Is the government can really make a way to end poverty or it depends on us?

[Unbunplease]

I have read many comments on this topic from different pages and noticed that many concepts are vague for many. All economists recognize that the capitalist system cannot continue without the existence of a poor class to replace the tools of production in jobs that machines cannot do.
In fact, it is an impoverished class. The owners of the bourgeois class will seek to preserve it in the same miserable conditions of doing business. The poor are part of the economic cycle in the capitalist system. Therefore, we find assistance programs for the poor, and we do not find programs to eradicate poverty, because it is simply not possible in the current world system. Even with the development of machinery and automatic industries, this increases the number of poor people who will be compensated by the machine.

I agree with you. The rich are unlikely to make it so that there are no poor (after all, it is the lack of money that makes the poor work for the rich). And the poor, if he suddenly becomes rich, will be forced to accept the rules of the game, and will himself do everything to keep the poor. Yes, he will do charity, but it will be within the system, with the expectation that the number of poor people will not decrease (and will not increase much).

[1715584768]

1715584768

[1715584768]

1715584768

[1715584768]

1715584768

[1715584768]

1715584768

[Poker Player]

I have read many comments on this topic from different pages and noticed that many concepts are vague for many. All economists recognize that the capitalist system cannot continue without the existence of a poor class to replace the tools of production in jobs that machines cannot do.
In fact, it is an impoverished class. The owners of the bourgeois class will seek to preserve it in the same miserable conditions of doing business. The poor are part of the economic cycle in the capitalist system. Therefore, we find assistance programs for the poor, and we do not find programs to eradicate poverty, because it is simply not possible in the current world system. Even with the development of machinery and automatic industries, this increases the number of poor people who will be compensated by the machine.

I agree with you. The rich are unlikely to make it so that there are no poor (after all, it is the lack of money that makes the poor work for the rich). And the poor, if he suddenly becomes rich, will be forced to accept the rules of the game, and will himself do everything to keep the poor. Yes, he will do charity, but it will be within the system, with the expectation that the number of poor people will not decrease (and will not increase much).

You have remained in the 19th century, in Marx's ideas. What is this bourgeoisie? In Marx's time you could not earn money with signature campaigns comfortably from your computer as you are doing. The difference in Marx's time between the working class and the upper class was that the working class depended exclusively on their labor to earn money while the bourgeoisie and the upper class had financial assets that provided them with income. Today that is much more blurred, as you yourselves have Bitcoin, which is a financial asset, you can buy stocks and mutual funds from your cell phone for as little as $10 the standard of living for a worker has risen enormously in these 200+ years.

But you guys keep on with your victim mentality and I'm sure you'll do just fine.

[coupable]

I have read many comments on this topic from different pages and noticed that many concepts are vague for many. All economists recognize that the capitalist system cannot continue without the existence of a poor class to replace the tools of production in jobs that machines cannot do.
In fact, it is an impoverished class. The owners of the bourgeois class will seek to preserve it in the same miserable conditions of doing business. The poor are part of the economic cycle in the capitalist system. Therefore, we find assistance programs for the poor, and we do not find programs to eradicate poverty, because it is simply not possible in the current world system. Even with the development of machinery and automatic industries, this increases the number of poor people who will be compensated by the machine.

I agree with you. The rich are unlikely to make it so that there are no poor (after all, it is the lack of money that makes the poor work for the rich). And the poor, if he suddenly becomes rich, will be forced to accept the rules of the game, and will himself do everything to keep the poor. Yes, he will do charity, but it will be within the system, with the expectation that the number of poor people will not decrease (and will not increase much).

You have remained in the 19th century, in Marx's ideas. What is this bourgeoisie? In Marx's time you could not earn money with signature campaigns comfortably from your computer as you are doing. The difference in Marx's time between the working class and the upper class was that the working class depended exclusively on their labor to earn money while the bourgeoisie and the upper class had financial assets that provided them with income. Today that is much more blurred, as you yourselves have Bitcoin, which is a financial asset, you can buy stocks and mutual funds from your cell phone for as little as $10 the standard of living for a worker has risen enormously in these 200+ years.

The difference is not great between what is happening today and what was happening in the 19th century, since the economic system has not changed in anything except that it has evolved.  When you work on the Internet using your phone, you do not belong to the bourgeoisie, and you are not in the working class, since you run your own business.  This is called the middle class by the concepts of our time and Marxism calls it the petty bourgeoisie, and it is a privileged class compared to the working class and has the opportunity to join the bourgeoisie.

