A conversation on TED.com: In addition to increasing income, what else should poverty eradication include?

Manuel Aguilar
Guatemala
Guatemala

This conversation has closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

In addition to increasing income, what else should poverty eradication include?

Live TED Conversation: Join TED Fellow Manuel Aguilar
Due to enthusiastic and growing number of responses this conversation will be open for 3 more days, and Manuel will be checking the responses periodically.

Manuel is a social entrepreneur who co-founded Quetsol, a company working on increasing access to lighting and modern communication in Guatemala and Central America through low-cost solar power solutions. His mission is to improve the quality of the life of the Base of the Pyramid - those living under $3 a day - through appropriate technology solutions.

This conversation will open Monday December 19th at 1:00PM EST.

Related Talks:

Topics: Eradicate Poverty rural poverty

Sort By:

Jamal Shoro
- 0
Dec 23 2011: Increasing /enhancing skills/capacities and opportunities to utilize these skills and capacities
Shalabh Mittal
- 0
Dec 23 2011: Two other things to be done are:

1. Reduce Desires

2. Achieve satisfaction in life

This will help in reducing poverty. Plentiness does not signify poverty eradication. We need to increase happiness quotient of the population and this will help reduce poverty.
Manuel Aguilar 500+
- +2
TED Fellow TEDx Organizer

Dec 23 2011: Dear all, As this conversation nears closing time, I wanted to thank each and every one of you for an amazing set of insights, suggestions and ideas about how to tackle this formidable problem. My own thinking has been greatly enriched as I hope so have yours and I'm eager to start putting these ideas into practice in my own work. It's beyond these 2000 characters to synthesize all that has been discussed but here is a synopsis of what some of the most prevalent themes - please excuse if I missed any:

- Creating sustainable food and water sources
- Increasing access to sanitation and communication
- Universal respect for basic human rights and individual dignities
- Universal access to basic educational tools and information
- Training the poor in business and other self-improvement mechanisms
- Community inclusion
- Local economies based on sharing and collaboration
- Opportunities to put one's skills and talents to good use
- Transcending a consumption-based economic model
- Focus on local and micro-based solutions
- De-focusing monetary systems based on hoarding / ending fiat currency
- Promoting lower birth-rates
- Greater coordination between government, NGOs and private industry

Once again, deep thanks to all that participated with these great insights. Surely these deeply-rooted systemic problems seem overwhelmingly large at times - but I wholeheartedly believe we will find a way out of them. This simple conversation is a testament to our collective power to generate and implement ideas to move forward. Human beings live in an abundant planet and universe, which makes abject scarcity an unnatural condition. The deepest overall take-away for me is that "well-being" and "wealth" are not purely monetary phenomena but more a result of our ability to productively and creatively express our uniqueness. In that spirit, let us go forth and make these positive changes in our own lives and our communities - the 1st step in shaping a world without poverty!
Neel Prabhu
- +1
Dec 23 2011: The law of economy is money begets money. Similarly poverty is a vicious circle which is the result of poverty. One of the most powerful weapons that can be used to terminate poverty is to provide with food and proper sanitation.

Education and literacy would come in at the next stage. So a classic way of poverty eradication would be to provide with mid-day meals in the schools which will motivate people particularly in rural areas to send their children to school.
V Raj
- 0
Dec 23 2011: Dear MANUEL

I strongly believe that the most fundamental and basic right of one and all ‘Literacy’ could be one of the biggest steps in eradicating Poverty but it has been ignored by one and all. Has it been ignored to make sure that the level of poverty increases as it would allow the divide between the Rich Nations & Poor Nations to increase and in turn would allow Rich Nations to play the role of Big Brother?

Having said that I feel that the concentrated efforts and the focus that the governments across geographies seems to be showing in the last 50+ years shows that its only an eye-wash and in some cases it’s done so that they can keep control over the masses by showing the CARROT of a better future!

I feel if people come together - irrespective of Cast, Creed, Religions, Nation and most importantly without asking 'WHAT AM I GOING TO GAIN OUT OF IT?' Financially and work together, start small by helping EDUCATE kids from the destitue families in the neighbourhoods!

Maybe, it's time to start rather give a new shape to 'Give A Hand' where we all need to make a promise to self to atleast Educate 5 Kids every year - Formally (if We Can Afford Finallcially - Then we should not stop at this number and maybe increase it to our capacity)!

Just an IDEA...
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 23 2011: And a great idea it is V Raj. Nelson Mandela said education is the most powerful tool one can use to change the world. I like the focus of taking personal responsibility to educate kids even outside one's sphere of immediate need, especially in destitute areas. So often, all kids really need is to have a seed planted in them that will eventually grow into a beautiful tree of self-attained knowledge - if we all took responsibility for a few kids, the world would change dramatically and quickly! Thanks for your thoughtful comments
joy faber
- 0
Dec 22 2011: I keep seeing innovative products made for countries other than the US, small solar, hand and "merry-go-round" pumps, single wire electricity, solar ovens; when I can buy these things at Walmart to make my life less expensive I can spend the surplus on gas to get to town to volunteer, on small investments in innovations, on really helping my children get a foot hold on their future.

