Poverty: whose fault is it?

who is to blame?

  • no one, it just happens

    Votes: 1 11.1%
  • everyone should share a part of the responsibility

    Votes: 4 44.4%
  • the more developed countries

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • the poor, themselves

    Votes: 4 44.4%

  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .

storni

topological frog
Registered Senior Member
Let me have your views on this perhaps, cliche issue.

Poverty, do you think there is anyone to blame for it?


There is an interesting concept of poverty here, quite helpful:

http://www.liberalvalues.org.nz/archive/welfare/child_poverty_whose_fault.html

There is only "relative" poverty in a country where governments pay people a living income. Real poverty exists in countries that cannot produce the necessities of life.


I guess when you are not aware, it is ethical not to consider poverty and keep throwing food away, using more energy than needed and even feeding the dogs is fine.

But would it be ethical if you knew about poverty and its effects?

Is there is anyone to blame or is it just a phenomena like a drought where no one is really responsible?
 
Originally posted by storni


Is there is anyone to blame or is it just a phenomena like a drought where no one is really responsible?

Someone or somethings ARE responsible but there is no particular individual or institution at fault. It is sort of a chain reaction with one cause leading to another effect.
 
Who's fault is it
Mother nature's.
Although I wouldn't call it a "fault".
If poverty was left alone it would produce super humans. Its "nice people's" fault that poverty goes on for as long as it does.
 
Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
Mother nature's.
Although I wouldn't call it a "fault".
If poverty was left alone it would produce super humans. Its "nice people's" fault that poverty goes on for as long as it does.

Dr Lou, havn't your handlers caught up with you yet? We know you dont like the cage but its for everyones good!
 
Originally posted by storni

I guess when you are not aware, it is ethical not to consider poverty and keep throwing food away, using more energy than needed and even feeding the dogs is fine.

But would it be ethical if you knew about poverty and its effects?

From this statement can I assume that you believe that ignorance is a valid source of morality? All you’ve said here is “If you don’t know, you’re moral, if you do know you are immoral”. So if our aim was to be a moral person, should we simply try to learn as little as possible about the world?
 
My thing is, she listed 2 things: half eaten food, electricity, dog food. None of these would actually help homeless people. Really the only people that throw away food which hasn't been touched are supermarkets, and they regularly donate stuff that is about to expire.

At least in the city, VERY few homeless people are going hungry. If anything, most need to go on a diet.
 
Originally posted by Persol
At least in the city, VERY few homeless people are going hungry. If anything, most need to go on a diet.

wow what friggen city do you live in? In Phoenix our vagrents have such a stringy and hungry look you wonder if they arnt going to dart at you and rip the flesh from your bones.
 
Originally posted by Persol
At least in the city, VERY few homeless people are going hungry. If anything, most need to go on a diet.

Haha, I wonder if that will become a new way to judge the charitable nature of societies: How much does their average homeless person weigh? You should probably go ahead and pattent this scale and make a million dollars off of it when CNN wants to quote your statistics or something.
 
Back
Top