Now that Halloween is out of the way, the winter holiday season is upon us, and the world of consumerism is shifting gears. In the coming weeks, you’ll probably witness an advertising blitz that covers everything from the latest tablet PC to Thanksgiving catering. You might even run across several collection drives for donations of food and clothing.
This season of giving may lead you to ask what is really going on with the income gap domestically and abroad. What should poverty mean to college students and young adults who could otherwise be labeled as tomorrow’s millionaires?
Approximately 43.6 million people live below the poverty line in this country in 2009, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s website. At that time, that number made up 14 percent of the total population. Poverty, in this sense, is calculated using threshold figures, but even those rather comprehensive measurements cannot fully account for the ramifications of living in dire straits.
Thanks to globalization, the world is now more interconnected than ever before. This means that the strengths and weaknesses of our global neighbors will in some part affect us all.
Poverty is a social issue that is both real and uncomfortable. With 1.4 billion people living on less than $1.25 a day in 2005, according to the United Nations, global dignitaries and their constituents have been thinking about how to address poverty for quite some time.
Through the years, politicians, entrepreneurs, educators, and students have stepped up to the plate to tackle the issue of poverty. Our university plays a part in this global effort through its programs and students. ASU offers courses in economic development and coordinates service projects in the U.S. and abroad.
Despite how good giving back can feel, there is room for a healthy dose of skepticism. Will policies and programs actually change poverty? Can the plight of the impoverished truly ever improve?
Donors and consumers have the right to ask questions. It’s only natural. Just like in the current debate surrounding public education, there are ways to get results.
“Waiting for Superman” is a recently released documentary on public education in the United States and investigates how American public schools are performing against the rest of the world as well as recognizing the success of several charter schools in low-income areas. The movie is not without controversy as the film calls for large-scale reform, but it does raise a couple of interesting points.
The documentary highlights how money or spending is not always the best tool for changing a situation. The effectiveness of a program should theoretically be more influential than the cash it receives. And, when a good or a service, which in the case of the film happened to be education, is not free or requires additional effort to obtain, the buyer feels more invested in the outcome of the purchasing decision.
If you want to shop until you drop, you could do it for a cause, too. At least that’s what Nordstrom was channeling with its plans for a new store in SoHo, which is a fashionable and well-to-do enclave in New York City.
According to a recent online article by The Seattle Times, the concept store will sport a different look than the typical Nordstrom. The new venue is an interesting way to see if consumers have a taste for shopping at a store that donates all of its profits to charity.
No matter the outcome of the store, it brings up some thought-provoking questions. Are human beings wired to help those who are hurting around them? As college students, we can vote on that survey question with ballots and our feet. But, what would it really mean to give something away with no strings attached?
Send your thoughts on economic development to Isaiah at isaiah.mccoy@asu.edu
