Can the world be without poverty

[Assface16678]

I think yes, because we already have the money and the technology to help the poor get up and eventually support themselves, they're just there because our human nature is greedy, we aren't naturally altruistic and we were raised to think of ourselves first before anything else. I think with all the money Bezos, Gates, Musk and the other billionaires out there, we can probably eradicate poverty and hunger, not to mention that we will advance much faster as a civilization because everyone has equal opportunity in terms of education, I think we've lost billions of brilliant minds already because of our selfishness, they're in the sweatshops and factories, toiling over nothing not knowing that they have the potential.

[mojun7982]

No matter how equally you divide the wealth there will still be some people who have more money and and still many people who have less money.
Without this the difference in the world we cannot find people who are willing to do odd jobs or fulfill them.

It doesn't matter. The question here is whether the world can be without poverty or not. Poverty may cease to exist, but the wealth disparity may remain. Wealth equality is theoretically possible only in socialist countries. And socialism is a failed concept, as seen from infinite number of examples. Personally it is possible for the governments to manage poverty, if overall wealth levels are high (irrespective of wealth disparity). But that is not possible, in case the overall wealth levels are low. The governments can tax the rich, and distribute a part of it to the poor.

Isn't poverty as a quantitative measure also a moving target? Even if hunger and thirst isn't a thing anymore, maybe you still count as bloody poor and disadvantaged in thirty years from now when you are still driving a Tesla to your workplace in the morning while the middle and upper class is already flying with drones. Now from today's perspective we would say, hey there are worse things in life, but poverty may remain a relative issue. Others are faster than you, more efficient than you, have better computers (or one at all). Others have healthier food, live longer, cleaner water and whatever you can think of. The wealth disparity will remain as a fact, but whether people are overall more satisfied with life is an important question.

[geegaw]

Poverty is a relatively relative term, and everyone can define poverty.
If poverty is eliminated, it means that the world is equal and fair.
The most basic way to get rid of poverty is to rely on labor and get how much money you do. But it is difficult to cross classes. The more you go up, the more you need to broaden your horizons and increase your knowledge reserves.
Poor people are slow to accept information and will accept wrong information.
Learn to control risks, control risks, control desires, and save money.

No matter how equally you divide the wealth there will still be some people who have more money and and still many people who have less money.
Without this the difference in the world we cannot find people who are willing to do odd jobs or fulfill them.

Equally distributed in a day but the future is still ahead, the intellectual and environmental gap and the work that each person is doing will take away the assets of those who are limited in this problems, more precisely, what a person can do creates value and judgment around them, can't let light jobs have the same salary as creators or big bosses, society will gradually lose the sense of development with people's relaxation. Equality only creates more poverty while discrimination increases the opportunity to compete

[Kayum10029]

It is difficult to imagine that there will be no poverty in the world, but it is not impossible. Poverty is a congenital problem of people. People suffer from poverty due to various obstacles. The richest country in the world Today, it has been able to stand tall as the richest country in the world by observing various issues word for word. I believe that poverty will be alleviated if some rules given by the government follow the Tantric plan.

[tiCeR]

Poverty is a relatively relative term, and everyone can define poverty.
If poverty is eliminated, it means that the world is equal and fair.
The most basic way to get rid of poverty is to rely on labor and get how much money you do. But it is difficult to cross classes. The more you go up, the more you need to broaden your horizons and increase your knowledge reserves.
Poor people are slow to accept information and will accept wrong information.
Learn to control risks, control risks, control desires, and save money.

No matter how equally you divide the wealth there will still be some people who have more money and and still many people who have less money.
Without this the difference in the world we cannot find people who are willing to do odd jobs or fulfill them.

Equally distributed in a day but the future is still ahead, the intellectual and environmental gap and the work that each person is doing will take away the assets of those who are limited in this problems, more precisely, what a person can do creates value and judgment around them, can't let light jobs have the same salary as creators or big bosses, society will gradually lose the sense of development with people's relaxation. Equality only creates more poverty while discrimination increases the opportunity to compete

That is a narrow minded view although I get the point you are trying to make here. We still have inequalities that a developed, highly intelligent, empathetic species like we are shouldn't allow to exist. If you take the nurse that is working 100 hours weeks and she can barely take care of their two children financially, we as a society should be sophisticated enough to figure that that is unacceptable. What are you going to tell the nurse in your Darwinistic style rhetoric? Work more hours to compete with the manager? Be more competitive? Who then is going to take care of you when you broke your neck and need 24/7 care for 120 days in a row in an intensive care unit? What about the psychological pressure nurses carry with them day in and day out? Do nurses see people dying everyday? Young kids, parents, people losing their loved ones and the nurses in the middle of those events? How many managers have to deal with death on a daily basis? What happens to a manager when he is fired? He gets a big check. What happens to the nurse when she leaves or gets fired? There are certainly problems in our world that are not to be explained by insufficient competitive endeavors.

