How to Deal with Poverty


I know that with globalization the future looks brighter and brighter for many people: But will many people also be left behind in this expanding economy? I know that with technology expanding as it is, many of the jobs that required more human effort are disappearing while other types of jobs that involve more technical expertise are being created. Now do the jobs created by this expanding technology compensate for the loss of jobs in the non-tech sector, considering also the expanding population around the world? Two problems arise. One is that those who lose theirs jobs need more education, assuming they can be retrained, to attain those jobs that are being created by this new technology, and this new technology is expanding at such an accelerated pace that I wonder whether this reeducation can really keep up with this technological expansion. And secondly, if one can find employment or if there are no ethnic conflicts or natural disasters to interfere with job opportunities, the non-tech sector’s remuneration level would probably be lowered because of its new supporting service function to a point whereby many would need a second or third job to make livable ends meet. Therefore you’ll have those growing with globalization while I believe there will be many who will not be able to keep up within this movement. What can be done about this?

To provide more employment for individuals, you could re-engineer the workweek by providing shorter hours for those already working, thus allowing more workers to be employed to keep up with the productivity. Financially you could spread the profitability of the enterprise more evenly between the workers and management so everyone could then have a livable standard of remuneration. Of course in evening out the remuneration levels, one might feel the motivating factor for improving productivity would lessen. But perhaps the motivating factor for this should be something else other than profit, such as job significance. This approach could also lessen excessive stress that can accumulate on the job. Tips on how one can be more frugal with ones expenses, as expressed in my report on How to become Financially Independent, can also be practiced to aid one in developing a more livable standard of life.

If by chance you might not be able to find a job no matter how hard you try you should not become embarrassed by this situation because this is how life oftentimes is and many are probably in the same boat. But the job one should eventually get, if he or she gets one, should be one whereby the employee finds societal significance in his or her employment, otherwise the motivation for working would tend to be quite unfulfilling and lead to much more restlessness and uncreativity in his or her job. An answer to this dilemma could be a procedure, which is set up whereby some financially well-off families could adopt some families that are not so financially well off. And this policy should be considered on a worldwide basis, sometimes crossing national boundaries, but always with an accountability procedure in place. Of course, this process could be either temporary or permanent depending upon the state of the adoptee’s employment situation. In doing this though, the cost would have to be the loss of much of the adopteeĀ“s privacy, and much of the time needed by the adoptors to supervise the distribution of financial aid to the adoptees in an accountable fashion. But since work is the vehicle by which individuals do develop a self-worth, however, the adoptees could engage in volunteer work that they find meaningful, and perhaps this could eventually lead them to specific job opportunities, while the adoptors are financially supporting them. If a procedure like this is not adopted, much talent is going to be lost to society, because those individuals struggling financially will be spending all of their time trying to survive, which sometimes can develop into some limited creativity, but not to the extent that creativity could be developed if you didn’t have to struggle exclusively just to survive. If this plan can not be adopted, than governments would have to be the adoptors and give a guaranteed livable wage to everyone who hasn’t one, because work for pay as we know it will continue to be less and less. And the morepolitical stability you have around the world, the more effective this program can be.


1st Question – What is the root of all evil: Money or the Love of Money?


1) Corbin says: As one becomes poorer and poorer, I believe the person tends to feel that money is really the root of all evil.

2) Sarah says: I believe that lack of Love-Love for God, for fellow man, for the world around us – is the root of all evil, followed by greed – greed for money, power, luxury, whatever. Lack of enough money to buy necessities is pretty bad, especially if you’re the person suffering the lack, but the reason for it goes back to the above. If a person has no money to buy food, you can bet someone else has got some.

3) Mary Anne says: In my humble opinion, it’s neither. The root of all evil is ignorance. Ignorance breeds fear, fear breeds anger and hatred, jealousy and greed. Money is just a symbol. Money symbolizes the value of our hours awake: Naturally if we spend all our hours awake making horseshoes, we are not tilling the soil necessary to grow the food to support our bodies. Money is the symbol of value we attach to the products of our conscious endeavor. It’s not actually a thing, it’s an abstraction whose actual value is nuetral, unless we all agree on one value or another. Even then, it’s still a figment of our imagination. When we all agree on a value, we are consenting to be bound by a certain delusion about the nature of reality. At that point, I think it can be argued, that a certain brand of “collective insanity” takes hold. The fact of the matter is that we are here, it’s All God’s stuff, and Private Property, while a pleasant delusion, is still a delusion. Marxist-sounding, I know, but there it is. Jesus was a Communist too, as I recall. It’s only ignorance that prevents us from claiming the Kingdom in the here and now. Money has little or nothing to do with it, in my opinion. But it’s a great question.

4) John says: To me it would be the love of money. For if one loves money too much one is willing to do all kinds of things to get money. Steal, lie, cheat and even kill to get the money they love. And another thing, it seems the more money one has the more they want which is greed and that’s not a nice thing.

