Is poverty a lack of money?

[Republikcoin.com]

I appreciate you.I see many people can't full fill their fundamental rights but they stay in well decorated house.some people i also seen consume three time  sufficient food but they stay in mud made house and they use horse and donkey for communication.Their children go to school by walking.They live happy life and they don’t want expensive car,Building and luxury lifestyle.

Actually, it's not that they don't want luxury cars or buildings that are more livable and an extraordinary lifestyle, but they just haven't been able to get it all so they prefer to enjoy what they have or what they currently have. So that other people see that they can live happily just by having that kind of thing, even though they are also struggling to make their life look better than it already is even though they don't reveal this to other people for now.

So don't judge something just by looking at it, but try to ask them directly so you can find out what they are feeling and also what they are struggling for in their life. After all, very few people in this world are comfortable living in poor conditions, unless they are really forced to enjoy what they currently have.

[1715441881]

1715441881

[1715441881]

1715441881

[gunhell16]

In the generation that we have today, it is speaking that if you don't have money, for most you are a poor person in this world. But there are still many people who even if they don't have money, are still alive over time.

For example, the people who live in the provinces, those who don't have money are usually there but they have food that they get from the lands that they cultivate or farm. Live even if they don't have money. But they are poor people.

[khiholangkang]

In the generation that we have today, it is speaking that if you don't have money, for most you are a poor person in this world. But there are still many people who even if they don't have money, are still alive over time.

For example, the people who live in the provinces, those who don't have money are usually there but they have food that they get from the lands that they cultivate or farm. Live even if they don't have money. But they are poor people.

In terms of state data collection, poverty data is calculated from the level of income, which a person gets every day, which defines the lower, upper class economy. From there why many people who think if they do not have money is someone who is poor even though basically he has food for the needs every day.

To be honest, in my opinion it depends on where you stand and see about poverty itself, if seen from the data and use the economic level in a social class, of course if you have income below the minimum level of the lowest income, then it can be said that the person is poor.
But if you look at the pattern of daily life and they can live even without having money because they can meet their needs from their agricultural products or plantations, then if they are viewed subjectively he is a capable person.

[ancafe]

I see poverty as the inability to provide what you need. So when people assume that poverty is when you don't have money I don't agree. Now what if you have all you need and you don't require money to buy anything, are you poor? Some people live in communities where everyone lives agrarian life. They have all they need because everything they need to survive is available. Food is on the farm, water available and everybody is happy. Although it was hard during the Covid-19 lockdown many people lived without money. I have also seen many people leaving cities and moving to rural areas to live a natural life.

This must be put aside because not everyone lives in rural areas and also cannot see the problem as a whole, how living below the poverty line will be very different when we live in urban areas. There is almost no way to get basic necessities for free in urban areas and you have to spend money to buy everything. It's different if we live in a rural area because there's a lot of land that we can use to grow crops for our daily basic needs, even though it doesn't look luxurious but at least it's far from enough to meet our needs.

So describing poverty in different places will never be the same, so that the classification of poverty living in urban and rural areas will be very different. But in the end poverty can be seen how they make ends meet, buy clothes and have a decent place to live and if these three things are not fulfilled properly, then poverty is very close to those who are unable to adjust.

[Solokan]

In this case, of course, everyone has different views. In my opinion, not everyone can be said to be poor even though they don't have money because in my opinion poverty is a lack of clothing, food and so on.
so basically the poor are people who are lacking.

but there are lots of people who earn big but are still poor because their expenses are so big, but there are also people who have low incomes but can save.

I personally think that in this case it is difficult to predict because we will not be able to see whether someone is poor or not but what is certain is that we will see by the amount of money owned and property, so that it is easier to predict whether the person is rich or poor.