As it is, we make just enough to keep the lights on, pay for basic insurance (not including health insurance). This really makes me sick when I think that my husband has been a framing carpenter for almost 40 years. He has built hundreds of million dollar houses and never had any medical benefits. I apologize, I have a hard time thinking about how to eradicate poverty in other countries when I see and experience so much of it here.

Not everyone can contribute on a global scale to world peace, environmental renewal, et.al. I think most folks just want a fair living, very basic medical care, and hope for their children's future. And if possible, to be part of something good.

Our local grocery store allows locals to put notices on a bulletin board outside the main store where no one will ever see it. They make small contributions to local schools and that's it. They make clouds of money off our community and put very little back. Many of the people who work there come out from a bigger city. There has to be a model for more inclusive business practices.

NGO's are finding the "improve it and leave it" model doesn't work very well either. I have seen some promising TED talks about community building. That is helping an entire community beef up its infrastructure.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - +1
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 23 2011: Thanks for contributing Joy and no need to apologize! You bring up a good point that the pangs of scarcity are felt everywhere, not just developing countries. As a concerned citizen about this, living in a world, regardless of country, ruled primarily by large corporate interests - it always amazes me to think of examples of how little "capital" is needed to engender much "good" if it's spent wisely. Healthcare being a great example in the US - it is such an enormous issue with astronomical costs, that it is extremely difficult for parties to agree on any given course of action in spite of it being so fundamental to wellbeing. I think you hit the nail on the head with the community inclusion. This applies everywhere I believe, as we are ultimately a planet of human communities - not gigantic legal entities made up of average persons. Though it seems like a great problem - I am also optimistic given successful examples and platforms such a TED that we will work our way through this. Best wishes.
Ira Sobral
- +1
Dec 22 2011: Poverty will grow as long as we view growth of consumption as a desirable thing. We've got this so ass-backwards that its tragicomical. Why is it great for people to rip resources bare to produce massive amounts of sht that goes straight into our junkyards? People have been so dislocated from the actual meaning of enjoyment that now as soon as somebody markets something as enjoyable, we come up with money and pay in droves, no matter how much thoroughly unenjoyable crap we need to do to attain it. Life was never meant to be easy in the sense of doing nothing. But we might aswell help ourselves and the people around us, instead of helping to destroy. No one will ever be happy with things you can buy. True enjoyment comes from people, sharing time, caring, helping, listening, bettering yourself. So, teach kids empathy, teach safe-sex, teach them what they want to know, teach them fearlessness, teach them to feel excited about uncertainty, teach them to question their elders. Maybe we will one day all refuse our paychecks, refuse to pay and start really working with other people instead of under, above and against them. Every single person who isn't happy costs us a little bit of our own happiness in collateral. Each sad news from strangers, from friends friends, is our extended family, so it eat ours hopes away too. Everybodys happiness should be our priority. I am ready to give because I have gotten more than my ancestors combined. I am living the current version of Earth and I want to see the next update, and the next one and so on..
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 23 2011: I'd like to echo this sentiment with a quote from the Dalai Lama: "Of the many problems we face today, some are natural calamities and must be accepted and faced with equanimity. Others, however, are of our own making, created by misunderstanding, and can be corrected. One such type arises from the conflict of ideologies, political or religious, when people fight each other for petty ends, losing sight of the basic humanity that binds us all together as a single human family".
  
  I really like your phrasing of different iterations of the Now, of which we are all stewards - working so that the Now ever flows into a constructive and joyful expression of our gifts.
David Hamilton 20+
- +1
Dec 21 2011: Oh... btw... there is a phenomenal developing technology you should do a bit of research into.

http://youtu.be/z0_nuvPKIi8

This is the future of portable energy... It's impossible to patent or become a billionaire off of it, so most Americans aren't interested... Guatemala could use this.

Hint: Steam power, boilers.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 22 2011: Wow!! This is amazing! Thanks so much for bringing this to my attention - I had never seen concentrated solar so powerful. I will definitely look into it.
V Raj
- +1
Dec 21 2011: I believe the best way to eradicate poverty is to work towards achieving 100% Literacy across geographies!

Sustainable Economic Policies which in today’s world seems a little too much to ask for! Isn’t it?

Just a thought but maybe it’s time that we revisit the principal of MARX that stresses upon ‘Equal Distribution of All Available Resources to One and All’ but then one is baffled as being the biggest Communist Population in the World – living on the Mao & Marxist principals, CHINA still has 34+% its population living in the abject poverty.

