Tips:
Click
to switch between English and 中文
Poverty is the Root of All ‘Evil’
Poverty is the Root of All ‘Evil’
贫穷是 “万恶” 之源
贫穷是 “万恶” 之源
"People observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed."
"People observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed."
"People observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed."
Before you read on, please don’t rush to oppose me.
We often hear the saying, Money is the root of all evil. However, I did rethink it. Why does money bring in evil? Isn’t it because of its contrary, poverty? If everyone gets what he/she needs to live, could money still entice people to put a price on their hearts and souls?
Days ago, I asked a friend to recommend some books as I am thirsty for reading. She listed some in which there are some novels written by Ae-ran Kim, a Korean writer. After reading a couple of stories in her book, I found all of them are about the nightmare of the poor. In Chinese culture, most of the stories about the poor are inspirational. It is either telling us about how a poor person got richer by hard work or about the kindness and bravery of the poor. In Ae-ran Kim’s stories, instead, the poor always end up sad and sigh, which pushes the readers into a thought blackhole: I would never ever live that way, live in poverty!
Ae-ran Kim’s novels are not the trigger of my impulsion of being free from poverty, – it is always what I insist. However, to be clear, I do not despise the poor – As Chinese, we have been educated since a child that the poor are always kind-hearted, although it is not truly fair, as same as equaling the rich to evil. – I despise the poverty itself.
If poverty is not detestable, why the world calls for fighting poverty?
As we have all known, the soil of poverty could grow evil, and produce inequality. Crime rates are relatively high in poor neighbourhoods; inequality is much more common in poor countries than in rich countries; In that era with more poverty all over the world, the world was engaged in more conflicts and invasions. I can understand the reasons behind this, as it is clear even without looking at the data, that poverty is due to insufficient or unfair distribution of social resources, which leads to a part of the population, the poor, not getting the need to live. For survival, people have to fight for the resources.
Those who live in poor neighbourhoods must dream the life of those who are living in the rich. Some of them work hard for their dream life. Once they find that hard work cannot lead them to their goal, some of them may take the risk of a more aggressive way to approach it. Moreover, poverty is a “vicious spiral” in generations. The poor grow up in poor neighbourhoods, which are most likely short of good education and healthcare resources, will more likely lack of skills and knowledge to get enough income to improve their life, and more likely get even poorer with poor health. It will trap them in cheap neighbourhoods as they are less likely to afford to move to a better area for the well-being of the next generation. Yes, a miracle could appear where no miracle seems possible, but the case barely happens.
No matter how poor a country is, there always be some wealthy. If most people in a country are living in poverty but a handful of people are moneyed, inequality must be there. In the political philosophy course, I learned the reason why most of the countries rich in resources are generally poor. Since governments can easily make a lot of money by selling resources in these countries, they are most unlikely to see the benefit of investing in their people by improving education or social security. On the contrary, the countries which lack resources, like Japan and Singapore, governments have no choice but to put money into educating their people and keeping them healthy to create and maintain enough skillful labour for their economy. As a result, common poverty vanished
I believe this has been a common perception nowadays. That’s why we can hear the calls to “fight poverty” here and there.
I also hear an opinion that a so-called developed society is a society that protects the weakest and poorest. I think it is not because they have been developed that they start paying attention to the weakest, it is the attention to protecting people, helping people get rid of poverty, and thus, reducing the risks of instability in society, that ultimately leads the country to become developed。
I would like to use a Chinese ancient maxim to end this topic: people observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed.
Before you read on, please don’t rush to oppose me.
We often hear the saying, Money is the root of all evil. However, I did rethink it. Why does money bring in evil? Isn’t it because of its contrary, poverty? If everyone gets what he/she needs to live, could money still entice people to put a price on their hearts and souls?
Days ago, I asked a friend to recommend some books as I am thirsty for reading. She listed some in which there are some novels written by Ae-ran Kim, a Korean writer. After reading a couple of stories in her book, I found all of them are about the nightmare of the poor. In Chinese culture, most of the stories about the poor are inspirational. It is either telling us about how a poor person got richer by hard work or about the kindness and bravery of the poor. In Ae-ran Kim’s stories, instead, the poor always end up sad and sigh, which pushes the readers into a thought blackhole: I would never ever live that way, live in poverty!
Ae-ran Kim’s novels are not the trigger of my impulsion of being free from poverty, – it is always what I insist. However, to be clear, I do not despise the poor – As Chinese, we have been educated since a child that the poor are always kind-hearted, although it is not truly fair, as same as equaling the rich to evil. – I despise the poverty itself.
If poverty is not detestable, why the world calls for fighting poverty?
As we have all known, the soil of poverty could grow evil, and produce inequality. Crime rates are relatively high in poor neighbourhoods; inequality is much more common in poor countries than in rich countries; In that era with more poverty all over the world, the world was engaged in more conflicts and invasions. I can understand the reasons behind this, as it is clear even without looking at the data, that poverty is due to insufficient or unfair distribution of social resources, which leads to a part of the population, the poor, not getting the need to live. For survival, people have to fight for the resources.
