Keefer 1

Jordan Keefer

Dr. Hellmers

ENG 1201

12 July 2020

Poverty: An Eternal Pandemic

According to the World Bank, “in 2015, 10 percent of the world’s population or about

734 million people lived on less than $1.90 a day. “The World Bank is an organization that has

two primary goals. The first goal is to end poverty around the world. The second goal is to

promote shared prosperity. While that statistic is five years old, it is still relevant to the

conversation on poverty. Our World in Data is an organization that focuses on extreme global

poverty around the world. According to Our World in Data, “two-thirds of the world population

live on less than 10 $-int per day.” Coming from a third world country, I have felt the effects of

poverty. I was part of the two thirds of the world that lived off less than $10 per day. It got so

bad that I was sent to live in an orphanage because my family did not have enough money for

food. I know what it’s like to go hungry and to be alone and hopeless. By the providence of God,

I was adopted, and I now reside in America. Living in this land of wealth and prosperity, it is

easy to forget about the little boy in Africa with the bloated stomach full of worms and wide eyes

searching for hope. It is easy to forget about the little girl in China working 14 hour days to make

American products in horrible conditions. It is easy to forget about the family in India, praying to

false gods waiting for better days while they continue to live and die in a state of poverty. It is

unimaginable to think that in 2020 people can ever live on that amount of money. Everyday

people all over the world struggle to make a living. There are hundreds, if not thousands of Non-

Profit organizations and billions of dollars that have been given in the effort to help alleviate
 Keefer 2

poverty all over the world. So, with all these efforts, why are there still so many people living in

poverty? Something is wrong; and this begs the question, what kind of help or aid has helped

people out of the cycle of poverty and what kind of aid doesn’t help the situation? As shown in

Figure 1.1, we have come a long way to alleviating poverty. There were 1.9 billion people living

in poverty in 1990, in 2020, there are roughly 500 million. That number is still too high, not one

man, woman, or child should have to live in poverty. Although it seems like financial aid is the

best way to alleviate poverty, there are more efficient methods needed to help people out of the

cycle of poverty. These methods include educational aid, financial aid, establishment of local and

governmental leaders, medical/healthcare aid, spiritual aid, and emotional aid.

Figure 1. 1 Number of People Living in Poverty

The first type of aid needed to help individuals out of the cycle of poverty is the

implementation of an adequate educational system. There is a quote about education by Malcom

X that says, “education is the passport for the future, for tomorrow belongs to those who prepare
 Keefer 3

for it today.” While many of the things that Malcom X said were quite controversial, this is not

one of them. Education is the backbone for any culture to achieve prosperity. Throughout

history, there have been eras of educational progress and times of enlightenment; namely the

Renaissance and the Industrial Revolution. Those were two historical periods where some

societies took a great leap forward and the rest of the world was left behind. If one looks at the

areas of the world affected by those two intellectual revolutions, they will see that they occurred

in the European sector. The Renaissance started in Europe and revolutionized the way that

people looked at the world spiritually, mentally, economically, and socially. The Industrial

Revolution began first in Great Britain then spread across the Atlantic into the Americas, mostly

North America. While this era was not one of great intellectual awakening, it was a period of

time when the world took a dramatic turn in technology, politics, and economics. Over the

course of history, one can see how beneficial education is to the development of a society. While

the European world was evolving, the same cannot be said about Africa, India, China, or South

America. Up until the 20th century, a major part of the world lived in the iron age. Their

technology was not advanced enough to support the weight of the Industrial Revolution. So why

is education important? Education is important to the alleviation of poverty in two major ways.

First, it gives people an avenue in which to look at the world. “Education is widely accepted to

be a fundamental resource, both for individuals and societies. Indeed, in most countries basic

education is nowadays perceived not only as a right, but also as a duty – governments are

typically expected to ensure access to basic education, while citizens are often required by law to

attain education up to a certain basic level.” (Our World in Data) Education and the opportunity

to learn is what sets us apart from animals. Humans have the capacity to learn and grow into

something better than we were. When people are educated, they how to use money, how to
 Keefer 4

manage their time efficiently, and take care of themselves and their community. When the people

of a nation know not to have unprotected sex or to wash their hands before eating or cleaning a

wound, then the life expectancy of the nation would rise. When people are educated, they take

care of themselves, which in turn takes pressure off the government to micromanage the people.