Having said that, I would agree that not everything we have done in the name of "anti poverty" has aimed to that essential standard of dignity.’
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 22 2011: Great point V Raj - application of Marxist theories have often created the antithesis of what they were "designed" to achieve. I agree completely that 100% literacy would be an enormous first step - amazing to think something relatively "simple" has proven so difficult to accomplish. Within a semi-"marxist" context, rather than equalizing goods and means of production - perhaps equalizing basic skills (literacy, etc) should be governing principle. I know it's easier said than done, but I also think universalizing basic skills is much less costly than doing it on a "means" basis. It seems the world is making strides in this - hopefully we are doing it at a faster pace than people being born outside this wider net.
Don Wesley 10+
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Peace be with you Manuel.

Eradicate the Label of "Poverty" and apply the Labels of " The Light of Kindness and Love." and "Heroic."
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - +1
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: Peace also be with you Don. I love the spirit and certainly labels are difficult to ascribe to human beings, specially "pejorative" ones. I see that Light in all people, which is the reason I'm passionate about this - in my own little efforts to let it shine forth :)
Timothy Timothy
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Very simple... educate people on how to start and run their own businesses! Mom and pop style not corporate models that only work with unreasonable growth. So much of education is only teaching people how to be wage slaves. Machines do most of the work that I learned in school and everything else was a lie (Christopher Columbus and pilgrims? All lies). Start with teaching truth and how to create your own way in life. Actual educated people have hope and a higher level of comfort in life and that is independent of their level of income! They also have fewer children.
And YES, fewer children in better homes are the key to a successful society.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: Key point - totally agreed. Teaching the "Truth" about everything can be a formidable task - but at the very least providing unlimited access to true information can make all the difference in my opinion. This once again, for me, falls under symmetry of information - not concealing and certainly not distorting valuable information would be an amazing start. More practically, I completely agree with the notion that business education would make great strides towards self-sufficiency - the prerequisite for any personal abundance. Thanks for commenting
Russell Richard
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Your income is a measure of the value of your idea or goal or, more commonly, your ability to help someone else fulfill their idea or goal. This is true for all people across the Earth because no matter how hard we try to eradicate the free market system, we can only pervert it. If a person lives in poverty, that person is probably living with some external economic force holding them back becuse true laziness is rare.

Think of the vast majority of impoverished people on this planet. They live in war-torn countries, under oppressive regimes, in controlled and communist societies, under the threat of lawlessness, or in a place recently removed from these things and only just finding their feet. The places that are wealthy are free to try new ideas with the chance to succeed at the risk of failure, fearing no repercussions from the government or a foreign military. (The failure rate of American companies is an unusually high 10%. It is the reason why America is so prosperous.)

Arbitrarily redistributing wealth from the top to the bottom or raising the lowest allowable income is dangerous to the world economy, and useless to society. It is like putting a Band-Aid on a gaping wound and ignoring the blood still gushing from it (and often only makes that wound worse). If you get rid of oppression and subjugation and replace it with the encouragement of inquiry, praise and rewards for success, removal of ridicule for failure, and allow people to exercise their own ingenuity, I think you will discover that poverty will largely eradicate itself.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: Great point. I think the idea of income redistribution is not one that I have noticed folks in this conversation are inclined to propose, though it is certainly very prevalent in many of the movements towards equality. Personally, I agree with you that income redistribution is not the right course of action and avoids tackling the root causes of the problem. I work in private industry and in my experience thus far, a free market system, when the information is transparent and incentives aligned, is preferred even by the "poor". I find it a very "paternalistic" attitude to believe poor people will always want/need hand-outs, and there have been many cases where this flatly fails. It's been mentioned here several times that a fundamental aspect of "well-being"/happiness, derives more from perceptions of self-worth, self-reliability and one's own use of skills and talents to improve conditions for oneself's and the community. This "internal" aspect of well-being is hindered by models of perpetual welfare and/or forced redistribution. Of course, some of least advantaged human beings could use some compassion in getting on their feet - compassion of course being allowed in a free market system :)
Tim Petersen
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Hello Manuel, In your reply to Oliver I heard you question poverty's intent and 'by who's design'. Pardon me if I sound as if I am paranoid, but I believe it is by design and the profit is in the ability to control the broke, destitute, and fearful with much less fatigue than trying to corral the wealthy, brave visionaries. If it helps you to understand me, I am one who thinks the French Revolution was no revolution at all, merely a reformation. Thanks for all your kind responses, this encourages intense participation.
- Oliver Johnston
  - +1
  Dec 20 2011: I wasn't able to respond to Manuel's comment to me so may as well do it here. Since I threw the 5 why's concept out there I guess I should put money where mouth is and take a stab at this. Firstly I think the root causes of poverty are multifactorial and vary by country, but probably not as much as most would expect. For example it's clear why warlords in rural Pakistan or Afghanistan would want to ban the education of girls under the guise of "Islam", but it's not clear who benefits from, say, poverty in Uganda. It could just be I don't know enough about that country.
  
  So I'll take a stab at an example where I think I have some insight, which is poverty among aboriginal communities in Canada. I will ask WHY five times and the numbers indicate each layer down. Note to readers - I anticipate this will cause controversy and no I am not an expert in this subject, nor am I part of those communities. Feel free to correct what you feel is inaccurate.
  
