How do we defeat poverty in the world?

I could call this blog "the gap". Because the gap between the richest and the poorest, both within nations, and globally, is growing and with it a whole range of social disorders from addiction and domestic violence to organised crime (see R Wilkinson and K Pickett, The Spirit Level-why equality is better for everyone. See also Max Rushbrooke, ed; Inequality-a New Zealand Crisis; and the 2014 study by Inner City Mission Speaking for Ourselves-the truth about what keeps people in poverty by those who live in it).

I'm not an economist. I hear arguments from those who think the current free market/open competition flavour of Capitalism is the solution to all the world's problems and those who believe the opposite, that it is the cause of growing poverty and all the social ills that come with it. The one thing I am convinced of is that those who defend the current capitalist ideas and spout the now well worn belief that "economic growth" of a nation as a whole will "trickle down to the poor" are wrong. This has been thoroughly debunked for many years. What I do not fully understand is the mechanisms by which the opposite seems to happen fairly consistently. Economic growth following the current ideologies seems fairly consistently to increase the gap between the richest and poorest in a nation. Wilkinson and Pickett document one or two nations who have intentionally taken radical steps to close the gap between the richest and poorest and show how this has benefited everyone, including the richcst in those nations.  There are obvious reasons why economic growth might only benefit the wealthiest and not those who are poor. We only need to ask who is in control of such measures to create economic growth. wealth and power go hand in hand just as poverty and powerlessness do.  So measures to create growth are bound to favour those in control of those measures. However I think there are other mechanisms besides the self-interest of those in power. I think many political and business leaders genuinely believe the poor will benefit from their effort to generate growth in a nation. 

What is needed is a recognition that the gap between the richest and poorest in a nation will only be closed by taking intentional steps to ensure that the needs of the poorest are met. In other words, a nation must gradually give to all its citizens some things as a right that comes with being alive. When  certain targetted basics are freely given to all, not means tested, simply given, no matter how poor or wealthy, that reduces the suffering of poverty and  powerlessness in a nation. Three basics come to mind: a minimum access to nutritious food, free medical care and free education. These things are not new but have been relentlessly undermined in nations which have bought into the current dominant idealogies.

The other thing which I believe is needed (and this will seem to contradict what I have just said above)  is bottom  up grown by intentionally supporting entrepreneurial initiatives by people who have no employment. When I recently visited Kenya I was struck by the reality that, without a safety net to provide for unemployed people, every "unemployed" person was self-employed, selling fruit and veges, selling clothes, people with cars driving people without them, and so on. In this country so many businesses fail. In Kenya, if your business fails, you starve. It does seem to breed certain survival skills in small businesses that our easier environment does not.

How could these two be reconciled? If some hardship is necessary to build into a nation's citizens from their birth the kind of work ethic and basic understanding necessary for self-employment AND some level of fundamental provision of needs is necessary as well, can these be balanced? 

Perhaps a way to think about this is to keep our eyes on the connection between poverty and powerlessness. People who are poor often know some single thing that might change everything for them. Sometimes that has to with education and upskilling. A person knows that, with a particular qualification, they could get work. Sometimes it  has to do with undercapitalisation.  A person has a sound business  plan but no money in the bank to get it to a point where it can generate income. Gifting a person the fees to get a qualification or providing micro-loans to people to enable them to get a business off the ground are ways that empowering a person reduces  poverty. 

Similarly though, as the Uganda UNSFP quickly recognised, feeding children enables children to learn. And Paul Odiwuor whose Kenyan Permoafrica school teaches permaculture gardening and farming to marginalised people has recognised that, for young women, the lack of underclothing and sanitary products is a barrier to education. Kayamba Enock in Uganda has identified the same issue in his high school. So the lack of basic needs, in itself, creates powerlessness and hopelessness. So does natural disaster like drought  or flooding. GIven people hope that, with hard work and support, they can change their  situation, is a key to addressing poverty. 

Which perhaps points to a weakness in my first suggestion of simply treating certain basics as a right for being alive.  Perhaps that right needs to be combined with some fundamental responsibilities, like hard work. St Paul wrote to one Church, "If they don't work, don't let them eat."  He was not addressing unemployment. He was addressing people who were travelling around sponging off the local churches. "Work" as Paul was meaning it, did not necessarily mean they had to have a paid job and be contributing financially but that they had to be contributing to the community if they were receiving from it.

This doesn't address how the lack of a social welfare safety net in nations like Kenya motivates people to be self-employed.  I have often said fear is a lousy motivation for anything yet fear of death does seem to have one good affect on some nations! 

I think I will leave this blog right there, leaving some gaping holes in my arguments, and invite a conversation from people who know far more than I about some of these things.