Join 100,427 users already on read.cash

How Are Wealth And Poverty Considered On A Wide Spectrum

4 30
Avatar for Peter-Molnar
Written by   246
10 months ago

The global economy is a fraught system of inequities, but one where the wealthy manage to thrive while the poor and the middle class remain in poverty. This understanding is completely obscured by the wealth-building scheme known as inequality. We have a strange idea of poverty today. On an interpersonal scale, poverty is a social stigma. But on an economic spectrum, it's something we can't even conceptualize. Poverty is becoming a worldwide issue, but what if we could think of poverty in a new way?

It seems obvious that wealthy people and those living in poverty have vastly different lifestyles and the highest way of life on the wealthy side is even more comfortable, than the lowest level to get on the poor end. But that's not how it works. Wealth and poverty is only defined through resources, not as a measure of how well off one lives or how many luxury homes one has.

A wide spectrum is the idea, that there are many different level of poverty and wealth out there. These falls on a wide spectrum, which includes rich and poor levels. A wide spectrum is typically used to describe the spectrum of wealth, poverty, happiness and indifference.

Image source: https://www.ohio-forum.com/2018/09/wealth-poverty-action-on-inequality-week-sept-21-28/

Wealth And Poverty Defined On A Large Scale

If you look at the global economy on a grand scale, you see a few different things. The rich are basically on one end of the spectrum and the poor are on the other. Everything else are in between and there's a certain amount of moving back and forth caused by the nature of the system.

The system itself can be broken down into two basic parts: production, and consumption. Production is the gathering of the primary materials required for human survival and the industry in which humans gather these materials to create useful things. Consumption is the gathering of these materials by humans into useful things for personal use.

The primary materials we produce and consume include food, shelter, clothing and other basic needs. The industry and process in which these are made and used includes agriculture and animal husbandry. The primary output of these are food and animals for consumption.

The relationship between these two parts is an important one. Without a way to produce and consume, humans would not exist. They would all die. It is the purpose of the industry to produce and consume so that humans may survive. On the other hand, humans do not live by producing and consuming. We do not exist to make a living. We exist in order to live.

The important distinction here is between the need for production and the need for consumption. Humans need to produce in order to live. Humans need to consume in order to stay alive and keep the industry running in order for there to be a continuous supply of materials. It is this distinction that determines the role of humans within the system. It is the reason that humans are not the rulers, they are the ruled. When it comes to wealth and poverty, the rulers are the people who are producing and controlling the industries.

So, in summary, the producers and controllers of the industry are the ones who are rich. The people who are participating in the industry in order to stay alive are the ones who are poor. The producers and controllers of the industry are powerful. The people who use the industry in order to stay alive are desperate. The relationship between these groups is an ongoing struggle. There is never any one moment when the status quo is overturned, but the relationship changes over time. There is a constant state of flux between the rulers and the ruled.

Real And Composite Measuring Wealth

Image source: https://paradigmlife.net/blog/measure-true-financial-success/

How do we measure wealth? The most obvious way is through owning property. But that's not the only way. What about human capital? Is a doctor richer than a farmer? Is a lawyer richer than a brick layer? What about all the intangible things, that human beings need in order to live? For example, are books wealth?

The answer to this seems obvious. Of course they're wealth! A library is a place where you can go and find knowledge! That's the primary purpose of books! Now, there's a good argument against this view: what if all the knowledge is wrong? What if we're better off without it? The answer to that one seems obvious as well. Then there's the objection, that the wealth is merely being hoarded, rather than being used. The notion of hoarding is a strange one. How can something be hoarded if other people can use it?

Is wealth that which others cannot use? Of course not. Wealth is whatever someone else does not have. Someone else cannot use it, because it is their own. Wealth is not merely a matter of people not having something, it's a question of people not having the ability to do something with whatever it is they have. This is the real difference between having wealth and being wealthy. The wealthy have the choice to do something with what they have, the poor do not.

Increasing And Decreasing Life Expectancy

There are a few theories as to why there is such a disparity between the rich and the poor. One theory is that the rich have more opportunities to improve their health. They can do this through better nutrition and by exercising. They can also afford medicine and other medical treatments. Many of these things can lengthen their lifespan. The poor on the other hand must work much harder just to survive. They are forced to walk a fine line between not enough food and too much. They are often sick and have a much lower quality of life than the rich.

A further theory is that the rich have a higher propensity for risky behavior. They can afford higher risk lifestyles. This includes taking more dangerous jobs in order to earn more money. They can also afford higher consumption levels. These things increase the likelihood of an early death.

A third theory is that the rich have a more favorable environment in which to grow up. Their parents can afford a higher standard of living. They can send the children to private schools or pay for nannies. The children of the rich are less likely to grow up with physical or emotional abuse. They can also play an instrument or learn a trade. These things increase the likelihood that the child will become well adjusted and have a longer life.

Of course there are other theories. It is important to note that while these theories are all interesting, they are not mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible for a child to have growing up in a poor household and to also have been neglected in their own upbringing. Still, these theories attempt to explain the disparities, that are seen between the rich and poor.

It is also important to note that these theories are mostly unproven. The fact is that we simply do not know enough about the ways in which our environment influences human behavior. As a result, we must carefully examine our own assumptions and ideologies.

Thank you for reading.

Created with Canva

9
$ 2.75
$ 2.49 from @TheRandomRewarder
$ 0.10 from @Ellehcim
$ 0.05 from @gertu13
+ 3
Sponsors of Peter-Molnar
empty
empty
empty
Avatar for Peter-Molnar
Written by   246
10 months ago
Enjoyed this article?  Earn Bitcoin Cash by sharing it! Explain
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.

Comments

Good to hear the way you described the difference of having wealth and being wealthy, and who is poor in the real sense.

$ 0.00
10 months ago

I think to have wealth is not necessarily means you are rich.

$ 0.00
10 months ago

I thought that doesn't included the rich and wealthy perso but I got it wrong co'z after all they have the biggest contribution in the spectrum and so does the poverty

$ 0.00
10 months ago

I thought the same. :)

$ 0.00
10 months ago