5) Gary says: Pretty much agree with every thing that’s said so far.

6) Frank says: I believe that the correct translation of the verse is “the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil” Here it is, 1 Timothy 6:9-10, “People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”

7) David says: I think you are asking a couple of different questions here…One is whether money is the root of all evil and the other is what to do when there is a lack of money which is a backbreaker to many and how to deal with it. I tend to see money as the root of all evil…(all evil is plural–as Frank pointed out)…and I think that lack of money is just part and parcel of a world that runs on it. I work on this in the States and I see the frustration and pain in not having enough money and the barriers it presents to just live with the basics…food, shelter, clothing… I also think that a generation builds upon another generation so that it is even more difficult because this situation turns into the a poverty of spirit and hope…the manifestations of whichabound…so that you not only have the outside barrier of the lack of resources, but also the inside barriers of the loss of spirit, dreams and hope.

8) Lawrence says: This is a great question indeed. I am sure that there is an inherent evil in all things, as well, there is an inherent good in all things. Take the subject of money; Money in and of itself is not good or bad, neither is it worth anything. Its value is determined at the time of purchase, at that time its potential for good or evil is also determined. There was a story in the news lately that shows this concept perfectly. A group of women decided to hold a fund raiser for the children that had no hope of receiving a Christmas. These women were prostitutes and ended up raising a lot of money for the children. The way that the money was raised was questionable at the very least. This made some of the locals mark the funds as evil. The funds were donated to a local church for the children. The presiding minister had a hard time deciding whether or not to accept the funds, saying that the money was evil and that it was received in sin, therefore it was not good enough to be used for the children. I believe that when the money gathered was put into the coffers of the church for the good of the children, the money, although gathered in sin, is now indistinguishable from the other monies gathered by other means. All of the money is now good, whether given by the whore or the deacon, the use and the intent is now for a good and therefore the money is good. Now the question that I have is would that money, having been donated by a business man, have also been marked as evil? The business man would likely not be questioned as to whether he lied, or even possibly stretched the truth just a little in the deal in which the money was raised. If he did, would the money not also have been acquired in sin? I believe that we spend too much time judging the intent and values of others, and far too little time evaluating the intent of our deeds and actions.

In closing, the answer to the question is NO. There is no evil in money or the love of money. It is in the priorities, uses, and means by which we acquire, spend and use the money that is evil. We must realize that it is by the grace of God that all things are possible and through Him anything acquired can be righteous. God has made many men rich and famous, he has also given them power over others. None of these are evil but the acquisition or the use of these same things without the power or influence of God is evil..

9) Harold says: The love of money is, not money itself. If you love money, you love the world. The worldly system is selfishness. The cause of most of our society disorders is selfishness. Selflessness would cure many of the problems created by selfishness. God is not against money. He can bless us with money. He will, however, not bless us for personal gain, but so that we can bless others.

10) Robert says: I can understand the feeling and concern about poverty increasing. Even in the US, the percentage difference in the salary of CEOs and the average worker has increased tremendously in the last couple of decades. More and more of the middle class is becoming the lower class. But I personally agree that the love of money is really the evil. It’s saying that money is much more important than other aspects of life, such as helping others. Although I can understand the minister’s hesitation in accepting money raised by prostitution. It is also interesting to note here that during the time of Jesus, you were usually believed to be rich because you were blessed by God. I further think that people tend to believe that money is evil when it’s someone else’s money.

11) Steven says: Neither money nor the love of money is evil, provided it is used for developing God’s Kingdom. The danger is the rich person will be consumed with the material things of earth rather than heaven. And if the poor were the ones who had money to feed their families would they think money is evil? It’s really situationally dependent.

12) Corbin says: A respondee suggested to me that if you wanted a rich boss to work harder, you should pay him more money, whereas if you wanted a poor worker to work harder, you should pay him less money.

2nd Question – There was a consensus of opinion among Internet contributors that Gambling is not prohibited by Scripture, but is, if it’s overused.

Poverty, one should consider, is not only Material Poverty, but more importantly, Spiritual Poverty as well.

The names of the commentarians, other than myself, have been changed to protect the privacy of the Internet contributors, but their comments are accurate.

An Autobiographical Sketch

I was born in New York City in 1931, grew up on Long Island, graduated from Roanoke College in Virginia with a BA in Political Science, and from New York Theological Seminary with a Masters in Religious Education. I became a committed Christian in 1958, and a number of years later became a committed Ecumenical Christian. I worked as an accountant in various companies for about 25 years in New York City, then moved down to Argentina and worked for more than 20 years as a BusinessEnglish conversationalist teacher with some of the top managers. I also became a Stephen Minister (trained counselor) while down here. I have been married twice (the last to an Argentine), widowed once, have one cat, but have no children. If you want to contact me, you can write to me via (

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2007-2015 Top Politics - powered by: J.Winberg