Secondly, knowledge is also cumulative. One generation will learn a skill, create a technology,

or develop a process and the next generation will add to it and make it better. One great example

of this is the discovery of electricity. In 1752 Benjamin Franklin discovered electricity with the

famous kite experiment. In 1879, the technology and the resources were advanced enough for

Thomas Edison to create an alternative to the gas-powered light: the electric lightbulb. The

process began when Benjamin Franklin harnessed lightning on a string and progressed to Edison

harnessing it in wires to create light. The same process can be taken to Africa, where there is

rampant poverty. For a long time, and even now, the culture of parts of Africa are made up of

hunters and gatherers. The men hunt and the women gather herbs and plants to cook. If they had

known about division of labor or had the knowledge of farming and cultivating the ground,

where would Africa be today? Instead of warring tribes fighting for land and kids dying of

starvation, they could have sustainable farming, mining, and flourishing business. Africa is rich

in minerals and natural resources, yet they don’t have the knowledge to use it, so the Europeans

came and ravaged the land and left the bones. “Despite progress in the long run, however, large

inequalities remain, notably between sub-Saharan Africa and the rest of the world. In Burkina

Faso, Niger and South Sudan – the African countries at the bottom of the rank – literacy rates are

still below 30%.” In Figure 1.2 it shows the relation of how much money people live on and how

many years of schooling they receive. In the first extreme, there is Russia with 0% of the

population living off of $3.10 and receiving 12 or more years of education. In the other extreme,
 Keefer 5

there is Mozambique with 85% or more of the population living off of $3.10 and receiving 2

years of schooling. This chart shows the impact that education can have on the quality of life.

The more education, the better life, the less education, the worst life. Furthermore, written

language is the most accurate and reliable way to pass down knowledge to the next generation. If

a people can’t pass on the wisdom of the ages, how can they expect to survive, much less thrive

in this world. It is said that knowledge is doubling every 13 months, so how is it that people in

Africa are subjected to a 30% literacy rate? What two thirds of the world needs is access to

education. Organizations like UNICEF, The United Nations, The World Bank, and the Bill and

Melinda Gates Foundation need to prioritize education. While just giving money to poor

countries is good, having an educated population is far more beneficial. An educated population

is a wealthy population.

Figure 1.2 Poverty vs. Educational Attainment

 Keefer 6

The second type, and most prevalent type of aid needed to help families out of poverty, is

financial aid. This type of aid is the most prevalent in any conversation about poverty.

Everybody is always ready to open up the floodgates of their wallets and support any cause.

There is nothing inherently wrong with giving money or supporting an organization. In a world

where people are honest and genuine, the money you sent to help the dying child in India would

go directly to the child’s family, the money you sent to the little boy’s family in Africa would

have enough money to buy food. However, the world is not perfect. Especially, when it comes to

dealing with poverty, the governments of those nations are typically corrupt. The problem with

sending money into the void starts with the people at the top. First, the organization receiving the

money has many problems of their own and they have their own expenses. In the case of

UNICEF, they have been known to line their pockets first before sending the aid to the people

who need it. Even if the organization is not corrupt and greedy, the governments receiving the

international aid are often greedy. The economy of many governments in a state of poverty is

that of a trickle-down economy. This means that any money received from abroad is first given

to the government to do with as they please. If the government was just and good, they would

use the money to improve education and build public roads and facilities. However, more than

likely what happens is this--- the higher up government officials line their pockets; they keep a

portion of the funding. The money then goes down to the people at the next level, and so on,

until all that’s left is a few remaining dollars spread thin amongst the people on the streets and

dying of starvation. For example, in Haiti, they had a dictator named Papa Doc. After being

elected by the people in 1957, he declared himself a dictator and stayed in office until 1971. In

that time, he stole millions of dollars from the Haitian people and lived a lavish life with his

family. There have been billions of dollars poured into Haiti from private organizations and
 Keefer 7

governmental organizations, yet Haiti is still the poorest country in the western hemisphere. Why

is that? How can you give a nation billions of dollars and they still fail to rise out of the squalor?

