When discussing poverty, absolute poverty and relative poverty are two indispensable and important concepts. Absolute poverty usually refers to the lack of ability to meet basic survival needs, while relative poverty refers to the situation where an individual or family is unable to achieve the minimum living standard in a certain social and economic environment. These definitions not only influence policy making, but also affect the quality of life and future development potential of the poor.
According to World Bank standards, people living on less than $2.15 a day are considered to be living in extreme poverty. This type of poverty is prevalent in low-income countries and is closely related to a country's economic situation. For lower-middle-income countries, the standard cap is $3.20 per day, while for upper-middle-income countries it is $5.50. These standards are set to take into account differences in national economies.
The concept of absolute poverty makes it clear that no matter what country a family is in, when they cannot access food, water, and other necessities for survival, their situation is urgent and difficult.
Relative poverty refers to the comparison between an individual and the surrounding society, and this type of poverty is often more pronounced in developed countries. People living in relative poverty do not have access to the same social resources and living standards as others. When the gap between the rich and the poor in society widens, the problem of relative poverty becomes more obvious.
In some wealthy countries, although the absolute poverty threshold may be higher, large numbers of people are still affected by relative poverty.
Socialists believe that poverty stems from the uneven distribution of capital, wealth and resources, especially in favor of the "wealthy elite." This tradition advocates a redistribution of resources in order to improve the living standards of ordinary people.
Neoliberal PerspectivesThe contrasting neoliberal view holds that poverty stems from market concentration and excessive government intervention, and argues that the role of the private sector is crucial. While private investment can theoretically help reduce poverty, in practice the amount of funding available is often very limited.
Many scholars have pointed out that poverty in the United States is closely linked to the rise of neoliberal policies, which have led to the criminalization and mass incarceration of poor groups.
Micro-level causes of poverty include resource-poor households being unable to purchase property, educational inequalities and the systemic exclusion of certain ethnic groups, all of which contribute to the perpetuation of poverty.
At the macro level, colonial history and climate change are both important causes of poverty. Scholars point out that the legacy of colonialism has affected state institutions and created a series of conditions that are not conducive to economic development.
Climate change not only affects economic production, but also threatens social stability by potentially pushing more than 100 million people into poverty in the coming decades.
The main causes of global poverty include poor food and water supplies, inadequate health care, unequal distribution of resources, discriminatory policies and lack of education. These factors together form a vicious cycle that makes it difficult for poor families to escape from their plight.
Poverty’s historical roots can be traced back to wars and armed conflicts, which not only directly lead to economic stagnation, but also damage social structures, further exacerbating the problem of poverty.
ConclusionIn today's globalized context, no country can be immune to poverty, and the problem of poverty needs to be considered and solved from different perspectives. The challenges faced by each country are different, and the path to eradicating poverty will vary depending on local circumstances. What can we do together to help eliminate poverty and enable everyone to live a better life?