[Ozero]

Our world has never been rid of poor states and poor people in terms of providing them with material benefits at a more or less normal level. We could argue that the economies of states as a whole are developing and over time we can hope that the level of material security of each person, although unevenly, will grow.
It would be too optimistic and unrealistic. We are now on the verge of global climate change. Because of this, in a number of states, there will be a sharp shortage of food and water. In many states, it will be necessary to completely rebuild agriculture, which is becoming less predictable and more unprofitable. So there is no hope that poverty will eventually leave us.

[Sithara007]

It is difficult to imagine that there will be no poverty in the world, but it is not impossible. Poverty is a congenital problem of people. People suffer from poverty due to various obstacles. The richest country in the world Today, it has been able to stand tall as the richest country in the world by observing various issues word for word. I believe that poverty will be alleviated if some rules given by the government follow the Tantric plan.

The richest country in the world right now is Qatar (in terms of per capital income). They became the richest as a result of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports and not as a result of "observing various issues word for word". And now the problem is that the other countries doesn't have natural gas or petroleum deposits like Qatar does. And even if they have, there are cases where these resources are not managed properly. The best example is that of Venezuela. Despite having some of the largest petroleum deposits in the world, a majority of the population is still living in abject poverty. The same can be said about other oil producers like Russia, Angola, Nigeria and Iraq.

[Ngemmeng]

It is difficult to imagine that there will be no poverty in the world, but it is not impossible. Poverty is a congenital problem of people. People suffer from poverty due to various obstacles. The richest country in the world Today, it has been able to stand tall as the richest country in the world by observing various issues word for word. I believe that poverty will be alleviated if some rules given by the government follow the Tantric plan.

The richest country in the world right now is Qatar (in terms of per capital income). They became the richest as a result of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports and not as a result of "observing various issues word for word". And now the problem is that the other countries doesn't have natural gas or petroleum deposits like Qatar does. And even if they have, there are cases where these resources are not managed properly. The best example is that of Venezuela. Despite having some of the largest petroleum deposits in the world, a majority of the population is still living in abject poverty. The same can be said about other oil producers like Russia, Angola, Nigeria and Iraq.

I agree with you, abundant natural resources are not a guarantee that all people will be free from poverty. my country has many big gold mines and other natural resources such as oil and coal, but not a few people in my country are still below the poverty line.

[Alisha-k]

First poverty is the state of the mind. One is only poor if the choose to be. It takes dedication and hard work to grow above poverty but when it comes to development and nation's growth then a collective effort is needed. Lots  of persons came from poor homes and turned their story around through dedicated hard work. Poverty is more of a choice.

[syedakhlaque]

It is the reality that "the best investment for a Government is to invest huge capital on education. This investment will give you in return: the best doctor, engineer, and the best expert of all departments of life. Through this investment, there will be good planning and development, and your country will progress by leaps and bound . All these procedures will eradicate the poor and poverty of your country. So the spread of education and awareness is the only solution to poverty.

[Baihaki Khaizan]

Eradicating poverty is indeed difficult to realize but that does not mean it is impossible.

I see there are many poverty reduction programs carried out by countries, including every individual or institution.

However, nothing has been able to change the quality of life of people from the lower layers. Many institutions or foundations or also the government make programs that are not sustainable, so they only last for a few years, because they are stuck on the problem of finding further funds.

So, the right solution in my opinion is, every rich person should always spend a little of their income to help their economy.

[alpamar99]

Eradicating poverty is indeed difficult to realize but that does not mean it is impossible.

I see there are many poverty reduction programs carried out by countries, including every individual or institution.

However, nothing has been able to change the quality of life of people from the lower layers. Many institutions or foundations or also the government make programs that are not sustainable, so they only last for a few years, because they are stuck on the problem of finding further funds.

So, the right solution in my opinion is, every rich person should always spend a little of their income to help their economy.

this will not have a significant impact. and sometimes even though government programs are very good at making plans for poverty alleviation, the reality in implementation is sometimes not in accordance with the existing reality because there are so many obstacles in it such as for example corrupt officials or funds are not channeled properly.
Besides that, the rich have to distribute some of their wealth to people in need. It also seems easy to say, but back to the application of this, it is not as easy as imagined, because in this way the government has to make specifications on the level of wealth and must make managers of the money that is used. generated by the rich.
other than that this kind of rule would not be accepted by some rich people.

[Victorycoin]

Poverty cannot be eradicated unless the standard of living is improved poor is very difficult to eradicate poverty. if the rich people of the society help the poor people of the society then they will be able to improve their quality of life but there are many differences between the rich and the poor in order to alleviate poverty, inequality must be eliminated and the poor must be given their fair share without being exploited. This requires strict legal action by the government.

[Sithara007]

I agree with you, abundant natural resources are not a guarantee that all people will be free from poverty. my country has many big gold mines and other natural resources such as oil and coal, but not a few people in my country are still below the poverty line.