The answer is related to two factors. The first factor is the corruption mentioned above. Haiti is

known to have a corrupt government. Even within my adoption there was a push from the

government who wanted more and more money to push the adoption process through; it ended

up taking three years to complete. With all the corruption, it is useless to give billions of dollars

to people who don’t know how to use it and take it all for themselves. The second factor that

causes a problem is with giving solely monetary support to a country in poverty, because they

don’t know how to use it most effectively. They don’t have the education or an understanding of

how money works. It’s like giving a toddler a Ferrari and expecting them to be able to drive it

perfectly. While it may seem insensitive and ignorant to say that the Haitian people are not

knowledgeable, it is the truth. A better method of donating financially is to invest in a local

business. This is one of the World Bank’s strategies in dealing with poverty during the COVID-

19 pandemic. To immediately help tackle the COVID-19 crisis, “the World Bank Group is

deploying up to $160 billion by working with governments in developing countries on policy

options to compensate for income losses, mitigate food price increases and service delivery

disruptions, and support firms and workers to protect jobs and facilitate recovery.” Governments

and people who are wanting to send money to impoverished nations need to be wise in sending

money. For example, in Haiti there are local businesses that are trying to develop solar powered

streetlights to bring light to a people living in darkness. There are also farms and manufacturing

businesses that are in desperate need of capital. By putting money into the hands of the

businesses providing jobs for the people, more people benefit. The World Bank is wise in
 Keefer 8

investing in business and not in people directly. The money invested in impoverished nations

need to be spent to create jobs and opportunity.

Sometimes it’s good to give money to a nation to get them out of an immediate crisis.

After the Earthquake in 2010, the United States and other nations gave Haiti approximately 13.5

billion dollars to aid in rebuilding the country. However, today Haiti is still stuck in the same

cycle of poverty. The same concept applies when giving material aid to impoverished nations.

When a nation receives free grain or rice, the value of the homegrown products is undervalued.

Hence, the farmers who have worked hard to grow the food now have to give away their product

for close to nothing. That is one of the principles taught in the book by Brian Fikkert and Steve

Corbett, When Helping Hurts. Often times when people give to another country, they undermine

the local economy and everything they have been working for. It is actually basic economics: if I

am given a product for free, why would I waste my money buying the same product. Likewise, if

a Haitian can receive American rice for free, then why would they buy Haitian grown rice. It’s

not evil to give money to a nation stuck in the clutches of poverty, it’s just often unwise and

unplanned. While in America people often say invest in people and not businesses, in states of

poverty, it should be the opposite. Invest in the business and the people will have jobs. Money

creates jobs, jobs pay people, people spend money on products. This creates cash flow in an

economy, and it is the best way to effectively alleviate poverty.

The third type of aid needed to help people out of the cycle of poverty is the

establishment of local and governmental leaders that are held accountable to the people. It cannot

be disputed that one of the leading factors in promoting poverty is poor leadership. From

dictators like Joseph Stalin, who created a communist regime that oppressed millions of people

and kept them in a state of poverty, to Mao Zedong who killed millions of people and destroyed
 Keefer 9

China’s economy. The fight against poverty often starts from the top down. As previously

discussed above, there are many corrupt people in positions of power that actively work to keep

the people poor while making themselves wealthy. During the presidency of John F. Kennedy,

Fidel Castro was the dictator of Cuba. The Cuban people were being oppressed under a

burgeoning communist regime. In response to this, along with many other factors, John F.

Kennedy allowed the United States military to stage an assault in the Bay of Pigs, in Cuba, in an

attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro’s power. This is just one of many examples where there has

been an attempt to create a change in leadership to alleviate the poverty or oppression of a

nation. Previously, the focus had been on alleviating poverty from the angle of financial aid, but

clearly that hasn’t worked. While it is known that the government plays a big role in the state of

a country, now the focus has shifted primarily to the governments of poor countries. “The Role

of Social Accountability in Poverty Alleviation Programs in Developing Countries: An Analysis

with Reference to Bangladesh,” is an article written by Abu Elias Sarker and Mohammad

Habibur Rahman. Sarker and Rahman argue that social accountability has great potential to

improve the situation in Bangladesh, however, there are many difficulties hindering that growth,

namely “contemporary socio-economic and political realities.” While this paper doesn’t address

poverty worldwide, it is understood that these same principles can be applied to other nations.

