intentions trying to solve and support these individuals who live in stressful and uncomfortable circumstances, but it is not in their interest as such that they improve at all. The truth is sad, everyone should have the same opportunities, or even be able to have access to a good job that allows them to have a peaceful life. When the economy of a country increases, it theoretically becomes stable, and this happens when jobs are sufficient, if the whole society works, it allows the economy to flow and be maintained, and in addition to this, poverty decreases to such a degree that it is considered almost zero. I would call this achieving social balance, but to achieve that there must be less corruption and more contribution from the rulers.

Unfortunately, this is true. The ones who work hard in the field, in factories, in dangerous places are mostly from the poor while the ones getting the most or earning the most from them are the rich. The rich will only get richer while the poor will word harder and harder but will only get what is given to them, which in most cases not even enough to pay their bills.

Many people think that poor people are the biggest problem, but we have to understand that without poor people there would be no life, no one would want to grow food crops, no one would want to work as a driver delivering groceries, no one would who want to sell food so that there will be no food on the dinner table, the poor have an important role in life.

Being a poor is different from what you've mentioned. All that said here isn't the life of a poor. According to collective data, being poor is unable to meet his basic needs. This includes food, clothing and shelter. If there is increase in the poor people, it means the unemployment in the country is on the rise. This is where government focus on organising different programs to make the poor people's life better. However the impact of the poor people in the economy creates negative thoughts, for this better solution is the distribution of wealth in right proposition than getting accumulated within specific people.

Every country, no matter how good the economy is, and no matter how rich the country is, still have people that can be looked at as poor, even though it is possible that their poverty in that country equals being rich in another country where the economy is in a worst shape, they are still considered poor in that country as long as they are not living up to the standard the rich in that country lives, take Dubai for example, it is commonly said that Dubai is country for the rich, but if we go there, we will still find people that are considered poor by the rich people in Dubai.

 And like it or not, agree with it or not, poor people contribute to the economic growth in the society as well as the country at large, though it is always in their small way, a poor man who is not idle, that is , he works to earn money, is contributing to the economic growth of the country, for example, think of the farmer planting and harvesting crops, food items and taking it to the market to sell, such person is contributing to the growth of that country in terms of food security.

Again, think of the shoe maker, who makes your shoes and charge you, and you pay, that shoe maker is contributing to the growth of the economy in the show making industry, even though this seems insignificant, they are all significant in their little numbers.

The people living in poverty line aren't supposed to exist, the role that they play in the economy is that they are an indicator that there's inefficiency and incompetence when it comes to how the people that's in power run a country's economy. Poverty isn't something that any person should experience even if they are the lowest of the low in a society, anyone should have the access to basic needs like food and shelter. Making sure that everyone has a fair headstart makes for a competitive society that strives for greatness.

Your heart's in the right place but poor people is a generalization and not every farmer is poor. The people that thinks the poor is the problem are the type of people that doesn't think besides for themselves and lacks empathy. And the way you say it, the poor is being romanticized like they are the foundation of society when in reality it's the masses/labor force of a country.

Thank you for this comment as it truly captures my view. The poor are the actual drivers of the economy. The farmers, construction workers, factory workers, sales personnel and indeed those doing most of the jobs are the people that sustain the economy.

Unfortunately, they are controlled by the rich, a tiny fraction of the population. There is a popular saying that the more strenuous the job is, the less the income that come from it. For instance, lawmakers in my country who are about 400 in number, appropriated to themselves $82 million to caution the effect of rising inflation while proposing $588 million for the rest of the population that are about 200 million people. These are people that do little that contribute to the wealth of the country. Their neither near production sites neither do they touch even the farm produce yet they take large share of the proceed. They make laws that are only applicable to the poor who they control.

I understand what you are saying, the government is the one who has a big responsibility if the country has too many poor people and the economy is underdeveloped. But if poverty rates are only a handful in a country, the government cannot be blamed entirely. I mean, why don't you question, why the people around you live a full life while you are poor? Rich or poor depends on ourselves, if you are lazy and refuse to work, you cannot blame others for your poverty.

