Another celebrity news story to report on today. Hilary Duff is promoting a program called Blessings in a Backpack that sends needy children home with a backpack full of food on the weekends. It is fairly heartbreaking to think of children in America not having food on a weekend when we all know how much food goes to waste every day in this country. This seems like a better idea than 1 million dollars worth of soy products in the Bronx, but it still isn't going to solve the problem of hunger in this country which is intrinsically linked to poverty.
Matt would be so proud of me that I like his mantra of 'Incentive Drives Behavior', when it comes to the public programs of assistance that our country offers. In no way do I think those programs should go away. We have a responsibility, whether morally, spiritually or financially to help those in need. However, none of the programs (as far as I know) are set up to teach someone how not to end up back on the dole and it seems to be a vicious cycle of eating government cheese that is hard to break by individual, let alone by generation. Giving handouts, while necessary for short term help in the face of unexpected tragedy and loss, isn't going to solve the long term problem. So, what will?
The sad reality may be that our capitalist nation needs poverty level living to function. The poor must have less so the rich can have more. Muhammed Yunus' book Banker to the Poor really opened my eyes to the potential for another way of dealing with poverty and possibly eliminating it (though where would wall street be if that were to happen?).
Yunus started Grameen Bank and offered low interest loans to women in poverty in Bangladesh. His theory was that most women had a skill and if given money to purchase supplies, they could apply their skill to make things (baskets, rugs, etc.) and not only pay back their loan, but be able to earn a living large enough to pull them out of the lowest levels of poverty. He started this in the late 70's with little support from large banks and was incredibly successful. He had good return rates on loan payments and as word spread, more women began to participate. They were able to earn enough money that their children could be fed, homes could be made more sound and life improved overall.
Could the same principles that he applied in Bangladesh be applied in this country? I think about the Gee's Bend Quilters and their relative poverty while making incredible works of art. Would a low interest loan have changed some of their lives for the better and not delayed recognition of their quilt's beauty until just a few years ago? How many women and men out there who are living in poverty have some kind of a skill that they could use to earn money and be able to put food on the table for their children? Could an incentive, the level of which might seem minute to you and me, make the difference in the lives of those in need to help them live above the poverty line where food is available to them and their children seven days a week?
Okay, maybe none of this would ever work, but a girl can dream, right?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment