Since poverty, which is defined as the lack of basic needs and cannot be considered a normal state, is constantly growing, according to the recent researches, it has to be dealt with.
The ways to eradicate it have been discussed by Angela Locke in ”Born Poor and Smart”, Herbert Gans explored the roots of the problem and the ways to fight it in his article “The war against the poor instead of programs to end poverty”, and the Economist article called “Middle of the Class” has driven a well-thought conclusion concerning the matter. As long as poverty remains the scourge of society, the decisions about fighting it have to be made.
Taking Locke’s method (2007), she suggests very persistent way of looking for one’s fortune. The question of “If you are so smart then why are you poor” (Locke 2007, p.106) is taken as a guideline here, and the author pushes the poor to earn for
their living with their own brainwork. These are all being cunning and smart that it takes to become rich. The only thing you should do is use the appropriate moment and not to miss the chance.
However, that method does have its weak points. The thing about catching your lucky moment depends completely on your own skills and attention. There is nowhere to wait for the backup from, and you are left all alone with the dim chances you might not miss.
The drawback of this method is that it does not take the peculiarities of people’s personalities into consideration. The solution that Locke (2007) presents could suit only the people of a particular temper and character features, while those less persistent and more reflexive might simply spend the rest of their lives waiting for the appropriate moments an missing them just as regularly as the fortune comes up with these chances. This is rather a way out for a businessman-like type, but those people already have wealth and fortune.
The next solution that is coming up is presented by Mr. Gans (2007). His point is that a poor man is first of all a victim, and he emphasizes that it is the society and the government who are to help the man to get out of the trap.
He claims that the society, along with the government, begins the war against the poor; they want to exterminate them instead of brushing through the roots of the poverty and fight the very phenomenon, not the people who have been caught in its claws. “Congress and the President yanked the safety net, never very strong, out from under people, and Congress doesn’t even want to know about the misery they have caused” (Gans 2007, p. 213).
So Gans’ method is the contrary to what Locke has suggested. This is the way of the people who are sure that they can rely on the government of their country and that the neighbors and the businessmen will all indulge into welfare as soon as they will be asked for. The idea is very humane, but it is inapplicable to the modern society. Indeed, one can hardly imagine any businessman spending his free time to help a poor man get out of the debt abyss. That is something that borders the science fiction.
Finally, there is the third solution presented by the Economist article that presumes that the core idea of wealth is the mobility, and America has never been mobile enough, the author says. People have to get down to work and start thinking wider if they want to shift from the dead point.
That sounds reasonable, but the core idea of the mobility is the freedom that only the money can give. Thus, these are not the poor who can make their state better, but the rich. Again, it is quite doubtful that a rich person would agree to use his mobility to improve someone’s state of affairs. It must be kept in mind that this is the century of trade and tradesmen that people live in now, and that such relationship will inevitably end in indifference to the business partners. The world of trade does not like to practice charity.
What all three authors agree upon is that the situation still can be improved, which is a reason to be optimistic. The two authors consider that the poor must handle their problems on their own, while Gans is still thinking that the help from the outside is possible. The Economist (2005) drives the example of USA saying that every state can be actually the one of the dreams come true, not the USA only.
Meanwhile, Locke drives people to roll up their sleeves and get down to earning their money, finding the ways out and using every opportunity that they can find. The hope works wonders, and maybe someday a bankrupt can turn into a millionaire. However, the fact that the people who have been born poor have almost no chances to climb higher is said to be obvious. “It means that, if you are among the poorest 5% of the population, your chances of achieving an average income are only one in six” (Economist 2005, p. 310)
One thing that Locke (2007) is absolutely right about is that people can improve any situation they have got into. It is all to us that it takes. Yet the lack of backup which Gans is speaking about might get an ill-willed person broke. They have not taken the types of character into consideration, and that is what has made them sound so unreal and a bit idealistic.
It seems more rational that the one who has gone broke needs all three components to get over the stressful situation. At first, this is working on your own course of thoughts and actions, and then you might start analyzing the financial and economical situation and begin to take some actions. And, finally, this is the encouragement of the people around you, whenever it is your family, or colleagues, or the officials, which gives you forces to go on fighting the crisis.
The persistence and belief together with intelligence and good grip make wonders.
Works Cited
Economist. Middle of the Class (2005). Kennedy, M. L., & Kennedy, W. G. (2007). Writing in the Disciplines (Sixth Edition). New York, NY: Prentice Hall
Gans H. The War against the Poor Instead of Programs to End Poverty.
Kennedy, M. L., & Kennedy, W. G. (2007). Writing in the Disciplines (Sixth Edition). New York, NY: Prentice Hall
Locke A. Born Poor and Smart (2007). Kennedy, M. L., & Kennedy, W. G. (2007). Writing in the Disciplines (Sixth Edition). New York, NY: Prentice Hall