Sarker and Rahman state, “There is now a consensus that participation of the poor people or the

institutions representing them in diverse poverty alleviation programs is a necessary condition

for improving their wellbeing. Therefore, the focus has now shifted to exercise social

accountability in the developing countries. Social accountability is based on civic engagement in

various forms, an essential civic engagement process required for public accountability under

any circumstances.” What does this all mean? What is social accountability? The accountability
 Keefer 10

is on the official and the people. When the leaders are elected in an impoverished country, they

are responsible for having a viable plan to alleviate the poverty in their nations. Often when these

leaders are elected, they don’t take responsibility for the people or the situation. They let the

people proceed as they normally do, with no plan of how to benefit the nation. The pressure is

often placed on more prosperous parts of the world giving more and more money. But how are

the leaders of those nations using the money? Are they wise with the money or do they abuse it?

According to the essay by Sarker and Rahman, “accountability is a “proactive process by which

public officials inform about and justify their plans of action, their behavior and results and are

sanctioned accordingly” (Ackerman 2004)”’ Social accountability is the ability to regulate the

actions of the leadership and making them deliver on their promises for which they were elected.

To effectively alleviate poverty, there needs to be capable leaders. The United States doesn’t

have to go to Haiti, Bangladesh, or Chad and make the leaders be accountable. There doesn’t

need to be military involvement, but the United Nations or the World Banks has to keep people

accountable on a world stage. If the president of Haiti is known to keep money for himself, he

needs to be thrust into the light and explain his actions. Good leaders make all the difference.

The process of keeping leaders accountable is the only thing that will keep some nations out of

the cycle of poverty. There are three models that Sarker and Rahman outline that have been

given considerable thought. Of the three models, the third one is more agreeable. The third

model states, ‘“Third, there is participative democracy which tends to create innovative

institutions by expanding ‘the opportunity for citizens to engage directly in different stages of the

policy process and at different levels of public bureaucracy (Joshi and Houtzager 2012), (Sarker

and Rahman).” This model is better, because it creates transparency. In a democracy, the power

belongs to the people and they regulate the government and keep them accountable. This model
 Keefer 11

gives the people an opportunity to be involved and know what’s going on in their own nation.

Often how dictators keep power is by keeping the population in the dark and hiding behind

bureaucracy. With this approach, the walls have been broken and information is relational.

The fourth type of aid that is needed to bring countries out of poverty is the availability of

medicine and healthcare. An outcome of poverty and often a common factor of poverty is the

lack of healthcare and hospitals to take care of the sick. The life expectancy in the United States

is about 79 years of age. The life expectancy of Chad is about 53 years of age. While there is a

plethora of factors that contribute to this statistic, one glaring factor is the lack of health care,

nutrition, and proper living conditions. One step to alleviating poverty around the world is by

improving the health of those too poor to afford proper medicines. The World Health

Organization is one of many organizations that help bring medicine to people in need. However,

for a country to have a sustainable healthcare system, they need capital. The only way the United

States, Canada, and Great Britain are able to afford their health care is by taxing the people.

Because people in impoverished nations don’t make enough money to live off of, let alone tax, it

is almost impossible to raise the capital needed to support a healthcare system. One great article

that addressed this topic is “Workfare versus Welfare: Incentive Arguments for Work

Requirements in Poverty-Alleviation Programs” by Timothy Besley and Stephen Coate. In this

article written in 1992, the authors juxtapose the two methods of poverty relief to examine their

benefits and deficits. Workfare is defined as the process of people working in order to earn or

gain access to the benefits of the government incentives. Welfare is programs made by the

government for the people with the taxpayer money. In the United States, with the advent of

welfare and Medicare, a lot of people were not incentivized to work. Because they could get the

medical aid that they need for free, this led to poor decisions in the work life and family life.
 Keefer 12

According to Besley and Coate, “To avoid this problem, it is argued, poor relief must be made

relatively less attractive.” The problem arises when this method is being applied to the

impoverished nations. Does the government require people to work in order to receive the

benefits from the government? What if there aren’t enough jobs to go around amongst the

people? If the government gives away free welfare to all people, then what will be the incentive

for people to work and support themselves? Besley and Coate state, “we analyzed two distinct

incentive arguments: a screening argument that work requirements may serve as a means of

targeting transfers and a deterrent argument that they may serve as a device to encourage

poverty-reducing investments.” They go on to say, “the screening argument is motivated by a

desire to direct poor support toward the truly needy. In developing economies, it is typically too

costly for the government to set up a sophisticated administrative machinery to determine

whether a particular individual is in need of poor support.” This is part of the social

accountability discussed in the previous paragraph. The government needs to take responsibility

for their people in a sustainable way. Yet when the government doesn’t have the capital to set up

the welfare system that they might need, it might be beneficial to set up a workfare system. To

the rest of the world, it is wiser to give medical aid then it is to just give financial aid. Earlier it

was discussed that while financial aid is often encouraged, it isn’t often the wisest choice.

