Helping the Poor

When we understand a little of what makes people poor and what makes people happy, we are ready to attempt a first approximation to the solution of poverty, and devise a plan to help the poor.

Ancient Chinese traditions have a wise saying for good government: love the people as you would your own children. In the case of poor people, this adage is particularly apt. Poor societies require a paternalistic government to lead with vision and disciple in order to evolve out of poverty into prosperity. In addition to the ordinary duties of coordination and execution of day to day governance, the government of a country facing any crisis, especially poverty requires firm and proactive leadership, to influence with vision, to lead with clarity, and to execute with firm resolve. It is not sufficient to have a vision of utopia; it is not sufficient to have the political savvy and skills to push through legislations and lead in the poll; it is not even sufficient to have the strength and charisma that carries a nation through hard times. All the virtues are simultaneously necessary for success.

Most important of all the virtues is the ability of sound financial management. Without exception, every great nation rise on the foundation of a frugal leader, who paved the way of prosperity for future generations. It is a common mistake for left-leaning governments to exhaust the treasury and goes deep into national debt while trying to hand out numerous and generous assistance to every citizen, mirroring the unconditional bottomless love of a parent for a child. Yet, just like a child being smothered with too much love, the poor in such society falls into a trap of dependency that takes generations, if ever, for them to rise out of.

On the other hand, those governments at the other extreme, offering no assistance whatsoever to the poor, allowing them to live or die by their own industry, are no better than those parents who neglect their duties to protect, nurture, and nurish their children.

The true path must be a middle road, where assistance is granted conditionally, depending on forever changing circumstance. How, then, should a government help the poor? Each nation face a unique set of circumstances that require a unique path to a solution. Anyone who offers a panecea is suspect, but sound financial management must be a prerequisite because nothing can be done, unless there is enough money to pay for services. And along the same line of reasoning, any plans that destroy the financial health of a nation is almost certainly bad, except in extreme circumstances, such as the need for a defensive war. Each nation, and the people in it, must consider the circumstances carefully and decide according to their own collective conscience.

Meanwhile, for an individual citizen, what can be done to help the poor?

Christ's story of the good Samaritan is a good illustration of the kind of help that is appropriate. When faced with a victim of robbery in desperate need, the good Samaritan helped in three stages:

1. first aid - providing medical aid, food, and water
2. secure shelter - taking the victim to a familiar hotel to receive better care
3. long term solution - before moving on with his own business, he left clear instructions and money for the inn keeper to provide long term care, until the victim is fully recovered.

All too often, we provide a little first aid, and go on our way. That's what many well-intentioned among us do when faced with the many beggers and pan-handlers on today's urban streets. Yet, Christ taught that it is not enough to simply provide a little aid. To love is to sacrifice, and the Good Samaritan sacrificed his convenience, by taking the victim out of his way to a safe place, where long term care and shelter was available at his own cost. Furthermore, he made certain that someone familiar and trusted would continue to care for the victim.

How does that story help us help the poor in today's infinitely more complex society?

We need to first of all understand that the problem is much more complicated than one can imagine, and the solution is more than simply throwing money at it. The poor is a collection of individuals with diverse needs, and diverse problems. There isn't a single solution that will help them all. However, there are common characteristics that a society can generalize into social programs, and individuals can participate as a part of the solution.

The three part solution of the Good Samaritan is a good starting point:

1. first aid: food banks, homeless shelters, and welfare cheques only provide the basic minimum to meet the needs that all people require
2. low cost social housing, workfare and other social programs provide the next level of secure shelter that gives poor people stability

Most socialist countries have done well up to this point, and yet, the level of poverty is stubbornly high.

What is missing in most cases, is the final step to lift the poor from their immature state, from their weakened economic health into vigorous contributors of society.

The final portion of a solution to poverty must necessarily be long-term:

3. There are many examples in under-developed countries where international aid have proven very successful. Mentoring programs, micro-loans, and specialized schools, just to name a few, have been extremely successful, and cost-effective. These same techniques and programs can certainly do wonder for the poor in wealthy countries. The only missing ingredient is political will. There is little glory in doing social work.

Until teachers and social workers receive the same respect and adoration that movie stars and atheletes get from society, media, and children, our society will be forever trapped along with the poor in our society, outside the gates of utopia. There will always be crime, and depression, both emotional and economic. There will be always speculative bubbles, because concentration of wealth has proven again and again, that when the rich has too much money, and little meaningful purpose to spend it, they will find a way to waste it.

Utopia is a society where the even the poor is happy, and the rich has meaningful lives. And when the poorest ten percent of utopia is helped to the point where they rise to the average, while others, less poor originally, become the bottom ten percent in a richer society, and receive the special care. Eventually, since the special care programs are so effective in lifting people's standard of living, ten percent at a time, almost everyone in utopia will be poor, receiving special care at one time or another. And as a corollary, almost everyone in utopia will be part of the top five percent who will be providing funding and direction for these ever changing special care programs for the "poor".

With a clear direction for these programs to help the poor, the next step towards utopia is to ensure that these programs are executed effectively, which means that the under-paid and over-worked teachers and social workers must be a part of quality control methods that ensure the increased funding to social programs reap the expected harvest in terms of happier and more fulfilling lives. There must be measurable deliverables, and milestones that can provide clear signals to the front-line workers in this war against poverty that we are winning the war one battle at a time. And just like any war, each member of society must contribute to the logistical support for the frontline, either directly or indirectly.

In utopia, each member of society must be fully commited to help lift the whole to a higher plane, in order that no one is left behind.