Mission agency releases new report, challenges people everywhere to 'help end extreme poverty in this generation'

Ruhling is an expert on Healthcare which he says is inversely related to medical care

Esther Duflo, an MIT economist, won the 2019 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for her experimental approach to alleviating global poverty. Duflo’s early life working at a non-governmental organization in Madagascar and volunteering in soup kitchens in her native France inspired her to study economics and research the root causes of poverty. With her fellow Nobel winners Abhijit Banerjee of MIT and Michael Kremer of Harvard, Duflo showed that effective policies often go against conventional wisdom and popular economic models. The only way to find out what works, she argues, is to rigorously test solutions on the ground, and she encourages businesses to do the same. With Banerjee, Duflo also wrote the new book "Good Economics for Hard Times."

Making his first official public appearance since his early release from jail, the 'Gooba' rapper slams ex-manager Kifano 'Shotti' Jordan for plotting with gang associates to have him killed.

Making his first official public appearance since his early release from jail, the 'Gooba' rapper slams ex-manager Kifano 'Shotti' Jordan for plotting with gang associates to have him killed.

Two young South Australian entrepreneurs launch their own social enterprise selling sanitary products whose profits will go to disadvantaged women fighting period poverty around the world.

Last year, Nigel Shedden got married to wife Belinda and together they moved into their dream home. Today, the couple are living with Mr Shedden's mother, and the home they spent 18 months building has been sold.

Sen. Cory Booker talks disproportionate poverty in America.

The relationship between health and poverty is reasonably well known; one can exacerbate and contribute to the other in a vicious cycle.

This update, as well as including a few health stats updates, provides further information on noncommunicable diseases (which cause some two-thirds of all deaths each year) and more details on the relationship with poverty.

Read full article: Global Health Overview

James A. Levine
Nov 1, 2011; 60:2667-2668
Editorials

Poverty and poor or non-existent health insurance coverage might worsen the effects of heart failure, the American Heart Association said Thursday.

New York City has been the epicenter of the COVID-19 outbreak in the United States, with immigrant populations in areas such as the Bronx "disproportionately" affected, a commentary in JAMA Internal Medicine says.

More than 1 million Tajiks migrate to Russia every year—a sizeable outflow for a country of about 9 million people. These high levels of emigration have had major effects for Tajikistan, especially in the generation of remittances that help lift everyday Tajiks out of poverty but have also made the country increasingly dependent on Russia. This article explores challenges faced by Tajik migrants in Russia and the effects of emigration on Tajikistan’s economy and society.

Poverty.

In the varied and vital roles they play – as farmers, farm workers, entrepreneurs, caregivers and community leaders – rural women form the backbone of rural societies. Almost everywhere, they make crucial contributions to food production, food processing and marketing. Indeed, because women produce, process and prepare much of the food available, they are critical to the food security of [...]

More than 200 million children <5 years old in low- and middle-income countries are not reaching their potential in cognitive development because of factors associated with poverty.

Poverty affects children’s cognition as early as 7 months and continues to increase until 5 years of age. It is mainly mediated by parental education, birth weight, home stimulation throughout the 5 years, and growth in the first 24 months. (Read the full article)

Allostatic load (AL), a biomarker of cardiometabolic risk, predicts the onset of the chronic diseases of aging including cardiac disease, diabetes, hypertension, and stroke. Socioeconomic-related stressors, such as low family income, are associated with AL.

African American youth who grow up in neighborhoods in which poverty levels increase across adolescence evince high AL. The study also highlights the benefits of emotional support in ameliorating this association. (Read the full article)

One girl’s dream comes true, as she is now able to go to a village primary school, started by OM.

A new analysis finds that high-poverty schools are the least effective. But why those schools stifle achievement is harder to figure out.

This is the 16th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Steven Pinker, in his book Enlightenment Now, relates an old Russian joke about two peasants named Boris and Igor. They are both poor. Boris has a goat. Igor does not. One day, Igor is granted a wish by a visiting fairy. What will he wish for?

“I wish,” he says, “that Boris’s goat should die.”

The joke ends there, revealing as much about human nature as about economics. Consider the three things that happen if the fairy grants the wish. One, Boris becomes poorer. Two, Igor stays poor. Three, inequality reduces. Is any of them a good outcome?

