In the Realm of the Poor IV: Globalized Poor (L-O-N-G)

I know it’s been a long time since I wrote something in the “realm” line—now I have something to write about.

I just got through reading the Undercover Economist, and the final chapter about global poverty and why rich nations are rich really struck me. It seems I wasn’t far off the mark when I suggested that Bono and Angelina were spinning their wheels when it came to getting Third World aid.

Corruption at the top is only the half of it.

Before I delve into it, though, I would like to clarify something that many of you are (or may already be) well familiar with—that so-called “poor” people here in this country have it good compared to real poor people around the world.

Nowhere but here does someone without a home, food, a job, or clothes get such treatment from the social safety net of shelters, food banks and soup kitchens, clothing banks, employment offices, and other various outreach and social services—all paid for with taxpayer money.

In any other country, save Northern and Western European countries, people who have nothing have NOTHING—no food banks, no social service agencies, no homeless shelters, no clothing banks—nothing. Real poor people have to scavenge whatever they can find for money, shelter, food, clothes, and beg, borrow, or steal the rest. Often, they go for days without eating, in inclement weather, barely dressed, and don’t even have a shopping cart to carry around their meager findings in.

Poor in North Korea are so hungry, their kids search under parked railroad cars hoping to collect fallen grains of rice off the ground. Poor in Cameroon (and elsewhere) are trying to find something useful at the local dump to make shelter from. Poor in Bangladesh is scouring the dump for recyclables to cash in, because a grandfather (dying in the street) needs medicine, and he’s too old and sick to work, and poor in the Philippines means scouring the dump for a meal—anything remotely edible.

By contrast, we charge a fee for anyone to go to the dump, yet we hand out social services freely. Are our priorities backward? One wonders, seeing as how the dump functions as a sort of social network for people in need elsewhere in the world. There, they can help themselves without being a burden to anyone else—one less bureaucracy wrapped in red tape to fund and administer. Here, our municipalities know what a treasure trove they have in the local dump, and want to restrict access as best they can—those recyclables are worth money, and other items there for free would impede economic prosperity and taxable sales in town. Taking things from the dump is equal to taking money from city coffers.

Seeing dump-scavengers in my mind, one would think they were more self-reliant than our so-called “poor” on welfare, food stamps, or other social service. The global poor expect nothing, receive nothing, and go out to take care of the business of living as best they can. I can’t say the same for American or European poor, who live a cushy life, relatively speaking.

As I was saying earlier, corruption at the top isn’t half of the story—the rest comes from….you guessed it…bureaucratic red tape designed to hinder personal progress in many forms. Not only do corrupt officials demand bribes and take rake-offs, but they purposely design rules and regulations to prohibit certain activities that would allow for self-sustainability and ease of life.

An example: in Cameroon, the poorest region in Africa, there has been a dictatorial “leader” getting re-elected by wide margins, even though voter turnout at the polls is small—mostly his cronies. The economy is in shambles, the infrastructure non-existent, and he keeps winning elections. In a decade of his rule, nothing has changed, except the amount of aid he’s been able to extort from global institutions. Meanwhile the roads are impassable, the people unemployed, the taxes and trade tariffs are sky-high, and it takes the equivalent of two years’ salary, 56 forms in triplicate, and a three-year wait for approval to get a business license. The leader has found that spending “just enough” on the country keeps him in power, keeps things right where he wants them, and lines his personal coffers handsomely.

Needless to say, many Cameroonians have gone and scratched out a living in the underground economy and the dump. They know that the situation is beyond hope as long as this man is in power, so they’ve moved on without him.

Now you see how poor countries stay poor—they suffer from the myth of Third World aid, and all the celebrity ballyhooing in the world will do nothing to alleviate it. It doesn’t address the real root causes of the situation.

Back to the U.S.: compare them to an unmarried mother of three, collecting welfare, who says she can’t afford to feed her kids anything but hot dogs and macaroni & cheese. She has very few barriers to improve her life, and little (if any) red tape to cut or massive corruption to sidestep.

When you think of deterring red tape in this country, think of nuclear plants and NIMBYs, environmentalists and ANWR, seeking a building permit for off-grid living, or trying to build a home with alternative materials—in many cases, regulation prevents us from doing something we think is right, but someone else has deemed it wrong for whatever reason. To try to come to a compromise, many city council meetings are held, various “impact” statements are requested, building code and zoning variances are voted on, and much time, effort, and money has been spent just to hear the word “NO” at the end. People whom you’ve never met, who may not have the slightest notion about what you’re trying to achieve, and could care less about anyone but themselves, have the chance to vote you down in the public arena.
Once again, the scissors don’t get unsheathed—the red tape is thick and hard on the blades, and heaven forbid, they might have to buy a new pair.

Red tape exists to stop the poor, like potholes in the road. There are ways around, but those are too costly in time, money, and sometimes the realization of the end product. Global poor are absolutely draped in red tape, without a pair of scissors in sight, so they don’t even try to fight it. It’s just not worth it. Besides, other countries will take pity on them and rush to their rescue, just to put a better face on things—or worse: they have it better now then they did before, as in the case of sweatshop workers. That’s a whole ‘nuther article.