Poverty on a global level is a difficult issue for many do deal with. While it is widespread in some areas, in others it is lesser so Sub-Saharan Africa can shed much light on this. It is perhaps most interesting, though, if we look at it in the place people least expect: the United States, which some consider to be the most successful country on the planet. Then, after identifying the problems there, we can apply them on a global level.
Many people assert that social standing is of less importance in America than in other cultures. While this is certainly true in some cases (India’s strict, traditional Caste system comes to mind), it really depends on the cultures that you compare it to. Compared to much of Europe today, America is much more divided by class and race. While we like to celebrate the equality that American culture so reveres, the huge gap in wealth, power, and standing between those at the top and those at the bottom shows that Americans are not, unfortunately, all on an equal standing.
Poverty rates in the United States reflect this. The poverty rate for African Americans and Hispanics, as well as other minorities like Native Americans, are much higher than for non-Hispanic whites. Poverty is an obvious indicator of low social standing. As people in situations of poverty are limited in where they can live due to the necessary low cost of what they can afford, they tend only to be able to interact with other people who live near them, likely also of low social standing. They are forced by economic factors into clusters; in urban areas, these are often referred to as “the hood” and “the ghetto” or “the core” for African Americans. The poor standard of living breeds crime and violence, thus making the areas even less desirable for people of any means at all to escape them and leading to what is often referred to as “white flight”, whereby middle and lower-class residents fled or are fleeing to the suburbs.
In the suburbs, then, another kind of social stratification appears, where the middle-class interacts mainly with each other and is free to ignore the social problems plaguing the lower class. They develop beliefs that those stuck in poverty choose to be there and could “pull themselves up” if they chose. Since they are no longer confronted with poverty, they are free to ignore the vicious cycle that its fewer opportunities reinforce and the unique challenges faced by those having to deal with the cycle. They feel that, since they had succeeded, surely everyone has the same opportunity that they did. They do not think about problems like the digital divide, the increasing gap between the skills of those who have regular access to the Internet and technology, for example. They can ignore the implications that this has for children growing up in poverty to secure future employment compared to the future prospects of their own, computer literate children. They are insulated from these harsh realities.
Then there is the American upper class, who tend to rarely interact with other classes as well. They often have little idea what struggles the other classes face. For example, a wealthy banker once expressed his surprise to me during the economic downturn when I mentioned I knew people who were losing their homes.
While the demographics of social stratification in the United States is in constant flux, it was always present, ever since its inception. While in 1776 some would argue that America was more free than most of Europe, it would also have to be pointed out that this generalization would probably have to exclude the African American population, most of whom at that time were being exploited as slaves, given no compensation for their work, and indeed, would not even be considered fully human by the United States Constitution. In fact, an argument could be made that the spiral of poverty for African Americans began with slavery.
What can we learn from looking at the system in the United States on a global level? For starters, we can recognize that it takes money to make money. The cycle of poverty in the United States does itself no favors. The poor continue to become poorer, precisely because they are poor in the first place. The African-American population, in particular, suffers from this, and the root reason is probably not a matter of race but a matter of social status.
Globally, poverty remains a major issue. All of the players on a global scale know that. Even in countries where poverty is widespread, such as China and India, economic growth is being made. With the development of websites such as odesk and elancer, people can drive down rates (on a global scale) in fields such as translation. With the advent of the Internet, for example, people who work in that field, no matter what language, now have a platform on which they can market themselves. While the industry is mostly open, there is no doubt that people charging too little are undercutting the market. If the industry standard is 0.07 cents per word, for example, you are doing a disservice to everyone else in the industry by offering 0.03 cents per word. That is an unsustainable rate and will drive other prices down. While it may seem like a better rate than nothing, it hurts the industry as a whole since people in poorer countries with lower of standards of living can offer rates that are much, much lower than people in areas with higher standards of living can afford to work for. This same principle is why so many help desks are being outsourced overseas, particularly to places like India.
We also see here how paying less for the same thing lowers quality, though. In theory, English is one of the official languages of India. Yet there are many other official languages as well, so most Indians are not native English speakers. In addition, Native India English is very different from other types of English, and is very difficult for many other Native English speakers to understand. This can make communication, particularly over the phone, difficult. While the outsourcers can pay them less because of the low standard of living, they also have to factor in the lost productivity they are creating by making these conversations perhaps last longer than they would with someone in the United States that was paid more but was able to deliver higher quality and less lost time. Perhaps it is still cheaper to use Indian or Bangladeshi labour for a call center, even with the lost quality and productivity. I think most of us have had experience with this. In then end, while it may be cheaper for the customer, it leads to poor brand loyalty. Customers feel put off by being redirected to Indians, who are not native English speakers even though English is a mother tongue for their country and are trying their best. It is interesting to note that such call centers often try to give their reps English “names”. I can only imagine that the experience of working for such an operation for an Indian is not pleasant. They make you give up your identity, adopt a new one, and all because you are in poverty and need a job. It’s shown that low worker satisfaction leads to reduced productivity.
Conditions in India are not up to the standards in the United States. We know that. As they are not in China, Bangladesh, and many other places. One place, though, were we really need to focus on is in Africa. Africa lags far behind every other continent in just about every way it can be measured. Finding ways to feed Africa and reduce the horrible suffering there is also something that needs to be a key driver globally. People starve there, on a regular basis. That’s not something that human society should think is acceptable in the 21st Century.
Of course, people in the United States also starve from poverty. We let our own veterans become homeless. We need to address starvation, both in the West, where it does still occur, and in both the second and third worlds.
What is of high importance is how we handle things in the west on these matters. It is important because, if handled properly, it could bring conditions in poorer areas of the world higher, and reduce the current trend that is pulling the west down at the moment. The major players continue to stay in the U.S., Canada, the E.U., Australia, etc. The problem is that the high standard of living is directly affected by poverty in other nations. Until this is addressed, it will continue to be a problem that affects us all, both locally and on a global scale. Simply choosing to ignore poverty does not make it go away, and it doesn’t make it have any less of an affect on our own society, even if those in the suburbs choose to be blind about how.
References:
Shah, Anup. “The Causes of Global Poverty”. Global Issues. Retrieved from
http://www.globalissues.org/issue/2/causes-of-poverty on 2/24/2013.
“Poverty Main”. U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/ on 2/24/2013.
“Poverty”. The World Bank. Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty on
2/24/2013.