  1. Because unemployment among these communities is very high
  2. Because there is a lack of sustainable jobs on reservations and many individuals are unable or unwilling to relocate to urban centres
  3. Because (among other factors) they either don't feel they welcome or able to compete among non-aboriginals in the workforce
  4. Because of a combination of structural discrimination against aboriginals, low motivation to seek higher education, and don't feel they have a "stake" in the future of the broader country
  5. Because of a history of unaddressed historical grievances with non-aboriginals, and significant social issues in the community such as abuse and addiction (potentially linked to not feeling a stake in the future as indicated above)
  
  So that's my stab at it. I'm sure it'll be controversial but let's focus on whether the process is a useful way to identify root causes of poverty (and don't attack me!). Anyone else want to give it a try, perhaps focusing on a different area where poverty exists?
  - Manuel Aguilar 500+
    
    0
    TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
    
    Dec 20 2011: I love this! I'm personally not familiar with the condition of aboriginals in Canada. Personally, I think "controversial" viewpoints are extremely valuable since it is precisely the status quo that seems to be broken in many respects. I will take a stab at the 5 why's with the aboriginals in my own country, the mayan communities in Guatemala. Many of the variables will be similar, but I think it's a very useful country-by-country exercise.
    
    1. Because employment is largely tied to agricultural subsistence or other extremely low paying jobs.
    2. Because educational and training opportunities are very limited and not geared towards improvement.
    3. Because of systemic disenfranchisement and discrimination.
    4. Because it benefits the old and current minority power-holders.
    5. Because it provides abundant cheap labor but most probably because it avoids the dangers of creating an educated and skilled majority (mayans) that would demand more equitable governance and distribution of wealth.
    
    Ultimately, this is a point that has been frequently on my mind, and in response to Tim's concern of sounding "paranoid" - I actually rather think that these inferences are more a result of logical deduction. I'm not into demonizing any particular group of people, but only interested in seeking solutions. I can perfectly understand the human desire to cling to power, and how it makes "sense" that keeping the majority powerless is an efficient way to do this. Nevertheless, I wholeheartedly believe that a vibrant and just human society where all members are empowered can create much more wealth, beauty and abundance for everyone - even for those at the top, perhaps even especially for them since they have a huge head start. Sometimes I frame it in my mind as a "sales pitch" to the power holders: "society, including you dear leader, would prosper beyond belief if the throngs of disenfranchised were given the opportunity. Make it happen
    " :)
    - Oliver Johnston
      
      0
      
      Dec 20 2011: Agreed, and perhaps we can find more impetus to make it happen if we could anticipate and create solutions that recognise your vision of a more equitable Guatemala could create short term 'problems' for the elites. So I guess the next question becomes...how to we position poverty eradication as good for everyone??
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
- 0
Dec 20 2011: here is a link to Manuel's comany Quetsol and a little about him ( quite a guy!!!!)

http://www.quetsol.com/
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: Thanks a lot for the kind words Lindsay!!
Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Manuel,

I am so sorry there is not more time on this very worth question you have brought to TED Conversations. Perhaps you can frame and host several follow up questions.

What you are doing in Guatemala with Qetsol is also key. Nations like Guatemala that have been exploited under the guise of anti poverty through the IMF the world bank and even the United Nations are left unable to compete for access to oil and foosil fuels for their econonic development , water distribution, sanitatiion systems, vehicles et.c ( See fellow TEDster Adriaam Kamp's program Energy for One World). Self determination, self governance, and economic indepedence for the nation is key.

Locally generated energy is key..tide ,wave, wind and solar. There is a wonderful man here in Maine I met some years ago who was going to places like Guatemala and Ecudaor to teach people how to make and install solar cells ( great scenes of donkey's ridden by land mine victims or victims of war) going through jungles with solar cells packed on.) In some countreis where he was working they even reached surplus in production of solar panels and were able to export them to other nations struggling to receve from the ravages of war, corruption, the IMF and the World Bank.

There should be far more liberal forgiveness for the debt than has been put in place and complete release from the horrific terms of this debt ( essentially a license for exploitation by outsiders) and I would say resitution..repayment for the exploitation done in the name of anti poverry in countries like guatemale. That resitution might be used to set up a soveriegn wealth fund for the people of Guatemala which could inves in companies like yours.as well as income (see my recent TED conversation on Soveriegn Wealth Funds)