Those who live in poor neighbourhoods must dream the life of those who are living in the rich. Some of them work hard for their dream life. Once they find that hard work cannot lead them to their goal, some of them may take the risk of a more aggressive way to approach it. Moreover, poverty is a “vicious spiral” in generations. The poor grow up in poor neighbourhoods, which are most likely short of good education and healthcare resources, will more likely lack of skills and knowledge to get enough income to improve their life, and more likely get even poorer with poor health. It will trap them in cheap neighbourhoods as they are less likely to afford to move to a better area for the well-being of the next generation. Yes, a miracle could appear where no miracle seems possible, but the case barely happens.
No matter how poor a country is, there always be some wealthy. If most people in a country are living in poverty but a handful of people are moneyed, inequality must be there. In the political philosophy course, I learned the reason why most of the countries rich in resources are generally poor. Since governments can easily make a lot of money by selling resources in these countries, they are most unlikely to see the benefit of investing in their people by improving education or social security. On the contrary, the countries which lack resources, like Japan and Singapore, governments have no choice but to put money into educating their people and keeping them healthy to create and maintain enough skillful labour for their economy. As a result, common poverty vanished
I believe this has been a common perception nowadays. That’s why we can hear the calls to “fight poverty” here and there.
I also hear an opinion that a so-called developed society is a society that protects the weakest and poorest. I think it is not because they have been developed that they start paying attention to the weakest, it is the attention to protecting people, helping people get rid of poverty, and thus, reducing the risks of instability in society, that ultimately leads the country to become developed。
I would like to use a Chinese ancient maxim to end this topic: people observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed.
Before you read on, please don’t rush to oppose me.
We often hear the saying, Money is the root of all evil. However, I did rethink it. Why does money bring in evil? Isn’t it because of its contrary, poverty? If everyone gets what he/she needs to live, could money still entice people to put a price on their hearts and souls?
Days ago, I asked a friend to recommend some books as I am thirsty for reading. She listed some in which there are some novels written by Ae-ran Kim, a Korean writer. After reading a couple of stories in her book, I found all of them are about the nightmare of the poor. In Chinese culture, most of the stories about the poor are inspirational. It is either telling us about how a poor person got richer by hard work or about the kindness and bravery of the poor. In Ae-ran Kim’s stories, instead, the poor always end up sad and sigh, which pushes the readers into a thought blackhole: I would never ever live that way, live in poverty!
Ae-ran Kim’s novels are not the trigger of my impulsion of being free from poverty, – it is always what I insist. However, to be clear, I do not despise the poor – As Chinese, we have been educated since a child that the poor are always kind-hearted, although it is not truly fair, as same as equaling the rich to evil. – I despise the poverty itself.
If poverty is not detestable, why the world calls for fighting poverty?
As we have all known, the soil of poverty could grow evil, and produce inequality. Crime rates are relatively high in poor neighbourhoods; inequality is much more common in poor countries than in rich countries; In that era with more poverty all over the world, the world was engaged in more conflicts and invasions. I can understand the reasons behind this, as it is clear even without looking at the data, that poverty is due to insufficient or unfair distribution of social resources, which leads to a part of the population, the poor, not getting the need to live. For survival, people have to fight for the resources.
Those who live in poor neighbourhoods must dream the life of those who are living in the rich. Some of them work hard for their dream life. Once they find that hard work cannot lead them to their goal, some of them may take the risk of a more aggressive way to approach it. Moreover, poverty is a “vicious spiral” in generations. The poor grow up in poor neighbourhoods, which are most likely short of good education and healthcare resources, will more likely lack of skills and knowledge to get enough income to improve their life, and more likely get even poorer with poor health. It will trap them in cheap neighbourhoods as they are less likely to afford to move to a better area for the well-being of the next generation. Yes, a miracle could appear where no miracle seems possible, but the case barely happens.
No matter how poor a country is, there always be some wealthy. If most people in a country are living in poverty but a handful of people are moneyed, inequality must be there. In the political philosophy course, I learned the reason why most of the countries rich in resources are generally poor. Since governments can easily make a lot of money by selling resources in these countries, they are most unlikely to see the benefit of investing in their people by improving education or social security. On the contrary, the countries which lack resources, like Japan and Singapore, governments have no choice but to put money into educating their people and keeping them healthy to create and maintain enough skillful labour for their economy. As a result, common poverty vanished
I believe this has been a common perception nowadays. That’s why we can hear the calls to “fight poverty” here and there.
I also hear an opinion that a so-called developed society is a society that protects the weakest and poorest. I think it is not because they have been developed that they start paying attention to the weakest, it is the attention to protecting people, helping people get rid of poverty, and thus, reducing the risks of instability in society, that ultimately leads the country to become developed。
I would like to use a Chinese ancient maxim to end this topic: people observe etiquette and know honour and shame only after they are well-fed and clothed.