The Debate: Is it possible to end extreme global poverty?

Author : Carnesia Deswara Chandra 1801400480

Extreme poverty is not a precise measure of income. It's not a number of calories per day. It is the denial of basic freedoms and basic human dignity. Extreme Poverty has always existed, but it is not inevitable.

      That's what they said at USAID video about Extreme Poverty. This year, UN's leader of World Bank says that ending extreme poverty is possible. It is possible by doing a heroic effort, more likely Global Poverty decreased until 8% by 2030 with 664 million people out of 8,3 billion in the world still get earning less than $1.25 per day. World Bank President Jim Yong Kim quite confident about that. World Bank believe that we are closer than ever before to ending the global poverty. The nomber of people living on less than $1.25 a day has halved since 1981 when it reached 43% from the population and now it reachs 15% by 2011. It includes Indonesia as one of top ten largest share of global extreme poor with the largest are India and Nigeria, but Indonesia also one of top three in share of poverty reduction in the world along with India and China. East Asia is the region that made the fatest growth; 80% people in extreme poverty by 1981 and now it decreased by 8%. In China, billion of people live in extreme poverty but China has not relied on external aid and Africa has 11% share of global population due to its fast growing region. The World Poverty scenarions begin with the target of 4% annual per capita consumption growth in every countries. It is targeting a reduction of Global Poverty to about 30% of world population by 2030.

     Extreme Global Poverty is one of the most discussed topic. Poverty concerns shortfalls in one's standard of living in a broad sense which includes such things as reliable access, the determinants of good wealth, secure from violence, education and free from the wonder where their next meal is coming from. The debate comes with more than only pro and contra. Some argues that the end of extreme global poverty is impossible and some argues that just by giving money to the poor is one of the most obvious and effective way to end the global poverty. They said that by transfering the consumption power from countries that rich enough and whose government are competent enough are likely to get them out of poverty. But the people are just lack of willingness to help someone that they far away and don't know anything about them.

     But I think it's not that simple, there are some cases that likely, the more they give money, the more expensive goods are. It makes people with low incomes find more difficulties to afford basic things. If you say that it could give new hope for them, yes it is, new hope to lazily sit back on their bed and wait for cash to fall from the sky. The worst thing is, it makes the poor countries completely dependent on the richer countries

     The basic things are economic growth and market economy. One of main factor that increase the global poverty is population growth. Without economic growth, there are no health ,sustained gains in income and so on. Anti-market nor free-market only can make poverty reduction happen and economic growth going stable. But of course there should be the development of disease control, public education, new science and technology and protection for the people. Fighting poverty is a fight with a lot of patience, the problems that come to poor people lives is always increasing. The large gap of inequality that happen today is the most concerning. Both in rich and poor countries, poverty is perpetuated by inequalities between classes, a fairly modest redistribution of resources might be enough and it should improve the health, education and assets. But today, inequality is not falling but always rising in most countries.

Does free trade gives positive or negative to developing countries?

Author : Mega Indah Putri Utami 1801404251

      With the free trade are usually aimed at the welfare of society and also expand trade throughout the State. Free trade can also have a positive impact and negative impact on the country involved. As in Indonesia also received the impacts of free trade. Free trade means the absence of government intervention which inhibits both trading activities undertaken by the inter-individual and inter-firms that exist in the countries. With a system of free trade is the trade between countries is no longer troubled by bureaucratic affairs.  The idea of forming free trade is that international trade often obstructed by tax problems, a variety of additional costs, and many other obstacles.

       At around the 1990s the countries in the Asia Pacific region initially welcomed the presence of free trade and eventually gave birth to the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). The benefits of free trade which can be seen directly is the diversity of goods provided. Free trade also can enlarge and expand market coverage, and therefore it can increased productivity.  And because of it, it will increased standard of living also citizens of a country. But among these benefits, the presence of the free market have difficulties for some countries, especially developing countries. Developing countries are usually difficult to compete to produce quality products with countries that are more advanced.

      In addition, free trade also lead to dependency more than interdependence. Developed countries certainly can produce products with good quality that can not be produced by the developing countries.  As Korea with a car and a handphone. Developing countries such as Indonesia, which has not been able to produce a car or a handphone whose quality is good and well-known as it has been produced by the Japanese, of just going to settle for consumers and ultimately become the consumptive state. By that, the small industries are not able to compete in the arena of free trade, it can be ascertained that the industries will be eliminated and insolvent. This could lead to other problems such as unemployment.  So by that, why the existence of the free trade potential  make it difficult for different parties especially for developing countries?