The Cause for Poverty, or Why There Is No Improvement of Its State - Case Study Example

The Cause for Poverty, or Why There Is No Improvement of Its Poverty – this awful word is seemedto occupy our world with the evidence of its great spread in every corner of the universe. The case is that not only everyday news and passing references while conversations keep us conscious of its presence. The thing is that we see poverty, experience it in direct or indirect way or just face its manifestations day by day, being involuntary witnesses of its representation in our streets in the persons of socially deprived people including tramps, beggars, bums and other miserable categories of men. One way or another, being an acute issue of humanity since old times, poverty appears to be one of the most specific and at the same time general problems in all ages, for it serves as a reflection of a failure within sociopolitical and economic system of a certain country. In other words, poverty as a practically rooted phenomenon has gained its specific features, which represent themselves in a somewhat universal view in different countries, however, maintaining peculiar aspects of historical and cultural perspectives. In this respect, research of poverty state across countries in various periods can be extremely interesting and beneficial for the keen perception of the issue in its every possible specific aspect. In fact, comparison of indigence in Europe of the beginning of the 20th century and America in the 21th century may afford a range of speaking poverty aspects in their numerous similarities regardless the difference in time and location. At that matter, representation of homeless and poor people’s experience in the streets depicted in Orwell’s work “Down and Out in Paris and London” just doubles the very similar state of socially deprived men in contemporary America. Practically, it becomes apparent by the means of considered analysis of the two territories in their real-life circumstances. First of all, Orwell’s experience of poverty represented in his memoir resembles America’s current state of poverty in the point of its large scales. “With 46 million Americans — 15 percent of the population — now counted as poor…” (Edelman). These figures are just shocking. In addition, “That is the third-highest poverty rate among developed nations, ahead only of Turkey and Mexico” (Sojourners). Then, it is obvious that poverty spread is that very similar point of the analyzed areas. The fact is that that European reality of absolute poor is depicted by the author in its very details of all-around misery in its contrast to the rich life of the wealthy. Despite the time and the place of Orwell’s story, its plot serves as a historic echo of our today life, where numerous tramps and beggars have to fight for survival in the streets of America. Moreover, there is another common aspect of the issue adding to the same state of poverty in the two contexts, that is, the role of the system in establishment, development and maintaining of a stable state of poor people, which are almost deprived from ability to cross the line between miserable existence and life of welfare. Orwell’s blame of European governments for the state of poor people’s presence in his reality is clearly manifested in his work. Furthermore, it makes us to think over the role of the US power in the process of fight against poorness. Real facts of flourishing poverty in America evidence that there is no significant changes for some unknown reasons. In this regard, Orwell’s claim that the rich just don’t allow improvement of poor people’s state for maintaining of their dominant social position gains its concern, and there is a great desire not to believe in such an unjust world order in relation to American reality. The state of working poor in both Europe and America of the two different ages is another similarity. There are many socially deprived people who are to handle any kind of jobs, primarily low-paid ones, for raking up some money in order to buy what is most urgently needed for living, including food, clothes, and shoes, which are usually lacking. “A plongeur is a slave, and a wasted slave, doing stupid and largely unnecessary work. He is kept at work, ultimately, because of a vague feeling that he would be dangerous if he had leisure” (Orwell). Anyway, the poor are to tackle any work in order to support themselves and their families. European reality of the Orwell’s memoir describes in living colors the state of the working poor, which brings us one more time to our own life with its forced necessity to work as servitorial staff in restaurants, cafes, and menial workers in shops, markets and other places. Again, the writer’s representation of the poverty issue in point of people’s perception of the poor doubles the idea of socially vulnerable group of people in current America: “Some of the most damaging stereotypes about poor people are that they are lazy, they are stupid, they don’t have any skills, prefer poverty, and don’t want to take care of their families” (Sojourners). Really, such an attitude, when humans allow themselves to attach labels on other men just because of social status, is of a purely destructive nature. In such a context, it goes so that the poor even cannot pretend to become richer, as they have been considered to be a kind of second quality people who do not fit demand of the society. One way or another, such a treatment of the people placing on the breadline sets a stamp upon them resulting in their almost deadlock of misery, as it is vividly shown in Orwell’s work and brightly presented in our present-day life. Another striking similar episode of the two realities refers to unfortunate situation of homeless people. Orwell puts a significant emphasis on their constant struggle for life in the conditions of uneasy dangerous living challenges waiting for them on every street