The natural resources belong to the citizens of the country. But if the regime is corrupt, then they will loot these resources for their own and the population may be forced to live in poverty. Look at the case with Russia. They are the largest country (in terms of surface area in the world) and they have some of the largest deposits of natural resources. But most of the population lives in poverty, as a result of decades of stealing by the regime. On the other hand, countries such as Singapore became very rich, despite having hardly any natural resources.

[DibiaVxosis]

Technically, those at the top can solve the poverty but why would they do it? Solving poverty means that they can't find desperate people that will do their bidding so they can stay at the top. I agree that it is possible but we have to be able to convince those at the top that they will benefit more if there isn't poverty, but I know that it will be impossible because once the people at the poverty line is saved, the middle class will not have anything to be fearful because I believe that the rich put the poor people so the middle class are put in their place protecting what they currently from being stolen by the poor.

That's just the mentality of human, the rich always feel if the poor get rich no one will be their errand boy or house maid to carry on their daily activities at home so this is more reason the rich refuses to make the poor more informed and educated so as to fight poverty, instead there offer them menial jobs so as to limit their focus to be in the little salary there get and live their lives in the range of amount they get.

[Wong Gendheng]

Eradicating poverty is indeed difficult to realize but that does not mean it is impossible.

I see there are many poverty reduction programs carried out by countries, including every individual or institution.

However, nothing has been able to change the quality of life of people from the lower layers. Many institutions or foundations or also the government make programs that are not sustainable, so they only last for a few years, because they are stuck on the problem of finding further funds.

So, the right solution in my opinion is, every rich person should always spend a little of their income to help their economy.

Poverty will never go away, we can only improve the standard of living of a poor person but it will not disappear 100%, even many countries have made various efforts to eliminate poverty from hundreds of years ago but there are still poor countries, in my opinion this is not problem because poverty is a part of life.

[suryana]

Eradicating poverty is indeed difficult to realize but that does not mean it is impossible.

I see there are many poverty reduction programs carried out by countries, including every individual or institution.

However, nothing has been able to change the quality of life of people from the lower layers. Many institutions or foundations or also the government make programs that are not sustainable, so they only last for a few years, because they are stuck on the problem of finding further funds.

So, the right solution in my opinion is, every rich person should always spend a little of their income to help their economy.

Poverty will never go away, we can only improve the standard of living of a poor person but it will not disappear 100%, even many countries have made various efforts to eliminate poverty from hundreds of years ago but there are still poor countries, in my opinion this is not problem because poverty is a part of life.

Totally agree with your opinion. Because indeed I believe in all countries have struggled to eradicate poverty , but poverty still exists . This proves that poverty cannot be eliminated 100%, not the government's fault either. But the individual's willingness to change is also the most important factor.

[Vishnu.Reang]

Totally agree with your opinion. Because indeed I believe in all countries have struggled to eradicate poverty , but poverty still exists . This proves that poverty cannot be eliminated 100%, not the government's fault either. But the individual's willingness to change is also the most important factor.

Poverty doesn't exist in a handful of smaller countries such as Monaco and San Marino, but overall I agree with your views. But it is also important to remember that there can be two metrics to measure poverty. The first one is in an absolute sense. If someone doesn't have the ability to take care of his basic necessities (such as food and housing), then you can call him as poor. This absolute poverty doesn't exist in developed nations such as US and UK. The next metric is to use a relative measurement. If someone is earning below 25% of the average national salary, then you can label him as poor. This type of poverty exists almost everywhere.

[terrorJR]

Totally agree with your opinion. Because indeed I believe in all countries have struggled to eradicate poverty , but poverty still exists . This proves that poverty cannot be eliminated 100%, not the government's fault either. But the individual's willingness to change is also the most important factor.

Poverty doesn't exist in a handful of smaller countries such as Monaco and San Marino, but overall I agree with your views. But it is also important to remember that there can be two metrics to measure poverty. The first one is in an absolute sense. If someone doesn't have the ability to take care of his basic necessities (such as food and housing), then you can call him as poor. This absolute poverty doesn't exist in developed nations such as US and UK. The next metric is to use a relative measurement. If someone is earning below 25% of the average national salary, then you can label him as poor. This type of poverty exists almost everywhere.

it is true as you said that monaco is one of the countries with 0% poverty and one of the richest countries because 30% of its citizens are billionaires.
but not all small countries are rich countries depending on government management in the economic sector.
and many countries whose governments have made a mistake in taking action, especially in the economic sector. just an example is the country nauru. a country that is indeed very rich in natural products but they are wrong in managing their finances and the result is now they are on the verge of collapse.

[Sanugarid]

Yes it can, just remove the negative elements in the government and economy but mostly government like corruption, power hunger, discrimination, violence, and militarization, and I think that we will be good to go. And we can also be ruthless against big corporations like Amazon to pay their taxes and it can't be exempted and written off and no bribery or lobbying can get through the people that creates the laws, making those and we will be one step further to eradication of poverty. Creating a sustainable farming and abandoning religion could help too. I added religion because most wars are waged because of God hence the abandonment of religion, and what happens when there's war? That's right death and poverty.