[axxo]

Ending poverty it requires collective effort from both the individuals and government. The government is the one who implements and legalize the policies, laws and programs to reduce poverty and they are responsible in providing assistance to those who are in need. It is also depends on the choices and actions of each and every individuals to improve their life situation. To end poverty it requires full effort and change of individuals to their own lives.

[Argoo]

Ending poverty it requires collective effort from both the individuals and government. The government is the one who implements and legalize the policies, laws and programs to reduce poverty and they are responsible in providing assistance to those who are in need. It is also depends on the choices and actions of each and every individuals to improve their life situation. To end poverty it requires full effort and change of individuals to their own lives.

I fully agree with your opinion. But the level of prosperity and poverty in a particular country also depends on the general state of the world economy and other factors, such as the presence of military and other military conflicts, natural disasters and man-made disasters, and recently also on the speed of climate change on our planet. These and other similar factors greatly influence the result of the common efforts of the people and the government to improve the standard of living in the country.

[Velemir Sava]

what people blame is government policy. If the government sided with the common people, I don't think there would be demonstrations everywhere.
but what we all need to know is, the government will not be able to end the poverty of its people, but the government at least opens up opportunities and makes it easier for whatever the people do to cover the economic needs of the community as long as what is done by the people does not conflict with norms and laws

While it may be true that individual efforts are important in overcoming poverty, it is also important here to acknowledge the role of government in addressing this problem when relying solely on individual efforts may not be sufficient to address the systemic problems and structural inequalities that contribute to poverty. .

Admittedly or not, the government also opens up opportunities and has the responsibility to create and implement policies and programs aimed at reducing poverty and improving the welfare of its citizens as a whole, for example social safety nets, access to education, health services, and employment opportunities, meaning that there are efforts more than government can significantly reduce poverty and create a more just society.

As for Regulatory support The crypto space I think is still in its infancy, and regulation related to cryptocurrency is still not well established in many jurisdictions creating legal and financial uncertainty for individuals who want to get involved in cryptocurrency.

[tjtonmoy]

Government plays an important role in this, but it also depends on us. How we take approach in this kind of situation plays a major role. Inflation will happen no matter what, so instead of preventing it, we need to be prepared for it. So that the effect is less in our life. We can not stop inflation because it could happen by any uncertain events.
So, creating a favorable business environment will help people to find more opportunities to make a good living. But it will take combined effort from the government and individual peoples. Both working together can help reduce the amount of poverty by fighting the inflation and prepare for the time when it will come. Individual effort to make our life better will only help us, not everyone. People are lacking opportunity to grow. So, government can help in this scenario to create more opportunities, but we need to take that opportunity to make our life better and also help others. There's a saying that goes like this, "Help yourself, in that process you will help others".

[mm2543363580]

Government can provide with you with some initiative but that totally depend on you how you avail it ,ending poverty is your decision and hardwork. And most of all your determination is everything that's required to end poverty .
You cannot rely on government to do something on this topic.

[CryptoSlater]

It depends on Amazon, believe me or not.

https://cointelegraphfeed.com/?amazon-creates-amz-token-06-12

[Mahanton]

I have read many comments on this topic from different pages and noticed that many concepts are vague for many. All economists recognize that the capitalist system cannot continue without the existence of a poor class to replace the tools of production in jobs that machines cannot do.
In fact, it is an impoverished class. The owners of the bourgeois class will seek to preserve it in the same miserable conditions of doing business. The poor are part of the economic cycle in the capitalist system. Therefore, we find assistance programs for the poor, and we do not find programs to eradicate poverty, because it is simply not possible in the current world system. Even with the development of machinery and automatic industries, this increases the number of poor people who will be compensated by the machine.

I agree with you. The rich are unlikely to make it so that there are no poor (after all, it is the lack of money that makes the poor work for the rich). And the poor, if he suddenly becomes rich, will be forced to accept the rules of the game, and will himself do everything to keep the poor. Yes, he will do charity, but it will be within the system, with the expectation that the number of poor people will not decrease (and will not increase much).

You have remained in the 19th century, in Marx's ideas. What is this bourgeoisie? In Marx's time you could not earn money with signature campaigns comfortably from your computer as you are doing. The difference in Marx's time between the working class and the upper class was that the working class depended exclusively on their labor to earn money while the bourgeoisie and the upper class had financial assets that provided them with income. Today that is much more blurred, as you yourselves have Bitcoin, which is a financial asset, you can buy stocks and mutual funds from your cell phone for as little as $10 the standard of living for a worker has risen enormously in these 200+ years.