I also believe a new consitition..similar Ecuadors is a cornerstone to ending outside exploitation of Guatemala, etsablishing a corruption free governement ( see my current TED Conv. on Consitutions)
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: Thanks Lindsay for showcasing Quetsol as one of the success stories :). It has been very gratifying to see this idea take off and benefit the people we were intending to help, in addition to being economically successful so far. I think economic independence is key - though I see prefer the term "self-sustaining" as we live in an increasingly interdependent world. In my conceptualization of an "ideal" case, this great dynamical system we call civilization made up of human "units", self-sustainability should be present from the smallest scale (human unit) to the largest (the world) - while still preserving the links that bind us to each other. Interdependence has created some of the most astrounding and beautiful features in our civilization's progress - like the fact that I am sitting here in Guatemala City chatting with you all, wherever you are. You have mentioned the IMF and World Bank a few times - which I agree have directly and indirectly caused more hardships than they set out to "solve". In the long term, I like to see it as a continuum: One World, One People - with the necessary institutions to protect the dignity of all the links in the value chain, no matter how big or small. A country (sovereign) can be said to be like a large person, and a person is akin to a small sovereign. Outside "interference", on either sovereign, belies a breach/violation of that entity's sovereign rights. Outside "collaboration" however, based on full willful participation shuold be encouraged - across scales.
  - Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
    
    0
    Dec 21 2011: A Beautiful vision.
    
    May it come to be.
    
    Interestingly, the emergent new party, AmericansElect has a survey completed so far by over 2 million Americans' included foreign policy questions While notusing your language,. I was delighted to see that an overwhelming majority of respondents felt that in our dealings with one another as sovereign nations we should be should be more respectful aof the sovereign rights,
    
    "Collaboration" and " Interdeendence" are dynamics we shoukd refer to with more intention as individual persons and sovereign persons.
Rajiv Sondhi
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Yes, Manuel, coordination among various actors would be very effective. Ideally, this should be orchestrated by country institutions or governments . And that is where the biggest challenge lies- the capacity, motivations and incentives of government institutions are not always aligned, nor inspiring. Non governmental agencies and donors have a key role to pay here. Donor coordination unfortunately has also not progressed much, despite innumerable high level conferences. Perhaps the answer les in developing customized solutions case by case, country by country, based on these broad principles?
Daniel Yorke
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Dalai Lama:
In an increasingly interdependent world our own welfare and happiness depend on many other people. Other human beings have a right to peace and happiness that is equal to our own; therefore we have a responsibility to help those in need. Many of our world's problems and conflicts arise because we have lost sight of the basic humanity that binds us all together as a human family.
Joanna Murawska
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Like others have said, I think that education plays a HUGE roll in eradicating poverty.
David Hamilton 20+
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Skill... Skill is the only thing that erradicates poverty. You are not out of poverty until you are confident enough in your skills to lose your job, and still feel comfortable that you will find a new one. Self esteem is an important part of poverty irradication as well, people don't just need to have the skill to get a new job, they need to really feel like they deserve a new job, and anyone who doesn't hire them is crazy... From a societal perspective, how do you increase skill and confidence? Education. Educating your children is the only hope anyone has, of leaving poverty.
Chris Pattullo
- +3
Dec 20 2011: Jon Blake mentioned a TEDx Portugal talk by Peter Joseph on a related theme. I believe I've found it here for those that are interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI

It'd post it in the proper thread but replies don't seem to be working for me right now. Apologies if this is a PEBKAC issue.
Alex Braud
- 0
Dec 20 2011: John, money is based on value either way - that's why we have problems like inflation. Removing ourselves from a fiat currency doesn't put a "top price" or price cap on things, it would just establish more reliable relative value. When you have a fiat currency, you allow for money printing, which leads to a devaluation of the currency like we've seen in the US through the federal reserve and as we saw with what led to the German Depression allowing Hitler to rise to power.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 20 2011: I'll comment briefly here as there are a few posts further down that I have to catch up with. I think differentiating between money and value is valuable, even if they are intimately related in our economy. Assigning a "value" to something is slightly different than setting a price, which can be indexed to a real commodity or a fiat "index", which can easily lead to devaluation as you pointed out. One can easily think of things that are extremely valuable yet hard to define - such as happiness - much less set a price on. Inasmuch as measures of human achievement can be "commoditized" they can be traded, and must be done in a common currency. I do agree that there is no price cap when removing fiat - the question I would like to ask at this point is then is: How can we reliably place "value" on aspects that clearly affect our well-being into a systemic monetary system that currently incorporates only fiat digi-dollars?
Rajiv Sondhi
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Let us go upstream on the Poverty value chain - factors that lead to poverty or maintain poverty. Consider factors that feed on each other, such as lack of opportunities for the poor o be gainfully employed, lack of skills, lack of education, health in early childhood, and having a say in developing public policy. Increase in income is only the end of the chain! Poverty eradication, to be sustainable, must involve action targeted at each of these stages in the value chain. Different segments of poor would benefit from actions at different stages. All poor people have a right to these, yet are so often denied these.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 20 2011: I like the idea of breaking it down into steps in the value chain and I think you are right that attention should be placed on all of them. Often times, unfortunately much energy and resources is spent on just one aspect - only to have the other variables counteract the efforts. You are also echoing some other people's remarks that income is more of the "end result", or "by-product" of these other measures of well-being (education, opportunities, health, etc). Do you suggest that there should be coordination amongst entities working to facilitate these different stages of growth in a more coherent way? Is this the job of governments, and if not, which sectors should lead the efforts?
Estela Estela
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Housing is a very important part to eradicating poverty.