corner. The author provides certain examples which may be seen as very linking to America’s modern state of homelessness, which figures have reached a shocking point: “As of the beginning of the 21st century, 2.3 to 3.5 million persons were homeless at some time during an average year” (Montauk). The question is about living conditions and their reasons which dishouse people and make them to get accustomed to the being side by side not only with other deprived human beings but also with dogs. According to Orwell, such an existence when men are to face with their fears abridges them of many feelings and a feeling of anxiety in particular. Obviously, this change cannot be perceived as a positive one, but it outwardly demonstrates the whole effect of street life on people’s personality whose shifts are of irreversible character. Existence of numerous beggars and tramps in present-day America even doesn’t need its written confirmation, since everyone (except the rich living in silk-stocking districts separated by walls of social position) has a chance to make sure just by coming out of a house on the street where the life of the homeless begins. Treatment of beggars in Orwell’s experience as well as in America reflects its totally negative perspective, because “… beggars do not work; they are parasites, worthless in their very nature” (Orwell). Still, in reality, “Approximately 18 percent of adults who are homeless are employed” (Montauk). An obvious conclusion offers itself, namely: incomes of many Americans are so slender that they may only offer food supply and something from clothes without any notion of a roof over their head. Moreover, for beggars “It is fatal to look hungry. It makes people want to kick...” (Orwell) them. In fact, most poor people have no alternative but living by begging, since “Half the jobs in the nation pay less than $34,000 a year, according to the Economic Policy Institute. A quarter pays below the poverty line for a family of four, less than $23,000 annually” (Edelman). And the question of source of getting money is not in their interest. Thus, beggars alongside with tramps are only puppets in hands of the rich, which control everything in their environment including the state of poverty for maintenance of their wealthy position. Finally, an attitude of the rich to the poor and their treatment of the latter is another similarity between Orwell’s experience of poverty and the US present state of misery. The case is that both now and always a distinct frontier between these two groups has been presented in society, since it had appeared. Now there is no doubt that a great part in development of this division belongs to the rich who just don’t want to let socially deprived people in their circle through getting money, although  “…the average millionaire is only the average dishwasher dressed in a new suit” (Orwell). As it is said in Orwell’s memoir by one of his rich characters, “… we will fight like devils against any improvement of your condition…we feel that you are much safer as you are…” (Orwell). Therefore, it is undoubtedly that the poor cannot become richer in their majority not because of their laziness, illiteracy or other subjective reasons, but primarily due to the fact that the system works for the benefits of wealthy men keeping the poor in their borders of misery. So, it is obvious that “Money has become the grand test of virtue” (Orwell) and the rich have not passed this life test.  To conclude it all, there are certain similarities between state of poverty in Europe of the 20th century and America of the 21th century. Orwell’s experience of poverty alongside with our research of the same theme of the US reality represents general aspects of poor people’s state in the two realities. The thing is about peculiarities of the life of working poor and hardships facing homeless men in different contexts. In fact such a result may be accounted for universal governmental failure to tackle the problem of poverty, or rather to say governments’ unwillingness to solve the issue, which results from the system’s subordination to interests of wealthy elite striving for the maintaining of its social status built up on a vivid contrast between prosperous life of moneyed people and miserable distressed existence of deprived humans. In such a way, poverty remains in the same state as it has been a century ago, with a number of new complications caused by peculiarities of the present time and added to its general description. Although there are many achievements of our advanced society, they are just used for prosperity of rich people instead of their application for improvement of poverty. Altogether, similar state of poorness both in Europe and America regardless the difference in time for almost a hundred years evidences that people’s values and ideologies in two contexts have not changed – poor people still fight for living, while the rich use working poor for the benefits of their social state. And even different circumstances of historical and cultural background are not able to influence the terrible state of socially deprived people, as the system itself is against such an unprofitable change. Works Cited Edelman, Peter. Poverty in America: Why Can’t We End It? The New York Times, Jul. 28, 2012. Retrieved June 18 from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/opinion/sunday/why-cant-we-end-poverty-in-america.html?_r=0 Montauk, Susan Louisa. The Homeless in America: Adapting Your Practice. American Family Physician, Oct. 1, 2006. Retrieved June 18 from: http://www.aafp.org/afp/2006/1001/p1132.html Orwell, George. Down and Out In Paris and London. Retrieved June 18 from: http://georgeorwellnovels.com/books/down-and-out-in-paris-and-london/ Sojourners. The Line. Poverty in America – It’s not What You Think. Published Oct. 2, 2012. Retrieved June 18 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZxjb4gB93A Read More