[nlovric]

Poverty is a complex issue that cannot be reduce to a simple lack of money. It is true that poverty is often characterized by a lack of financial resources, it is also broader phenomenon that encompasses a range of social economic and political factors. Poverty can manifest itself in different ways, including inadequate access to food, housing, education, healthcare, and social services. Poverty can also be characterized by social exclusion, discrimination, inequality and powerlessness. Poverty is not just an individual problem but a systematic issue that is deeply rooted in social and economic structures. Poverty can be perpetuated by factors such as unequal distribution of resources, limited opportunities for economic mobility and lack of access to basic services. Addressing poverty requires a comprehensive approach that addresses that multiple dimensions of the problem, including structural inequality and systematic barriers that prevent individuals  and communities from accessing the resources they need to thrive.

Indeed, poverty is a complex problem that goes much beyond a simple lack of resources. Its existence is influenced by a complex network of interrelated social economic and political forces. While a defining aspect of poverty is a lack of money its effects go well beyond that. People that are poor frequently do not have enough access to basic essentials including food shelter educatio healthcare and social services. In addition, social exclusion, prejudice, inequity, and a sense of helplessness are all linked to poverty. It is vital to understand that poverty is a systemic issue that is deeply established into our social and economic institutions rather than just an individual problem. Unfair resource allocation little prospects for economic growth and obstacles preventing access to basic services are all factors that contribute to poverty persistence. A thorough strategy is needed to properly alleviate poverty one that addresses the problem many facets. This strategy must address structural disparities and institutional impediments that deny people and communities access to the resources they require for their growth and well being.

[jaberwock]

Personally I see poverty as the lack of plans to secure the future. Money doesn't define poverty because as long has one is actively engaged in something that renders services to the society even if such doesn't have enough to live big at that point in time such person have a big chance of meeting with a bigger opportunity to someday.

Money is just a reward for consistency and will never be a difinition of poverty, it might define riches to a certain extent but still can't be a full definition of Richies.

Poor people does have plans but they only lack of resources to fulfill it. Money does define poverty. If you have less money, you are considered to be poor. A poor person can work to earn money but not all jobs are about doing a service to the society. There is nothing wrong with that. If we are willing to help the society, we can still do it and we should not expect anything in return.

This looks better than compared to those rich people who don't care about the sake of others. Poor people with a good heart are likely to get lucky someday or a good karma can come with them which will make them wealthy. So I hope they will stay consistent and don't do anything that is evil.

[Wakate]

In the generation that we have today, it is speaking that if you don't have money, for most you are a poor person in this world. But there are still many people who even if they don't have money, are still alive over time.

If you don't have money, it means that you arr poor but you can still be rich in knowledge. But if a person is poor money wise, there is still hope that things can still be better with time so it is wrong for us to discriminate people that are broke financially. Since we know that hands turn, a person that is poor today can still be a rich person with time.

For example, the people who live in the provinces, those who don't have money are usually there but they have food that they get from the lands that they cultivate or farm. Live even if they don't have money. But they are poor people.

There are people that do not have the cash or money to do what they want or buy what they want. They could have landed properties and cultivation that would worth a lot of money. There are even some like when you go to the village that have plenty of lands but do not have the physical cash or wear big clothes or live a luxury lifestyle.

[Fullcoinese]

In summary when you have everything you need to survive and you don't need money, are you poor?

in this world poverty is more often seen as a person's inability from an economic standpoint or you could say a lack of money, but in my opinion poverty is broader meaning not just a lack of money but in this case actually depends on the perspective of each person.
it's simple, in my opinion poverty is a condition where a person is unable to fulfill basic needs for survival such as eating, drinking, shelter and others.
In my opinion, the term poverty is used to support what is called welfare, so that term exists to group a person or group of people who have lower incomes and have difficulty meeting basic needs, so that they can easily get assistance so that they feel well too.

[Crypto Library]

The definition of poverty can vary from person to person. In my personal terms what I think is that where the basic needs of people are being met there is no poverty.
Now coming to your point, the events you describe above have everything but one thing I see missing is treatment. This is also one of the basic human needs. I think that to survive there must be good treatment systems. In the community you are talking about there are other ingredients available for survival, food being one of them. 
Well I wouldn't call them poor in everything but they are perfect in every aspect if they have good medical system.

