Poverty limits opportunities

EDWARD BULE
Correspondent | Friday September 17, 2010 00:00

There are at least three categories of poor people. The 'chronic poor' are those who live in a permanent state of extreme deprivation to the point where they need government intervention.

The 'borderline poor' are just a notch above the chronic poor because they do not suffer extreme poverty but have enough to sustain them in poverty.

The other category, the 'newly poor' are those who might have been doing well but because they do not have enough savings, could be suddenly experiencing financial instability because they are no longer getting an income either because they lost their job or they have retired from work. 

There is no consensus on the causes of poverty but the stereotypical view is that poverty is the fruit of laziness. The leftist view is that the poor are the most hardworking and productive people and that, given a chance, they would prove themselves.

The leftists argue that the poor are in their state of affairs because they have and continue to be exploited by those who own the means of production.

Some causes of poverty are also the results of poverty. For instance, some people are poor because they do not have land on which to plough.

Others are poor because they do not have cattle to sell or use for draught power.

Many rural and urban dwellers lack the relevant educational and training skills that could help them qualify for a job.  Persistent droughts are also blamed for poverty especially in the rural areas. While poor people would depend solely on rains to cultivate their ploughing fields, the rich would harness technology to achieve the same effect.  

The poor of any given society are identifiable by their lack of the most basic needs of life, such as food, shelter, clothing, education and health. In some cases, these basic needs are available but in such a poor quality that they cannot afford the person concerned even a degree of comfort consistent with a minimum standard of living.

A recent study quoted by Kempe Ronald Hope shows that between 1980 and 1990, 43 percent of Batswana lived in poverty.

Fifty-five percent of the poor were found in the rural areas, while 30 percent of them lived in the urban areas of the country.

The same study established that half of the rural population in this country do not own cattle. The same study also classified Botswana as having the highest degree of economic disparities in the world. One of the things used to explain the high levels of poverty in Botswana is the high disparities in our education. Access to education is not the same both in terms of quality and availability.

The poor in the urban areas are housed in overcrowded crime-compatible slums or squatter settlements with a degraded and contaminated physical environment because they have got no choice of accommodation.

Their settlements are susceptible to evictions, floods and other put-offs.

The result is that many of them engage in illegal practices such as the brewing of illegal alcoholic drinks, the use of habit-forming drugs and theft. Children growing up in these violent neighbourhoods are highly likely to be immoral and violent themselves because of the negative influences around them. Children living in a squalid neighbourhood are likely to perform badly at school because there are very few role models in his or her area. There is very little motivation to do well.

The fact that a child from a poor family will not be able to dress as decently as his or her fellow pupils from the well-to-do families might destroy his or her self-esteem and impact negatively on the child's performance at school.

Because they are not able to build safe and decent houses, poor people are exposed to intolerable vagaries of weather and disease. On average, their houses have got poor ventilation, putting the lives of their occupants such as those suffering from asthma at great risk.

Educationally, children from poor parents are more likely to do badly at school than their counterparts from rich families. While a child whose parents are poor has got limited options in terms of choosing a school, the rich parent cannot only engage a tutor to improve the performance of their child but can enrol his child in a private school as opposed to a public one, if the quality of education in the private school is higher.

This disadvantages the child from the poor family even in the job market. Without the best education, chances of the disadvantaged child lifting himself from abject poverty are limited. The vicious cycle is therefore passed from one generation to another until a miracle happens.

Poor people, because they would not qualify for insurance or have enough money to use the best doctors, are most likely to die from preventable diseases. Besides, because they eat low quality food with inadequate nutrition, poor people are more likely to contact a disease. Their children are likely to die in infancy from preventable diseases.

Because the mind of a poor person is forever in turmoil because of want, he is more inclined to violence. Research shows that poor people, in an attempt to escape the reality of their poverty, tend to drink less responsibly than those who are not desperate.

This makes them even poorer and more violent, leading to divorces. Poor people are more likely to be entangled in a quagmire of debts which makes them emotionally very unstable.

Parents who are poor hardly spend any quality time with each other or with their children. The result is that there are no strong bonds or relationships between members of the family. The reality is that there is no family worth talking about.

The poor have got no dignity and are normally ostracised by the rich, who exclude them from decision-making processes.

While a well-to-do person can fight for justice in a court of law using the best lawyer in the market, a poor person can only dream about justice. Politicians use the voters' poverty to buy votes by offering presents to them.

Governments, who monopolise the distribution of welfare benefits also use these handouts to present themselves like the good Samaritans they are not.

There is no overstating that poverty limits the contribution of the poor to the economic development of their country.