Poverty in Canadian Society - Term Paper Example

?Poverty in Canadian Society Christopher Salvo remarked on poverty in Canada: The fact is that poverty, as it has been traditionally understood, has been virtually eliminated. It is simply not a major problem in Canada (deGroot-Maggetti 1). Such remarks stress on the need of measuring poverty, which has become an issue in the absence of a government supported poverty measuring parameter. Discussion on measuring poverty has been dilly-dallying on relative measure or absolute measure. The Statistics Canada has been using the income equality measure called as low-income cut off, which was 10.8% in 2005. The Central Intelligence Agency has used this indicator arguing that a relative measure accrues in higher poverty rate than an absolute measure. There is another traditional poverty measure criteria based on basic needs poverty measure, recommended by Fraser Institute. As per this measure poverty has reduced greatly in the past 60 years, as reported 4.9% in 2004 (Wikipedia para 2). Indicators of poverty have changed with the changing times. In comparison to middle class Europeans, the “poor” America possess larger homes; more than 70% have a car; about 20% have more than one transport medium; about 60% poor have two or more television sets. The traditional definition of poor denoting those who have deficiency of food, shelter, and clothing holds minimum authenticity, therefore, requires redefining (Bauman 6). Before considering poverty in relative terms we need to find the parameters to compare, what are the standards, global or the highest known standards in Canada and Europe, as examples from third world could be the worst on absolute poverty (Segal 7). Milton Freedman, one the great post-war Nobel Prize winning conservative economists put the case this way: “The programme should be designed to help people as people not as members of particular occupational groups or age groups or wage-rate groups or labour organizations or industries” (Segal 18). At government level, a number of welfare schemes are run to ameliorate poverty including allowances and benefits for children, youth, pensions, war veterans’ allowances, grant to aboriginals, tax credits, and a number of other social and pension plans at state level (Statistics Canada 13-213). Canada could not meet the poverty targets set by the United Nations in 1996, the International Year for the Eradication of Poverty, as reported by the National Council of Welfare. Since1990s such figures have been presented that indicate a rise in the number of poor people in Canada. Even at the height of economic boom, rate of downfall in poverty was slow. There is no unanimous opinion on it, as all depends on how we define and measure poverty. Some indicators to the rise in poverty include peoples’ increasing dependence on food banks and emergency shelters. Between 1989 and 2000 the use of food banks had increased by 96%. At a boom period of 1997-2000, the food bank use increased by 9.4%. Housing has become a big issue for poor people. Canadian youth are the leading community in the matter of homelessness but when it comes to measuring poverty, computations on poverty lines are not unanimous (deGroot-Maggetti 1-3). So far as poverty lines are concerned, in Canada there is no dearth of poverty measures. The federal government has a number of poverty indicating measures. Besides, the social councils, organizations, and independent researchers have evolved their own measures. Yet provincial social help rates offer another set of poverty lines. Absolute measures stress on basic human needs while relative measures point towards the insufficiency of standards socially accepted above poverty line (deGroot-Maggetti 3). Due to different measuring standards of poverty, the term has become somewhat ambiguous. A further research into the causes of poverty in Canada can help in making the meaning clear. Many factors are responsible for poverty although there is difference in a “factor” and a “cause”. A “cause” adds to the emerging of an issue such as poverty while a “factor” helps in extending it. There have been a number of historical causes of poverty such as colonialism, slavery, war, and victory. There is significant difference between historical causes of poverty and factors that promote conditions of poverty. Thus causes of poverty remain; we cannot change them but we can control the factors that promote poverty (Bartle 5). After the World Wars came to an end, survival became a major issue. People had to depend on charity but after so many years some countries of the world came out of the after-effects of war while others remained doomed to poverty. All the money spent on poverty eradication could not raise their level and standard of living because only the symptoms were treated, not the root cause of the malaise of poverty. At macro level low gross domestic product of a country is not the cause of its poverty but a symptom of it, as it is a social issue (Bartle 7). These factors are ignorance, disease, apathy, dishonesty and dependency. They encourage the growth of secondary factors like deficiency of markets, dilapidated infrastructure, directionless leadership, poor functioning, and underemployment, deficiency of training, absenteeism, and lack of resources. All these are social issues caused by all or any of the five factors stated above, adding to the endless growth in poverty. Unless we remove the factors of poverty we cannot eliminate poverty (Bartle 8). A compact analysis of the factors can help further on eradicating poverty. Ignorance—we need to differentiate ignorance from stupidity and foolishness; ignorance is dearth of information or knowledge. This knowledge needs to be shared in stead of keeping it hidden so that skill gained from the use of knowledge benefits more people. General education cannot help in providing that crucial information; only specific knowledge on that subject can help in finding a solution to a specific issue such as the community empowerment programs provide training by sharing information that builds up strength of the doer in a particular activity; It is not meant for all (Bartle 10-13). Disease—a high disease rate creates a chain of events; workers remain absent from work, which