The difference is not great between what is happening today and what was happening in the 19th century, since the economic system has not changed in anything except that it has evolved.  When you work on the Internet using your phone, you do not belong to the bourgeoisie, and you are not in the working class, since you run your own business.  This is called the middle class by the concepts of our time and Marxism calls it the petty bourgeoisie, and it is a privileged class compared to the working class and has the opportunity to join the bourgeoisie.

Year by year, inflation do becomes worst and it would be something inevitable into the future on which it would really be just that right that you should really be finding other ways for you to have other source of income on which on the time that inflation becomes worst then you could be able to survive somewhat and this is the primary thing that you should really be having in mind so that you would really be able to
survive on whatever financial difficulties on which  you would really be able to encounter in future years. Dont make yourself that getting relying on government about providing on something like having a job
or some necessity kind of supply or support which we know that it would really be just temporal on this case.

Poverty is something a global problem that we do have in the world today on which certain places does have different levels of it and the government which are trying out to solve it out but its not
something that could be resolved or wiped out since we know that population do becomes big and it would be normal that having tons of people requires or does need lots of jobs
and if there's lacking of it then this is where unemployment bloats out.

[Crypto Library]

In my country i observed so many people doing rally and blame the government why the basic needs price rise and the salary is still very low and not enough for daily expenses, is this the effect of the Ukraine and russia war that makes the gas or crude oil so high at price and they pass the gas expenses to the product and it ends to very high price of the basic needs that make us very poor, I see government has a move to resolve the problem but many people are still blaming the government.

To alleviate poverty or to make a country economically self-sufficient, the people of that country contribute just as much as the government of that country contributes. So it depends both of us and the government.
The government is engaged in voting by us, the government mainly conducts leadership activities such as guiding various directions, making laws, implementing laws, etc. And after the government formulates this law, we need our help to implement it, if we do not behave like good citizens, do not follow the laws of the country, and condone corruption, then the development of the country will be hindered. So our efficiency plus respect for the law, as well as the corruption-free head of government of that country, play a role in a country's economic development or poverty alleviation.

[Dzwaafu11]

I'll respond to your topic before I read what you have to said. Yes, governments are in charge of combating poverty by providing citizens with jobs that they can rely on to survive. In my opinion, if someone has a job, he will never be completely without anything; even if the pay is meager, it is better than continuing to be jobless.

In my country i observed so many people doing rally and blame the government why the basic needs price rise and the salary is still very low and not enough for daily expenses

People need to complain about that because government is the only solution to their problem. However, if the salary is plenty I believe poverty will not be too much of a problem, but when someone is collecting a little amount of money, how do you think they will survive without taking loans? You know, even taking loans can be a course of action, but as a salary earner, they also have family at home to feed, and if the money is very small, there is no way to reach out to meet their needs.

[Ebede]

Government can end poverty if they really want to do it, there are several ways government can do this and is by creating enabling environment for investors to come in for business, we should know that Government do not have sufficient jobs for their citizens, the creation of jobs is been done through government and private partnership either by training citizens on skills and after they acquire the skills the have to be given loan or establishment funds to set them on the right track as so doing poverty will be eradicated to a particular level not totally.

[DrBeer]

I have read many comments on this topic from different pages and noticed that many concepts are vague for many. All economists recognize that the capitalist system cannot continue without the existence of a poor class to replace the tools of production in jobs that machines cannot do.
In fact, it is an impoverished class. The owners of the bourgeois class will seek to preserve it in the same miserable conditions of doing business. The poor are part of the economic cycle in the capitalist system. Therefore, we find assistance programs for the poor, and we do not find programs to eradicate poverty, because it is simply not possible in the current world system. Even with the development of machinery and automatic industries, this increases the number of poor people who will be compensated by the machine.

I agree with you. The rich are unlikely to make it so that there are no poor (after all, it is the lack of money that makes the poor work for the rich). And the poor, if he suddenly becomes rich, will be forced to accept the rules of the game, and will himself do everything to keep the poor. Yes, he will do charity, but it will be within the system, with the expectation that the number of poor people will not decrease (and will not increase much).