I usually don't blame anyone, because I know blaming won't make me better, I'll find a way out instead.

It is a mistake to think that farmers are poor people, they are even richer than office workers, business, if you live in my area. Just because they work in a struggle doesn't mean they don't have money. But society needs to have a gap between rich and poor, if everyone is equal, society will perish.

You are right, the higher the number of office workers in a society, the lower the salary. I have witnessed several cases of lawyers who were paid the minimum legal wage, or even no salary in the case of interships (in Spain, contrary to what happens in the USA, for instance, legal or financial professions have little prestige).

About the gap you mention, I agree that it is necessary, but it must also be balanced. The dissapearance of the middle-class will have nefarious effects.

Back on OP's question, IMO the modern role of the poor in the economy nowadays is, surprisingly: to consume.

What the hell are you talking about? You're clearly saying that if there's a few poor people, we should just leave them in abject poverty. Didn't you read the last part of my post? I'll highlight it, see what part there did I talk about giving everything in silver platter to the poor people. Well, yes you don't blame for no reason but if someone is clearly not helping the people when it's their responsibility, will you just stand by and be neutral? Remember who's on the deepest part of hell?

Asking for accountability isn't blaming, people like you are brainwashed so when someone complains about something wrong in the system, you fight those who questions the system instead of joining them.

Yes, it's a mistake because you have a myopic perspective on things as do I in this context. I didn't generalize that all farmers are poor but that's where you went. It's a matter of perspective I guess, you haven't seen or heard of farmers drowning in debt from paying their fertilizers and having their crops underpaid by the markets that they have no choice but to sell there, or the farmers who got massacred because they asked for a piece of land that they've been promised if they work on it. So yeah, not all farmers are poor and not all farmers rich. Are you also saying that there shouldn't be equal opportunity for everyone at the start in the last part of the sentence? And yeah, what made you think that an equal structure in hierarchy will lead to a collapse? Is there an empirical evidence of that?

That's life, everyone will need each other in various ways so that rich people who already have lots of factories and agricultural land will still need poor people to be employed there. And it is also very suitable for those who are poor because they are in need of a job to be able to survive longer, so needing each other like this is what makes balance in life always exist and be maintained. But if one day the rich are able to use other tools such as robots, for example, perhaps the poor will no longer be used by the rich or factory and company owners. Except for only a few as operator officers.

I agree. It will seem like there is balance as both sides need each other to function but in reality, the rich will soon be able to function without the poor as their employees. The rich will only get richer, and it does not matter if the poor is included in their business as employees or not. And the poor? Well once that happens, they need to work harder and make do.

We are all very important at one point or the other and everyone cannot be rich at the same time, we need to identify the uniqueness of man labour in the aspect of work production and organization of labour in every country's economy, the rich people also depends on the poor to help them engaged in manual labor otherwise known as work force or man power in certain situations, they depends on what they locally produced as well for their own survival because the rich can afford to buy them, all these ensure the circulation of resources across the economy and those that depends on this for their survival shouldn't be regarded as poor but labour force under organizational settings.

Does anyone forbid the poor from accessing basic needs? If you know you're poor, why don't you find a way to rise up, but expect and need help from others? Have you ever asked the question, why are your friends and people around you rich and you poor? It seems that you always like to blame others if you are poor or fail.


Farming or raising livestock is like business, it needs to be calculated carefully because the future is unpredictable. If the crops fail, or we have to sell cheaply and lose money, it's largely our fault because we didn't make careful calculations. Like if you lost your business, would you blame others for not buying from you?
My family is a farming family and I understand what you're saying, but my family has never blamed anyone if the crops didn't go as planned. Instead, my family will find a way to fix the next crop instead of blaming the weather or the government.

You seem to just want to put all the blame on the government, on other people when you live in poverty. Your life is yours to decide, no one can decide for you, so instead of stopping blaming, you should find a way out of it.