Question from @makenziejones:
"In your opinion, is it possible to completely eradicate extreme poverty? Why or why not?"
Relative vs Extreme Poverty
Before addressing this question, it would be useful to examine what extreme poverty is defined to be. The United Nations on extreme poverty:
"More than 700 million people — or 10 per cent of the global population — still live in extreme poverty, which means they are surviving on less than $1.90 a day"
Sustenance on a budget of less than two U.S. dollars is unattainable. Essentials including food, water, shelter, electricity, heat are foregone leading to malnourishment, growth disorders, and a host of other health issues. While it is not entirely common to witness individuals in extreme poverty in the United States, the statistic from the UN elucidates just how prevalent these wealth disparities really are globally. In the United States, we do have some extreme poverty, but much of what we think of poverty as is from a sheltered perspective. I would argue that this is really what I might call relative poverty - a state where individuals find themselves lacking the economic means of those around them, but still having enough to sustain themselves. There is individuals living in extreme poverty in the U.S. but the proportion is much lower here than in other areas around the world: China, India, Africa, to name a few.
In the UN websites section on poverty they define Sustainable Development Goals, in which the primary focus is "No Poverty". Now we will examine whether that is entirely possible as well as possibilities to help the world more in that direction.
Addressing Poverty
First off, it would be entirely impossible to eliminate all of poverty including relative poverty. But I believe steps can be taken to address extreme poverty conditions around the world. In particular, some resources like clean drinking water and energy may made more available to more areas of the world. We see many non profit philanthropic organizations trying to tackle these audacious goals. Alex Honnold, accomplished mountain climber turned celebrity with his film Free Solo, has has a foundation that is one example of such organizations. His nonprofit aims at providing solar energy to communities across Africa and Asia that are lacking energy access. Corporations like TOMS or KNO clothing operate under a buy one give one model to help those in under developed countries. This is a commonplace thing to observe in our society where wealthy individuals and corporations do humanitarian work in attempts to build a better world.
How can we make these utilitarian efforts more effective?
Maybe as a society we ought to start valuing such work more both from a extrinsic, monetary standpoint and an intrinsic, meaningful perspective. This may attract more people into such social efforts. I am sure there are already tax incentives for groups doing such work, but maybe there are other means of encouragement for starting such a organization like land grants, or policies that favor investment in underserved communities both domestically and abroad. I think such humanistic efforts are often overlooked and undervalued in our society today. Maybe it is because they aren't profitable from an investment or financial perspective. Looking around at our society, it is amazing how much we can have while some in the world do not have anything. Our power and command of technology is far to great to have such a disparity in resource availability across the world.
Resources
Poverty | UN Global Compact. (n.d.). www.unglobalcompact.org. https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/our-work/social/poverty