Treatment for Chronic Poverty

Those suffering from acute poverty are most visible, but not most numerous. The impact and effects of the chronically poor on society far outweigh those from acute poverty. The children living in poverty form the majority of those suffering from chronic poverty. These children carry the consequences of growing up poor. Although some rise to the occasion and bloom beyond anyone's expectation, a much larger number of children with the same potential as those born in rich families are stunted by the despair and hopelessness and become stuck, as their parents were, in the chronic cycle of always depending on the government or charity.

It is this vicious cycle of dependency that a society must break if there is any hope for utopia. If not, the consequences of perpetual despair and hopelessness are crime, drugs, addition, lost opportunities, and wasted lives.

The antidote to despair and hopelessness is not as some conservative think tanks might suggest, to let them pull themselves by their own bootstrap, for the poor children to hunker down and learn to be self-disciplined. Admittedly, they are correct in the final destination, that ultimately, we want every citizen to be self-displined (not just the poor, but also the rich), and each person to be self-sufficient, (indeed, more than that, but to be contributing member to be of service to others). However, their over-zealous passion for laissez-faire often blinds them to the need for compassion. Would they ask a wounded man lying on the road to get up and treat his own injuries? Would they tell a hungry child to go learn agriculture, and grow food? The chronically poor needs first aid, as well as security, in order to find their own boots, before they can pull themselves by their own bootstraps. It is this breathing space that governments and charitable organizations can, and should, provide, not just out of compassion, by out of economics.

The cost of chronic proverty is not only measured in human suffering, but also economically in terms of expenditures in health care cost, crime and the cost to maintain order, and most of all, in terms of lost opportunities. A society with a quarter of its citizens living in poverty is certainly poorer, and its government collects much less in taxes, than a society with all its citizens living in moderate comfort, and spending more disposable income. Acts of compassion to help the poor to help themselves are also acts of profitable business with no down-side. Only a stubborn misguided faith in outdated myths about the poor would allow any reasonable person from doing the right thing.

What is the right thing for the chronically poor? In additional to what they receive in most liberal socialist countries, what else do they need to rise above their condition? Just like those who afflicted with acute poverty, they must first believe. The chronically poor have been so conditioned by their own history and environment of poverty that they see nothing else in the future. As Eleanor Roosevelt so poetically put it, "Vision is for those who believe in the beauty of their dreams." When anyone, including the poor, believes in the beauty of their dreams of a better future, they will rise by whatever means necessary to their rightful place in society. The first role of government is therefore to inspire, to lead, with a vision of beautiful dreams, not ephemeral, but practial, with a plan, not of bureaucracy, but of actionable deliverables that can be measured. Most of all, a government of the people, for the people, must be also accountable to the people.

One of the most successful international foreign aid programmes to developing countries is the supply of micro-credit to entrepreneurs to start their own business, with mentoring and advise from professionals along the way. The same can be applied to the chronically poor, helping them to earn a living instead of relying on welfare. Unconditional aid, although well-intentioned and definitely needed in urgent and desperate cases, can be also a dangerous crutch.

Another successful program has been low cost housing via Habitat for Humanity, where the receipients often build their own homes using material and expertise provided by the local donating organizations. Instead of giving a person a cheaply built pre-fab anonymous apartment, this program lays the foundation of a sense of community and ownership that a sense of faith and hope can build and extend into the future.

What the poor needs is neither the extreme of laissez-faire, nor the extreme of unconditional paternal care from cradle to grave, but the middle road of responsible nurturing, as a loving parent would expect for helpless, but hopeful children.