Instead of giving billions of dollars to Haiti, the United should have and still should, go into

Haiti and build a few hospitals or maybe set up some electrical power plants. With that structure

in place, they can teach the Haitians how to build upon that foundation, how to maintain it, and

to set up a sustainable welfare system. This requires capital and a people willing and able to

work.
 Keefer 13

The most crucial, and often neglected part of poverty alleviation, is the need to provide

people with spiritual and emotional support. Where is God in the fight to alleviate poverty? God

is often represented in the Church. Thousands of churches send hundreds of people all over the

world on mission trips. Why? Does it help? A mission trip is one of the most useless forms of

poverty alleviation. For one thing it is degrading to the poor and harmful for the people trying to

help the poor. I’ve been on a mission trip for one week. Being from Haiti, I have a different

mentality from most people on mission trips. Most people go on a mission trip because they have

a good heart and want to see how they can help the world. Again, I have been on both sides on

the poverty line. I have been the kid looking up at all the white people wondering why they are

here and if they are going to help me. I have also been the one to look down on a little kid and

feel pity and shame. A weeklong mission’s trip has no effect on the fight against poverty. What

does have an impact is prayer and investing in the country physically or financially. God is

needed in the fight against poverty. The Bible says that true religion is helping the poor and the

widowed in their affliction. Christians and the church as a whole need to invest more than a week

of our lives to the poor. One reason that people stay in poverty is because they have no hope of a

better life. They have no reason to want better for themselves or their loved ones. When a person

has hope, anything is possible. When a person has hope in God, then poverty is only a pebble in

the path to eternal life. Now this is a sensitive issue. Some Christians go on mission trips to share

the gospel and give hope, yet they don’t do anything to physically help the person in need. They

will often feed the soul, and let the body go hungry. How can a person listen to a message of a

good God when they are literally dying of starvation? When we as Christians preach the gospel

to the poor, we need to follow up with physical gifts of food, medicine, or shelter. Many times,

people want to solve the issue of poverty without God like He is an afterthought. Nothing of
 Keefer 14

significance happens in this world without the providence of God. Only through prayer,

supplication, and physical actions led by the hand of the Holy Spirit can we bring change to the

world.

In conclusion, poverty is a never-ending battle. In the New Testament, Jesus said, “you

will always have the poor with you.” That could mean the poor of spirit or physical poverty. But

we can only hope to fight to end poverty. Plenty of methodologies have been used to alleviate

poverty all around the world, yet none of them have had lasting results. Although it seems like

financial aid is the best way to alleviate poverty, there are more efficient methods needed to help

people out of the cycle of poverty, which are; educational aid, financial aid, businesses

foundations, medical/healthcare aid, spiritual aid, and emotional aid.

 Keefer 15

Work Cited

Besley, Timothy, and Stephen Coate. “Workfare versus Welfare: Incentive Arguments for Work

Requirements in Poverty-Alleviation Programs.” American Economic Review, vol. 82,

no. 1, Mar. 1992, p. 249. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=bth&AN=9204060605&site=eds-live.

General, Secretary. “Implementation of the Third United Nations Decade for the Eradication of

Poverty (2018–2027).” United Nations: General Assembly, United Nations, 6 Aug. 2018,

undocs.org/A/73/298.

Hasell, Joe, and Max Roser. “How Do We Know the History of Extreme Poverty?” Global

Extreme Poverty, vol. 1, no. 1, ser. 1, 5 Feb. 2019, pp. 1–5. 1, ourworldindata.org/extreme-

history-methods.

Howton, Elizabeth Howton. “Poverty.” World Bank, International Development Association, 16

Apr. 2020, www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview#2.

Sarker, Abu Elias, and Mohammad Habibur Rahman. “The Role of Social Accountability in

Poverty Alleviation Programs in Developing Countries: An Analysis with Reference to

Bangladesh.” Public Organization Review, vol. 15, no. 2, June 2015, pp. 317–333.

EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s11115-014-0275-x.