[|MINER|]

In my personal opinion I think that the proverty calculate by the situation of economic system. The community you mentioned here is living like a normal community. It should not be compared with the current era. They are surviving well on food alone. But I think the context must be different in other places where the quality of life is better and more economically viable than there. And for all these things, the economy is necessary for them to be self-sufficient, so it cannot be said here that without money, people cannot be called proverty.

[JoyMarsha]

Water, food, and shelter are the three most crucial elements for survival. If a person possesses all of these, they are living a life above the poverty line.

How much money a person has in their bank account does not actually define how poor they are. If he can offer three square meals every day, as well as a roof over his head, he should consider himself to be at least somewhat wealthy because he is maintaining a reasonable quality of living.

To be poor means a person that can not afford to eat three good meals per day, not having good cloths and shelter. If you see them, you will know that they are poor in the kind of environment they are living, the food they are eating. Did you know that some people will borrow to eat or depend on someone? Some people can not afford to send their child to school. If someone can not meetup with the basic needs of life, the person is poor. It is not about if the person is agrarian or living in a well developed city.

This is a clear definition of someone being impoverished based on what Oshosondy has said here. If they are powerless to support their family, are unable to eat three square meals a day, depending on others for survival, and appear and dress broken.

[Agbe]

Poverty has only one meaning and in the world many people misunderstanding the meaning of the concept. Op has given the real description not poverty. Poverty is when someone has money but it is not sufficient to buy the things he needed. And that is why there is different between poverty and hunger. Poverty has been said, now look at hungry. Hungry is when the person has no money to buy what he wants is called hunger or hungry. So poverty and hunger which look like synonymous but ironically they antonyms. If anyone one is interested to know more the person should go and read the macro economics deficiencies I'm economics.

[usekevin]

The poverty is caused by the failed to keep the money for your future on earning.When the government made many schemes for the people poverty reduction.The government executive should check the exact way of making reach to the people.When the people in the full poverty,the government should concentrate of giving basic needs as compared to giving free bees to poor people.

[dunfida]

The poverty is caused by the failed to keep the money for your future on earning.When the government made many schemes for the people poverty reduction.The government executive should check the exact way of making reach to the people.When the people in the full poverty,the government should concentrate of giving basic needs as compared to giving free bees to poor people.

Depends on a certain government whether it would really be that applied correctly on choosing up with those worthy eligible individuals or families which are really that on certain state and not into those people who
arent really that struggling at all. Just like here on my country on where there's a program for poor which they would really be given some monthly budget or allocation on having that financial support or back up.
Although it might not really be that big but still a considerable amount for them to be able to sustain and survive on daily living which it is really just that right that it should be given into that worthy beneficiaries
but we've been seeing that there are users or people who do accept out those monthly allocation or funds despite on having that good financial status or income which it is really not that fair at all.
Government should really be that keen when it comes on checking out those legit beneficiaries.

[DanWalker]

The poverty is caused by the failed to keep the money for your future on earning.When the government made many schemes for the people poverty reduction.The government executive should check the exact way of making reach to the people.When the people in the full poverty,the government should concentrate of giving basic needs as compared to giving free bees to poor people.

Whenever governments implement poverty reduction schemes, they must take a multifaceted approach. In order to ensure individuals' well-being and address their immediate needs, it is crucial to provide them with basic needs such as food, protection, medicine, and education. In addition, long-term strategies are also necessary to promote sustainable economic growth, employment, and economic empowerment.

Poverty reduction efforts should include policies that address inequalities, develop skills, provide job opportunities, and distribute resources fairly. Investment in infrastructure, support for small businesses, and social safety nets may be examples of these measures.

