Some tangents I cut out of an essay I provided for a very cool ebook project I’ll tell you about later:
Many – in fact, most – donors and activists have never been poor themselves. I haven’t. So when we try to picture poverty, we confuse the concept of poor with the concept of “broke.” Broke is a temporary state. You’re broke as a college student; it’s a phase you go through until you graduate and start to earn money. Maybe you’re broke while you pay down your student loans, or while you’re looking for a job. You have no money for luxuries, you live month to month. You might even think you’re poor.
But you’re not. You don’t have money right now, but that’s not going to last forever. Your life is not built around poverty. You’ll finish school, you’ll find a job. It’s a transitory stage, and it really is empty. It’s about waiting for something better to come. There is no point settling in, since it’s not real life. That life has room for poorly thought out aid projects. Poverty does not.
Another complexity in the lives of poor people: when you have very little money, the relative value of the rest of your possessions increases. These could be tangible objects like jewelry or appliances. If you’re poor and you lose your watch or your cellphone, you don’t get to go buy a new one right away. You save up, or you buy on credit. You also possess intangibles, like social capital. Or pride.
I like knowing my neighbors, but it’s not essential to me. If I need urgent babysitting, or an extra egg I call a sitter or walk to the corner store. If I was poor, the neighbors would be key to my survival.
***************
photo credit: GorillaSushi
In the US, you’re poor if you have to eat ramen. In Tajikistan you’re poor when you can’t afford ramen.
Dear Alana,
I regularly read your blog and really liked the thought you are trying to point to through this post. I agree with you on many fronts.
I , however, have an interesting observation to share. If you step into any slum in the city of Mumbai, you will find that most of the households have Dish Antena’s for satellite television, T.V (might be old), a fridge (a necessity in humid Mumbai) But if we look at the financial resources, we will find that most of these items have been taken either by loan or by borrowing money from someone. It is disturbing to note that the child in such circumstances might not be provided extra books to read or clothes to wear , but maybe has a stereo at home. I understand that it all boils down to ‘prioritizing’ and I don’t blame them for their choices. Afterall, they have a right to live the way they want to and free from our perceptions of poverty. But through my work in slums, and in rural areas of India, I have witnessed the changing notions of poverty. But nonetheless, your points are absolutely relevant.
When talking to poor people, I have noticed that people seem comfortable making these kinds of capital purchases – TV, DVD player, and so on, because they can be resold in times of need. Children’s clothes and books can’t. So they both increase comfort and seem like a safe purchase. I don’t know if that is true in India, though. I have only been a tourist in India.
I feel the issue of ‘what really matters for a quality life’ is perceived very differently by people who face poverty. While some understand the value of education, savings, investing on health, some look at it as a second priority to entertainment, momentary pleasure, and satisfying immidiate needs.
MS Srinivasan , who was an Indian Sociologist , had put forth a theory of ‘Sansrkitization’ which means that the lower classes try to emulate the upper classes in order to become like them. For instance, the Ganesh Festival ( Festival of Praying to Lord Ganesha) which occurs once a year was , some years ago, observed amongst elites and of particular caste who could afford to spend money on idols, decorations, feasts etc. Now a days , it is common for people, who cannot afford it to practice this. They sometimes take loans, or borrow from friends or family to do this. But the percentage of people taking loans to educate their children have only increased marginally over the years. The perception that spending on such things which are above the basic necessities , and sometimes compromising on necessities is something that makes me wonder how poor actually perceive their own poverty.
[…] A Few Thoughts on Poverty on Blood and […]
I had always thought I grew up very, very poor. My mother worked very hard but was unable to provide the things needed to survive. I remember being without power and water because the bills could not be paid. We also knew exactly which neighbors or family members would be able to feed us dinner or breakfast because our cabinets were bare. But the big difference is that was only for a period of a few years. In time we were able to move on and true poverty is almost imposable to get out of. So, I do agree with your statements about the difference between being poor and being broke. As an adult and a student taking a development class I now realize we were just extremely broke because we had the power to make ourselves better.
I think you have an interesting point by saying that people from MDC’s do not have a clear picture of what abject poverty really is. It is not being able to barely afford your rent or having to use food stamps, but not having a home built of scraps or the ability to find food at all. Being that this concept could be difficult for some to grasp in its reality, it could hinder their efforts in development since they would be blind to the immensity of life being poor. Also, the idea of lacking even suitable living conditions, schooling, hospitals, employment, and rule of law perpetuates an endless road of poverty that cannot be alleviated by finding a new job, as there may be no jobs to be had. Basically, there is no way out, at least not like in the more developed countries. I will say, however, that there can be great poverty in the developed nations as well. It may not have the same extreme nature as it does in LDC’s, but poverty in the United States can be dire in and of its own right. There may be jobs around and food in the Super Wal-Marts, but if one has no opportunity for sustainable employment, afford education, struggles to find affordable, nutritious food, and have health coverage; it can be a black hole as well. The key difference is that there is food to be had (it may not be the best, but it’s available); there is free, obligatory education; and there are low paying jobs can be found. With this said, even though the poor in the United States have more resources at their disposal, poverty in developed nations can still be full of its own misery.
As a college student, I may have a different group of people to listen to. But in my years here in upper education, I’ve learned one thing: It’s cool to be poor. I have no idea why but college students love talking about their financial status and how they have to skip a night out at the bar because they only have “like 80 dollars in the bank.” First of all, that’s a lie. But what is it about us that we want to be related to being poor (especially as college students like you mentioned.) I like your take on being broke and the transitory phase of ‘brokeness’. In addition, get to know your neighbors! You never know when you may need something more than an egg for your western.