affects productivity and earning capacity. Disease causes misery, tension and death sometimes, which becomes a cause of poverty. Good health helps in elimination of poverty. Preventive cure is the better option than making visits to clinics, doctors and taking medicines. Thus, indirectly good health of the community by living hygienically can help in the eradication of poverty. People need to change their outlook on health, as good health promotes high living standards. Various aspects of poverty accentuate not only the disease rate but mortality and morbidity as well (Bartle 14-17). Apathy—it is a feeling of showing disinterest in amending the deteriorating circumstances. People show lack of will power to amend conditions in their favor. Either they feel zealous of community members and relatives who are showing growth in life and try to harm them or they become fatalists believing that all misery is written in their fate by the will of god and forget their duty to themselves. Unless a spirited fight against poverty is fought, we cannot take control over our miseries and resultant poverty (Bartle 18-22). Dishonesty—it happens when funds meant for welfare of the community are misused by those at the helm of affairs, which causes and breeds poverty in excessive proportions to the amount misappropriated. Personal gains of a few people holding positions of power affect the welfare of vast public. In economic terms, the misappropriated money affects the larger community interests of poverty eradication by the “multiplier effect”. When funds invested for welfare are misused, loss to the social welfare cause happens four times of the misused amount. Dishonesty on the part of a public figure is as equally harmful to the social cause as of a thief but generally, the public figures get escaped from the hands of law while a thief is severally punished, which is an irony of the situation (Bartle 23-26). Dependency—depending on charity for a short period until the poor help themselves is ok but making it a crucial survival condition not only for the self but the whole group perpetuates poverty. The wrong attitude of depending on others for help discourages self reliance and empowerment, which is just an option to charity; it equips the community members to be self reliant and not depend further on others to come out of poverty. Out of the five leading factors breeding poverty, dependency is nearest to the community welfare stakes (Bartle 27-30). All these factors are inter-related, as disease adds to ignorance and apathy while dishonesty perpetuates disease and dependency. All the five factors leading to poverty are rooted in our cultural traits and functions creating a feeling of helplessness towards improving conditions for the better. What is needed is commitment and dedication to the cause of eradicating poverty at personal and community level to start the positive multiplier effect, destroying these factors that cause poverty (Bartle 31). Alleviating, reducing or eradicating poverty is not the sole responsibility of one class, group or institution. Federal government is the highest stakeholder and the obliging party to the cause of poverty. In Canada more than 120 organizations are part of the Campaign 2000, as voted by all members of the parliament in 1989. Situation is still far from satisfactory in the matter of child poverty especially in the children of First Nation’s communities where ratio of poverty is 1:4 (Poverty Canada Report 1) For eradicating poverty all local, state, and federal parties need to come together to initiate a Poverty Reduction Strategy for Canada (PRSC) by setting: aims and timelines; committed fiscal and human resources; responsibility and transparency in public reporting; involvement of people and local communities; collaboration with First Nations and Aboriginal communities We cannot expect a radical solution to poverty by saying that it can be demolished completely; it can only be amended so that the worst could be avoided. Resources are always limited and spending them unwisely on the wrong assumption that poverty can be totally eliminated would be foolishness. Such wastage of resources is just like behaving with enmity to the cause of poverty but it does not mean that the issue of poverty can not be tackled. The government should provide the tax credits to such organizations that help labor getting job skills and provide employment to them. Without providing incentives to businesses by reducing their tax burden, we cannot expect them to do such welfare acts. These welfare functions of the private sector should fit a situation and be achieved in a given time period. It means they should start from local bodies, not at the federal level (Bauman 6). Poverty has become a human rights issue. In stead of playing ‘political football’, collaboration at all levels from government point-of-view is must to show allegiance and dedication on the part of the government. The current situation is the result of bad government policies by not providing affordable housing and childcare. At federal level, a strategic and structured approach is required. Employment generation at all levels of specialization and skill sets can help in eradicating poverty (Poverty Canada Report 20-21). Works Cited Bartle, Phil PhD. “Factors of Poverty: The Big Five.” Workshop Notes. 2007. 25 March 2011. . Bauman, Michael. “The Dangerous Samaritans: How Our Poverty Programs Injured the Poor.” 10 July 2006. Michaelbauman.com. 25 March 2011. . deGroot-Maggetti, Greg. “A Measure of Poverty in Canada: A Guide to the Debate about Poverty Lines.” March 2002. CPJ. 25 March 2011. . Statistics Canada. Government Transfer Payments to Persons. 4 November 2010. 25 March 2011. . Segal, Senator Hugh D. “Moving to Basic Income ‚ A Right-Wing Political Perspective.” Notes for an Address: BIEN Congress 2008. 25 March 2011. . Toronto. “A Poverty Reduction Plan for Canada.” Notes from a town hall meeting on the role of the federal government in poverty reduction. 1 June 2009. Campaign 2000 & the 25 in 5 network for poverty reduction. 25 March 2011. < http://www.campaign2000.ca/currentissues/ReportofJune1TownHallMeetingJune09.pdf>. “Poverty in Canada.” Wikipedia: the Free Encyclopedia. 28 February 2011. 25 March 2011. . Read More