But we must be sure that the housing is in good, working neighborhoods with resources, amenities and community supports.

We also must make sure we take a 'one-on-one ' approach to problem solving with housing. People are homeless due to varying circumstances-there is no 'cookie cutter' answer. Following are some of those varying examples:

*Economic hardships
*Medical and/or Mental Health issues that affected their economic standing.
*Lack of life skills that made keeping a home difficult.
etc.

Those, and other issues, will need to be addressed individually so that 'a plan' of sustaining the home will work. If someone needs help paying their bills, for example, because they lack the ability, or skills to do so they should be able to get that help so that they can succeed in their transition from homelessness.

For some people with disabilities, for example, there is the Shelter Plus Care program that will assign case management assistance to the person receiving housing assistance which can include someone helping them, or paying their bills for them.

Some people will need little help to be successful, some will need more.

Also, all counties and states need to comply. California takes on the brunt of this type of assistance (as do some places in the East Coast) because 'the system'/NIMBY and bureaucracy has made things that way. It's inefficient and just not working given the thousands of homeless people out there.
Juan Happicampa
- 0
Dec 20 2011: Jed Trott said= "" I submit poverty in the US, which is hugely underpopulated when compared to the rest of the world, would be worse not better with less people. Also who are you proposing does this management?""

Evidence of your claims would be useful. Perhaps we are less populated than overpopulated and poverty stricken nations but we are not under populated compared to nations who are able to provide adequate employment levels and services to their citizenry.
Calculate the land that is uninhabitable, the federal reserves and parks, the depleting topsoil, deserts, forests and fisheries. Look at the extent that we have to go to, to retrieve oil, gas and coal. Look at the decaying shorelines and the rising seas, look at the melting glaciers and depleting aquifers and explain to us how we could sustain a larger population without increasing energy production, use and subsequent environmental destruction, without putting more strain on transportation and infrastructure. How about food production dependent on chemicals, pesticides and the import/export markets.
At some point we need to ask ourselves how much is too much population. What purpose will 10 billion serve our species the animal kingdom or our planet? What purpose does 7 billion serve when a large % of those live on non-sustainable land? Our we really being compassionate when we feed populations enough to procreate only to have them deplete all their resources and consequently triple a population that is now totally dependent on imports to survive, like Haiti? What sense of twisted morality drives people to increase populations on non-sustainable land? Condemning them and their future descendants to poverty as far as the eye can see.

The mechanism that will be held responsible to support our poor should be the same ones to determine if the person or couple has the capacity to raise productive and healthy children. Who decides we do.
Alex Braud
- +1
Dec 20 2011: Certainly morality will have something to do with it I don't dispute that. I'm very much into the tiny house movement, but I also balk at the idea of redistribution of wealth and of ceasing production because "you have enough". Progress comes from dedicated professionals advancing their field and they should earn what that gets them. Working in a low income industry - typically ruled by minimum wage, which causes some of these problems - should also net them whatever they can earn for their services. Low skilled workers should earn less because many people can do what they do. To become a higher earning person. Do something that few people can do, making your work, your productivity indispensable and therefore worth more. No one is entitled to a living wage, they must work to earn it. Getting the government out of the way and having a bit of understanding that most people are doing what they are doing to find happiness, would make that process much easier.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 21 2011: I agree that the issue of "entitlement" can be problematic when wages/assets/services are merely "assigned". In my own experience working with poor communities through a private entreprise - we very often encounter the issue that when people work to pay for something the inherently "value" it more and give it proper management and care, as opposed to things that were given freely and are often discarded/dismantled/sold for parts. One of the latest themes has been that of transparent and just governance, where rather than redistribute or reassign, the rules are simply built to remove artifical barries of entry (created by, say, oppresion) so that all can hope to prosper. I agree that training oneself and achieving mastery of skills and crafts is essential to our human expression and advancement and no cap should be set on that. I do think governance could be greatly reworked so that a vast number of people get the opportunity to develop a skillset beyond meager daily survival.
Hassan Hayat
- 0
Dec 19 2011: I believe that income is secondary in the whole issue. The main problem when it comes eradicate poverty is to allow for an environment that makes survival a non-issue. Only when this is achieved, then increasing GDP per capita, literacy rate, and so on make sense. This means that there are two fronts in which to attack the issue. The first is safe access to food and water, the second is safe access to health care. By safe, I mean no strings attached: the access to both resources should only have as price labor, nothing else. The problem nowadays with donations and charity organizations, is that the solutions are usually temporary, as in a one (or countably many) time supply of food and medicine. Yet, the goal is to allow for a given society to thrive. Therefore, one should look at how to make any given society care for itself. This implies educating doctors and teaching effective agricultural techniques in given societies. Only then can one look at encouraging other forms of education and entrepreneurship for trade and thus achieve the self-sufficiency needed to trade for medicine and then improve on living standards. It does seem like a herculean task because it involves ensuring the safety of these communities and the education of the people involved but in the long term the effort should, at least in theory, be rewarded more effectively that the traditional kicking the can down the road method of just donating. But the only way to attack such a task is to unite nonprofit organizations with governments in order to allocate the manpower to do all the educating and protecting.
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - 0
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 20 2011: "Teach a man to fish.." as the saying goes, and I think you touched on a point that many folks here share. I think there is also some consensus that providing for the basic needs is a prerequisite from which other forms of wealth, monetary or not, can be built. I would add that with the non-profit organizations and governments, for-profit enterprises should also be brought into the fold. As many have mentioned the "incentive" motive to develop a market, a value or a systemic feature is key in our current economic system and several others we can think of. Private enterprise, both in the top-down approach or with a bottom-up view of promoting entrepreneurship in poor communities can bring create much innovation and speed things up.
  - Hassan Hayat
    