[uneng]

Some people live in communities where everyone lives agrarian life. They have all they need because everything they need to survive is available. Food is on the farm, water available and everybody is happy. Although it was hard during the Covid-19 lockdown many people lived without money. I have also seen many people leaving cities and moving to rural areas to live a natural life.

Well, I doubt about it, because nobody can produce everything they need by themselves in order to live with quality and welfare. Those communities can grow their own food and have access to clean sources of water, but they still need clothes, accessories, tools, transport and materials in general to build their houses, work on their businesses and move across the regions.

They need money like everyone else. Despite living in a closed community, they are still part of a wider society and a capitalist system which has its survival based on the financial interactions among its components.

You might say they don't use money to trade, but their self-made goods to barter for another goods and I also think it's unrealistic and too romanticized to be true. It's an utopia, as the currently level we are organized as society demands us to use some kind of currency (money) to execute our deals daily.

[Iranus]

Some people live in communities where everyone lives agrarian life. They have all they need because everything they need to survive is available. Food is on the farm, water available and everybody is happy. Although it was hard during the Covid-19 lockdown many people lived without money. I have also seen many people leaving cities and moving to rural areas to live a natural life.

Well, I doubt about it, because nobody can produce everything they need by themselves in order to live with quality and welfare. Those communities can grow their own food and have access to clean sources of water, but they still need clothes, accessories, tools, transport and materials in general to build their houses, work on their businesses and move across the regions.

They need money like everyone else. Despite living in a closed community, they are still part of a wider society and a capitalist system which has its survival based on the financial interactions among its components.

You might say they don't use money to trade, but their self-made goods to barter for another goods and I also think it's unrealistic and too romanticized to be true. It's an utopia, as the currently level we are organized as society demands us to use some kind of currency (money) to execute our deals daily.

My family also lives in the countryside, wherewith basic foods like rice or vegetables and poultry, we can be almost self-sufficient for a long time.
But after all, to maintain those things, we also need money, without money, we will not be able to have those things. Indeed, wherever we live in the world today, we still need money, without money, we will never have a full life. When you have enough food on the table, but you don't have other things like a house, car, phone, you can't call it rich. So no money means we are poor.

[SOKO-DEKE]

In summary when you have everything you need to survive and you don't need money, are you poor?

People may have different ideas about what poverty means, but in my opinion, it is not being able to afford to meet your basic needs, such as food, clothing, and other necessities. Lack of resources to address basic issues As a result, I consider it to be poverty if someone can provide three meals per day and clothing, but lacks the funds to handle potential problems. I don't believe the poverty rate in many countries will be high if poverty is merely defined as the inability to give three meals per day and clothing, as many people are always able to accomplish.

[CageMabok]

This must be put aside because not everyone lives in rural areas and also cannot see the problem as a whole, how living below the poverty line will be very different when we live in urban areas. There is almost no way to get basic necessities for free in urban areas and you have to spend money to buy everything. It's different if we live in a rural area because there's a lot of land that we can use to grow crops for our daily basic needs, even though it doesn't look luxurious but at least it's far from enough to meet our needs.

This is indeed not the same because a place or environment can be a very basic influence on everyone, especially for those who have to always buy everything when they need it. Of course it will be very different from those who can still get it for free in the countryside through their own neighbors or grow their own crops for what they often consume daily. So this will obviously never be the same because in urban areas there is absolutely no land to grow crops except for only opening businesses such as shops and also other services such as offices.

So describing poverty in different places will never be the same, so that the classification of poverty living in urban and rural areas will be very different. But in the end poverty can be seen how they make ends meet, buy clothes and have a decent place to live and if these three things are not fulfilled properly, then poverty is very close to those who are unable to adjust.

In this case I also quite agree with what you say because I also see the difference between those who are poor in rural areas and those who are said to be poor but live in urban areas. And the very basic difference is in their level of income and in the way they meet their needs, because those who live in rural areas can still lead a life with below average income. Meanwhile, those who live in urban areas must always try to earn above average income so that they can be far from difficulties in their lives.