You are mistaken!
Or rather, you are partially mistaken. Let me explain.
In the capitalist DEVELOPED world, the middle class is very important. It is a CLIENT class that buys and consumes the products and services of producers. And if, for example, the middle class collapses in the U.S. right now, it will really become a tragedy for the U.S. economy.
As you know, in a balanced, quality economy, its life cycle requires a constant circulation of money. More precisely, a chain of money-goods-services-money. And accordingly, the poor population destroys this chain. No consumption - no production and sales, no production and sales - no profit and income companies ...
But what you said, is 100% consistent with countries with underdeveloped economies and backward development in general. There it is profitable to force people to work for a penny, creating products and services with a very low cost (at the expense of almost free labor). At the same time there is still consumption. And the goods with close to zero production cost, consumed by the population at a low price - will still bring more profit to the local "rulers".

[Uruhara]

Government can provide with you with some initiative but that totally depend on you how you avail it ,ending poverty is your decision and hardwork. And most of all your determination is everything that's required to end poverty .
You cannot rely on government to do something on this topic.

That's right because in the end it is us who have to try to change the circumstances of our life to be better and better. The government only has a duty to facilitate us. but in the end it will depend on us.

even if for example we are given a salary by the government or given capital by the government to build an independent business. now if we are not good at using the capital money or we are not able to build a business with the capital money then of course we will still not succeed in changing our life circumstances. the point is everything starts and must start from ourselves.

[coupable]

Let's admit that a truly balanced and quality economy must prioritize the needs and well being of all its citizens, not just those in the middle and upper classes.
I totally agree with the opinion that the middle class plays an important role in the economy, as a healthy economy requires a diverse range of consumers among all income levels. However, it is important to note that focusing on the middle class only may ignores the purchasing power of lower income classes, whom we can't deny their contribution to the circulation of money in the economy. The idea that poverty destroys the chain of structural is flawed, as lower income class often spend a higher percentage of their income on essential needs (goods and services). Furthermore, the view point that underdeveloped economies rely on cheap labor and low cost goods is a gross oversimplification that ignores the complex factors at play in these situations.

[Kelvinid]

The government builds opportunities to help their people to make a living and survive but if we talk about ending poverty, we can't just rely on them solely, we also have to help ourselves to grow and increase our finances because it was the not government's responsibility. But I couldn't blame some people for questioning how their leaders respond to the needs of their citizens, some corrupt leaders won't see how to help them instead, they are prioritizing themselves to benefit the money from the people.

[erep]

The government builds opportunities to help their people to make a living and survive but if we talk about ending poverty, we can't just rely on them solely, we also have to help ourselves to grow and increase our finances because it was the not government's responsibility.

The government cannot reduce poverty for one period but it takes time to implement several new strategies to reduce poverty in the annual term, the annual strategy must ensure that it can reduce poverty to reach the target of 5-10% of data poverty and the government can plan business capital strategies for the majority of people to develop business so that the government's program to end poverty will be realized quickly.

But I couldn't blame some people for questioning how their leaders respond to the needs of their citizens, some corrupt leaders won't see how to help them instead, they are prioritizing themselves to benefit the money from the people.

The corrupt leader did not have a program for people's welfare during his leadership era because their program focused on trimming the state treasury budget to divert personal cash accounts with sneaky tricks without the corruption investigation agency knowing. Countries with corrupt leaders will never progress under any circumstances, be wise in choosing leaders in the next period and assess them according to their perspective without persuasion from anyone, assess their achievements and educational history.

[bluebit25]

Rising prices and economic hardship for individuals can have many different causes, among them the effects of global events such as the Ukraine and Russia wars as you mentioned. However, the tension between the two countries is only one of the causes of price impact and economic hardship for individuals. The government often has policies and measures to help alleviate economic hardship for people, including social insurance programs, unemployment benefits, or incentives for businesses to develop to create jobs. do for the people. However, solving the problem of poverty reduction depends on both the government and the social community. The government can provide supporting policies and programs, but it also requires the participation and support of civil society organisations, volunteers, and community representatives to achieve this goal.

[HajiBagi]

In my country i observed so many people doing rally and blame the government why the basic needs price rise and the salary is still very low and not enough for daily expenses, is this the effect of the Ukraine and russia war that makes the gas or crude oil so high at price and they pass the gas expenses to the product and it ends to very high price of the basic needs that make us very poor, I see government has a move to resolve the problem but many people are still blaming the government.

Currently, the government does not consider the needs of the populace; instead, they just consider what would fill their pockets and allow them to enjoy time with their families. People chose the government to safeguard their lives and provide for their needs but government never thinks of that. High prices of goods and salaries are the most common items that create protests these days in many countries, and the government is doing nothing about it.
What I'm trying to say is that the government isn't doing anything to end poverty because so many graduates aren't finding work, the government has devalued education these days, and so many young people are suffering and accusing education of being a fraud. It would be better if we didn't rely on the government.