I feel exasperated when I hear intellectuals and columnists talking about economic inequality. It is my contention that India’s problem is poverty – and that poverty and inequality are two very different things that often do not coincide.

To illustrate this, I sometimes ask this question: In which of the following countries would you rather be poor: USA or Bangladesh? The obvious answer is USA, where the poor are much better off than the poor of Bangladesh. And yet, while Bangladesh has greater poverty, the USA has higher inequality.

Indeed, take a look at the countries of the world measured by the Gini Index, which is that standard metric used to measure inequality, and you will find that USA, Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom all have greater inequality than Bangladesh, Liberia, Pakistan and Sierra Leone, which are much poorer. And yet, while the poor of Bangladesh would love to migrate to unequal USA, I don’t hear of too many people wishing to go in the opposite direction.

Indeed, people vote with their feet when it comes to choosing between poverty and inequality. All of human history is a story of migration from rural areas to cities – which have greater inequality.

If poverty and inequality are so different, why do people conflate the two? A key reason is that we tend to think of the world in zero-sum ways. For someone to win, someone else must lose. If the rich get richer, the poor must be getting poorer, and the presence of poverty must be proof of inequality.

But that’s not how the world works. The pie is not fixed. Economic growth is a positive-sum game and leads to an expansion of the pie, and everybody benefits. In absolute terms, the rich get richer, and so do the poor, often enough to come out of poverty. And so, in any growing economy, as poverty reduces, inequality tends to increase. (This is counter-intuitive, I know, so used are we to zero-sum thinking.) This is exactly what has happened in India since we liberalised parts of our economy in 1991.

Most people who complain about inequality in India are using the wrong word, and are really worried about poverty. Put a millionaire in a room with a billionaire, and no one will complain about the inequality in that room. But put a starving beggar in there, and the situation is morally objectionable. It is the poverty that makes it a problem, not the inequality.

You might think that this is just semantics, but words matter. Poverty and inequality are different phenomena with opposite solutions. You can solve for inequality by making everyone equally poor. Or you could solve for it by redistributing from the rich to the poor, as if the pie was fixed. The problem with this, as any economist will tell you, is that there is a trade-off between redistribution and growth. All redistribution comes at the cost of growing the pie – and only growth can solve the problem of poverty in a country like ours.

It has been estimated that in India, for every one percent rise in GDP, two million people come out of poverty. That is a stunning statistic. When millions of Indians don’t have enough money to eat properly or sleep with a roof over their heads, it is our moral imperative to help them rise out of poverty. The policies that will make this possible – allowing free markets, incentivising investment and job creation, removing state oppression – are likely to lead to greater inequality. So what? It is more urgent to make sure that every Indian has enough to fulfil his basic needs – what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt, in his fine book On Inequality, called the Doctrine of Sufficiency.

The elite in their airconditioned drawing rooms, and those who live in rich countries, can follow the fashions of the West and talk compassionately about inequality. India does not have that luxury.

© 2007 IndiaUncut.com. All rights reserved.
India Uncut * The IU Blog * Rave Out * Extrowords * Workoutable * Linkastic

This is the 16th installment of The Rationalist, my column for the Times of India.

Steven Pinker, in his book Enlightenment Now, relates an old Russian joke about two peasants named Boris and Igor. They are both poor. Boris has a goat. Igor does not. One day, Igor is granted a wish by a visiting fairy. What will he wish for?

“I wish,” he says, “that Boris’s goat should die.”

The joke ends there, revealing as much about human nature as about economics. Consider the three things that happen if the fairy grants the wish. One, Boris becomes poorer. Two, Igor stays poor. Three, inequality reduces. Is any of them a good outcome?

I feel exasperated when I hear intellectuals and columnists talking about economic inequality. It is my contention that India’s problem is poverty – and that poverty and inequality are two very different things that often do not coincide.

To illustrate this, I sometimes ask this question: In which of the following countries would you rather be poor: USA or Bangladesh? The obvious answer is USA, where the poor are much better off than the poor of Bangladesh. And yet, while Bangladesh has greater poverty, the USA has higher inequality.

Indeed, take a look at the countries of the world measured by the Gini Index, which is that standard metric used to measure inequality, and you will find that USA, Hong Kong, Singapore and the United Kingdom all have greater inequality than Bangladesh, Liberia, Pakistan and Sierra Leone, which are much poorer. And yet, while the poor of Bangladesh would love to migrate to unequal USA, I don’t hear of too many people wishing to go in the opposite direction.