    0
    Dec 20 2011: Yes, I agree that private enterprise would be of great help but they need incentives to appear. Perhaps the best way to speed things up is by integrating micro finance in the whole equation. But my point is that you asked about the eradication of poverty and there is just so much that firms are willing to do for their communities. Granted, numerous companies do take initiatives with that respect, but in aggregate not enough. This is why I believe that non-profit organizations along with governments are key in the initial steps of such an endeavor, more so than private enterprise. For example, suppose you wanted to get a firm to invest near a small town you know to be hard hit by poverty. This can be whatever firm: car manufacturer, agricultural, renewable energies, you name it. This firm upon investing will take into consideration the physical capital at its disposal as well as the human capital. Let's assume there is the physical capital as in the place has strong illumination in the case of a solar power plant, or is very fertile in the case of a farm. In the case of the human capital, they'd rather hire locals than have to hire people from elsewhere and have to pay them the extra to go there, unless they'd have to train the locals. Now, granted companies do train locals but only when it suits them. So, how I see this is as I said earlier, first get the community to survive on its own and care for its own. Then train them by education. Then once that is done the companies will come on their own. (obviously, there should be micro finance not only in case the firms don't come but because it's always better) So maybe a decade has passed before these companies will start to appear, but I don't see any shortcuts. This is when I argue that in the grand scheme of things a decade is nothing in the face of the timeline of human poverty.
Mick Quinn
- +1
Dec 19 2011: There is a relationship between having things and the strength of being that the ego (the ability to perceive a self in thought). So more = more self. The ego in developed countries at it's current stage of unconscious existence is in panic mode that if more is given away to alleviate the unnecessary we see in the 3rd world that it will be lessened. Not true of course, in fact the opposite is true. But there is where we run into the collective/unconscious aspect of the developed world. The is a great book by Ken Wilber called Up from Eden which explains this in graphic and illuminating detail. In our classes with the kids here we teach a class on the evolution of the ego to at least plant the seed that will eventually uproot this painful illusion. (for those of you interested in reading more about our work, see http://www.integralheartfoundation.org)
Daniel Yorke
- 0
Dec 19 2011: Another model:

Heidemarie Schwermer, a 69-year-old woman from Germany, gave up using money 15 years ago and says she’s been much happier ever since.

Heidemarie’s incredible story began 22 years ago, when she, a middle-aged secondary school teacher emerging from a difficult marriage, took her two children and moved to the city of Dortmund, in Germany’s Ruhr area. One of the first things she noticed was the large number of homeless people, and this shocked her so much that she decided to actually do something about it. She had always believed the homeless didn’t need actual money to be accepted back into society, only a chance to empower themselves by making themselves useful, so she opened a Tauschring (swap shop), called “Gib und Nimm” (Give and Take).

Her small venture was a place where anyone could trade stuff and skills for other things and skills they needed, without a single coin or banknote changing hands.....

Full Article: http://wakeup-world.com/2011/07/18/happy-69-year-old-lady-has-not-used-money-for-15-years/
Alex Braud
- 0
Dec 19 2011: The part that you are missing seems to be property rights. The owners of property have every right to do with that property what they will. If they choose to only sell a portion of their wealth so that it is more valuable, that is entirely within their sphere of rights.
- Daniel Yorke
  - 0
  Dec 19 2011: Of course. My aim is to affect the mentality behind the choosing. If you feel you have all you need or know you can get it, it informs your choices regarding how you share/ distribute. Conversely if you feel you have to get what you can before the supply runs out, or if you feel the need for power to give you security, it will also inform your choices. Back to mentality. I'm pointing to a paradigm shift. You are rightly pointing to how things are now. I don't disagree with your assessment.
- Daniel Yorke
  - 0
  Dec 20 2011: It points to a model wherein you give your 'life energy' as service, through your expertise, or goods you personally provide, which then returns to you though someone else's services/ goods. Money is a substitute for these things. I train your dog, you give me food. Displaying the possibility of trade without hoarding. I should clarify, that I was pointing to a 'hoarding' model OF supply and demand. There is always demand. And there is plenty of supply. It's the distribution model that could use a shift.
  
