Poverty is not very discussed here... It seems that the origin of poverty is in the first world countries wild consumption... Here is some "evidence"... http://members.tripod.com/~sadashivan_nair/quotpovertyquotasubject/ http://www.unesco.org/education/poverty/index.shtml http://www.undp.org/poverty/overview/ http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/wssd/index.html From the site [I]http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/44/177.html[/I]: "The focus of this year's report is consumption and the widening gap between the world's rich and poor. Some 86 per cent of expenditures for personal consumption are made by just 20 per cent of the world's people - the rich. The report predicts that global consumption of goods and services will top $24 trillion (U.S.) this year, six times the amount in 1975, as people consume more in food, energy, education, transportation, communication and entertainment than ever before. But the report finds "gross inequalities" that have left more than 1 billion of Earth's nearly 6 billion people unable to meet even their basic needs. Almost three-fifths of the 4.4 billion people in the developing world live in communities without basic sanitation; nearly one-third don't have safe drinking water; one-quarter lack adequate housing. And for most of the world's poorest, walking is the only mode of transportation. Market globalization has increased demand for luxury items, even in poor countries, the report says. And it warns that social standards may be rising faster than incomes. "Household spending for conspicuous consumption can crowd out such essentials as food, education, health care," the report says. But developing countries are nowhere near the levels of consumption in the world's richest countries. The wealthiest one-fifth of the world's population eats 45 per cent of all the meat and fish consumed, burns up 58 per cent of total energy, has 74 per cent of the world's telephone lines and owns 87 per cent of its vehicles. And runaway consumption creates a double jeopardy for people in the developing world: They don't get to enjoy the consumption, but they suffer the effects of environmental degradation."
Truthseeker Are you trying to say poverty did not exist until we had this separation of 1st world, 2nd world, et cetera? You really think there was no poverty anywhere before this? There is a problem with those figures, and the interpretation. If I buy a regular evening meal here in Australia it might cost me AU$10. A regular evening meal in Thailand cost me the equivalent of about AU$0.50, and it was quite a nice filling meal. The reason 20% of the world spends 86% of the money on personal consumption is because the other 80% of the world doesn't have to pay as much for the same value. To illistate my point I would direct your attention to China and India. In those two countries alone we ifnd a third of the Earth's human population. They are mostly very poor. Yet most of them eat enough to work, reproduce, and generally thrive. Basically, the comparison of economies and personal consumption isn't really accurate or fair, since it neglects to mention that the higher your currency is, the more you pay for things. This really depends on which standards you use to judge these things. The entire human race lived without what we now call "basic sanitation" not too long ago. Those countries which now have that sanitation have it because they worked for it. Countries like Ethiopia, on the other hand, don't have much of it because their leaders are greedy filthy scum who suck up 99% of their country's wealth and produce. Poverty in Ethopia is not Australia's fault; it is the fault of the Ethopian leadership. I really don't see why you included or highlighted this section. It's very obvious, to be expected. If I work harder than my neighbour and I am far better at developing things than my neighbour, I should have more nifty gadgets and more luxuries than my neighbour. It's not my fault if my neighbour is such an idiot that he decides to develop nuclear weapons instead of a water supply. If they stopped developing nuclear weapons and crapping all over each other, they might be able to enjoy some consumption. The only reason Ethopia, for example, is a crappy place is because the locals are always screwing each other over.
Adam, There were. But it wasn't concentrated in some countries, it was spread and balanced. How much is this in Thailand's currency and how much an average person profits per month in Thailand? Do you know how much a brazilian doctor earns? Do you know how many taxes we have to pay? Do you know how expensive is the cost of life in a third-world country? Look, Australia has a nice economy. You pay somewhat highter prices in Australia, but comparing with the prices in Thailand... If you compare what you earn with what you spend in Australia and do the same thing in Thailand, you will see that it's less expensive in Australia. Thailand is only less expansive for you because you earn a lot of money compared with Thailand's people.:bugeye: Enough to survive... Otherwise they wouldn't be a third of Earth's human population, they just wouldn't exist anymore...!:bugeye: You forgot to concider the salary and cost of life in third world countries... Not mentioning Africa... It's not always the fault of the countries leadership. Sometimes it is, for sure... However, this doesn't exlpain the problems in a third-world country... Work harder...?????:bugeye: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Do you work harder tahn a child that works at least 14 hours per day in a shoes factory in Honduras??:bugeye: I don't think so...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Besides that I'm talking about basic things. There are many people who live below what we call poverty... Enjoy comsumption? We are talking about basic things here, not luxuries. Developing countries are not at war. They have somewhat the same condition though. Look to Argentina, for example. Not pretty...