Indeed, people vote with their feet when it comes to choosing between poverty and inequality. All of human history is a story of migration from rural areas to cities – which have greater inequality.

If poverty and inequality are so different, why do people conflate the two? A key reason is that we tend to think of the world in zero-sum ways. For someone to win, someone else must lose. If the rich get richer, the poor must be getting poorer, and the presence of poverty must be proof of inequality.

But that’s not how the world works. The pie is not fixed. Economic growth is a positive-sum game and leads to an expansion of the pie, and everybody benefits. In absolute terms, the rich get richer, and so do the poor, often enough to come out of poverty. And so, in any growing economy, as poverty reduces, inequality tends to increase. (This is counter-intuitive, I know, so used are we to zero-sum thinking.) This is exactly what has happened in India since we liberalised parts of our economy in 1991.

Most people who complain about inequality in India are using the wrong word, and are really worried about poverty. Put a millionaire in a room with a billionaire, and no one will complain about the inequality in that room. But put a starving beggar in there, and the situation is morally objectionable. It is the poverty that makes it a problem, not the inequality.

You might think that this is just semantics, but words matter. Poverty and inequality are different phenomena with opposite solutions. You can solve for inequality by making everyone equally poor. Or you could solve for it by redistributing from the rich to the poor, as if the pie was fixed. The problem with this, as any economist will tell you, is that there is a trade-off between redistribution and growth. All redistribution comes at the cost of growing the pie – and only growth can solve the problem of poverty in a country like ours.

It has been estimated that in India, for every one percent rise in GDP, two million people come out of poverty. That is a stunning statistic. When millions of Indians don’t have enough money to eat properly or sleep with a roof over their heads, it is our moral imperative to help them rise out of poverty. The policies that will make this possible – allowing free markets, incentivising investment and job creation, removing state oppression – are likely to lead to greater inequality. So what? It is more urgent to make sure that every Indian has enough to fulfil his basic needs – what the philosopher Harry Frankfurt, in his fine book On Inequality, called the Doctrine of Sufficiency.

The elite in their airconditioned drawing rooms, and those who live in rich countries, can follow the fashions of the West and talk compassionately about inequality. India does not have that luxury.

The India Uncut Blog © 2010 Amit Varma. All rights reserved.
Follow me on Twitter.

In one of the world’s most expensive cities,...

With much of the global economy stalled amid an unprecedented lockdown of nations grappling to contain the COVID-19 pandemic, the author of a new United Nations report on the disease’s impact on poverty told IPS that hundreds of millions more could be pushed into poverty and we can expect to see social unrest. “A lockdown […]

The post Q&A: Continued Social Distancing and Hundreds of Millions More in Poverty – A New Normal for the World? appeared first on Inter Press Service.

But the worst bit of being poor is to have no voice.

The graduation approach provides a sequenced intervention designed to overcome multiple barriers that prevent the extreme poor from breaking out of poverty.

The global value chains that help drive Asia’s export-driven economic miracle have widespread development impacts. We need to understand them better to maximize the benefits.

This report presents nine case studies on poverty reduction projects financed by ADB in Mongolia, Nepal, the People’s Republic of China, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Uzbekistan, and Viet Nam.

670,000 households in Indonesia are benefitting from improved access to water and sanitation.

This brief presents findings from a study on labor productivity across various sectors in India and its impact on poverty reduction.

BACKGROUND:

Medicaid plays a critical role during the perinatal period, but pregnancy-related Medicaid eligibility only extends for 60 days post partum. In 2014, the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) Medicaid expansions increased adult Medicaid eligibility to 138% of the federal poverty level in participating states, allowing eligible new mothers to remain covered after pregnancy-related coverage expires. We investigate the impact of ACA Medicaid expansions on insurance coverage among new mothers living in poverty.

You can donate at virginmoneygiving.com/fund/FoodforLondonNOW

Jadon Sancho and Arsenal's Reiss Nelson have said said they hope their journeys to the top of professional football can inspire more youngsters from south London to break free of poverty.

Meet John. He's 59, and used to be a teacher. He's also been job hunting for a decade and is one of almost 900,000 people in NSW living below the poverty line, according to a new report.

Logic suggests a coronavirus slump may provide a window of opportunity for first homebuyers to enter the market. But a new report suggests the opposite may be true.