  Right now most of us provide service to a larger machine that is gathering all they can to compete with other gatherers for enough power to not be subjugated, or do without. We provide our time and energy to serve their purposes, feeding the separatist mindset. We have to gather to protect ourselves from those who would otherwise come take our stuff, due to the sense of separation and scarcity. If the mentality were different, we would not feel the need to gather for security. We could then have basic needs met, as other's here have pointed to, thereby allowing people to bring their personal talents and abilities to each other for trade or money. No one going without.
  
  Money is just a form of return for the life energy we give to our employer. It's our life energy passed around for things. It could be a trade of goods and services, as she demonstrates, just as easily. Micro loans are allowing cultures to create businesses that provide goods and services to sustain their communities needs. It's a simpler life of interconnectedness, rather than a race to have the most. I'm not against money. Money isn't bad or good. How much do we need however? As long as we are in a separatist and competitive mindset we will need quite a bit to be 'safe'. With a mindset that we are the same, family, there is compassion that informs distribution choices. All the fighting around the world is over separation and scarcity. Both illusions. -Deep thoughts by Jack Handy :)
  - Manuel Aguilar 500+
    
    +1
    TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
    
    Dec 20 2011: I love the Jack Handy reference! :) Though deep philosophical points, I agree that separation and scarcity are largely illusions - inspite of their apparent ubiquity in the system around us. A great example of that is the energy crises in a universe made of energy. Of course, there are the economic/technical barriers to overcoming this scarcity - so a key question is WHY are those limitations in place? If scarcity a DESIGN problem? Or is it more of an aggregate by-product of this "hoarding" mentality you mention? I believe this is a key issue that goes to the heart of motivation - on a macro administrator and micro individual level, respectively. I would love to know your thoughts on this.
Tim Petersen
- +2
Dec 19 2011: I would hope prior to raising income, poverty eradication would train self subsistence farming, water purification and then classes to the population expressing the need to resist hydro-electric utilities, infrastructure and all thoughts of borrowing money from the world bank. (any bank) because this would only enslave them to poverty once again, no matter what their income is. The USA is a prime example. Our schools here would do us more if they taught us to be self sufficient, rather than depending on companies and jobs which are not worthy of anyones dependence. thanks,Manuel
- Manuel Aguilar 500+
  - +1
  TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
  
  Dec 20 2011: Thank you Tim. I think you have phrased the issue of self-sufficiency in a slightly different and important context than this conversation has so far - individual self-sufficiency taught within (any) school system. Though perhaps a bit extremist, I frequently think about the cessation of many or all services and the percentage of people that would be able to survive and be self-sufficient under such systemic break-downs. Though interconnectedness is a beautiful and inescapable part of our modern world, I believe self-sufficiency is a skill that should never be forgotten. Unfortunately many of us have, so a strong effort to re-incorporate this into our collective individual training would probably reap great benefits. Perhaps people would be less "afraid" and thus feel less compelled to "hoard"?
  - Tim Petersen
    
    0
    Dec 20 2011: Thank you, Manuel. We can dream, can't we? I have to commend you on such deep insight and your ability to break it down. Our universe would do well with more like you.
- Lindsay Newland Bowker 50+
  - 0
  Dec 20 2011: Tim absolutely key and we need a whole other TED Conversation to lay out what the impediments to this are, (like the terms and conditions of IMF and Wolrd Bank debt incurred by these nations in the name of anti poverty)share examples of succeses ( like rain harvestng systems, Manuels' solar project, Jasons ReChar project, permaculkure) 'build global connections amongst the many who are trying to bring this about in far flung corners of the world.
  
  There are many many internal and external barriers to food adequacy and food security that must be overcome in order to rebuild food indepdence and food sifficicency.
  - Manuel Aguilar 500+
    
    0
    TED Fellow TEDx Organizer
    
    Dec 21 2011: This certainly is a whole TED conversation in and of itself as you say. I really like the idea of sharing successes and pooling resources/talent to really promote the idea of self-sufficiency and prospects for poverty alleviation. To this end, I believe great improvements have been made in recent years, and TED is a great example of a platform for not only sharing success stories but also encouraging discussion and idea dissemination. Specifically as it pertains to poverty alleviation - I think it's a great idea to develop a platform with a common goal of showcasing and disseminating ideas around this topic in a multidisciplinary/multigeographical way. Connectivity is one of humanity's greatest strengths - like neurons in a brain, we are each "neurons" in the global brain - so it's great that we are incresingly utilizing it to tackle some of our serious societal problems.

Load more comments…

In addition to increasing income, what else should poverty eradication include?

Sign In

Thanks to our sponsor

Search Conversations

Recent Commenters

Popular Topics