Poverty

Hunger is no different in the US as opposed to somewhere else, for someone to think it may be different seems somewhat bizarre.
Perhaps more time should be spent on English grammar.

The only way Governments have ever aided people in their efforts against poverty was by protecting their right to earn a living without interference from rivals or from excessive government charges.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 785 BC!

Different apartments have different rules when determining income based housing. You do not necessarily have to live in poverty to qualify for an income based aprtment. You may want to contact the complex that you are interested in and ask them for their gudelines on income based housing.

88th rank

He meant that they should be more independent and depend on themselves for their freedom and not to take it for granted that someone would lead them to it.

There are a number of places where one can find more information about poverty. There is a website called World Bank which will shows stats of poverty in different countries. There is also information found on websites such as Wikipedia and Why Poverty.

1.Psychological factor:Psychological factor,such as the desire to change or fear of novelty determine the rate and speed at which social change comes and is accepted in a particular society.Some societies are by nature more innovative than other.

2.Scientific and technological advances:These have brought about significant social changes.Scientific inventions and discoveries have brought for reaching social changes in the lives of the people in developing countries.

Christmas is celebrated by the poor people by just having fun, and getting together and having a laugh. We don't need to be exaturated in decorations, presents and especially in food we only need to be with our family and relatives to enjoy Christmas.

It is unlikely that either condition will be solved. Mainly due to economic and financial restrictions and lack of political will.

the effects of lack education are-The people will become ignorant.And the people will jobless.and the last is early pregnant,early .

There is a long historical sequences of events that has made Nicaragua what it is today, starting with the arrival of the Spanish Conquistadors in the 16th century, who were there only to loot, and to impose their religion on the population, but not to create a functional society or economy, and then moving through many corrupt, self-serving governments over the centuries. Nicaragua became a kind of political football during the Cold War era, with the US seeking to retain its dominance throughout the Western Hemisphere, while various leftist factions had other ideas. Neither side of the Cold War did very much to elevate the standard of living, or to solve social problems in Nicaragua. Political disputes in Nicaragua rage on to this day, long after the end of the Cold War, while the general population suffers. Nobody actually wants to perpetuate hunger and homelessness in Nicaragua, but nobody is investing the resources to end those things, either. The powers that be have other priorities.

5%

poor housing structure

lack of sanitation and essential services such as water, sewerage and electricity

disputes between other members of the settlement resulting in chaos

high crime rates due to unemployment and poverty

high chances of getting diseases such as diarrhoea due to drinking unclean water

squatter is on hazardous land resulting in frequent flooding due to heavy downpour

high tide affects coastal area squatters

The impact of management's decisions on society is not just public responsibility but is inextricably interwoven with management's responsibility to the enterprise. Still it is a responsibility of management to the public interest as such. This is based on the fact that the enterprise is an organ of society and that its actions have a decisive impact on the social scene. The first responsibility to society is to operate at a profit and only slightly less important is the necessity for growth. The business is the wealth creating and wealth producing organ of our society. Management must maintain its wealth producing resources intact by making adequate profits to offset the risks of economic activity. And it must besides increase the wealth creating and wealth producing capacity of these resources with them the wealth of society. It may seem paradoxical that the responsibility of management is most clearly recognized in the Soviet Union. Profitability is the first and absolute law for Soviet management and the essence of what the Russians proudly proclaim to be their great economic discovery management by the Ruble. But a source which the Kremlin would hardly admit as authority has said as much. This responsibility is absolute and cannot be abdicated. No management can be relieved of it. Managements are in the habit of saying that they have a responsibility to the shareholder for profits. But the shareholders, at last in a publicity owned company, can always sell his stock. Society however, is stick with the enterprise. It has to take the loss if the enterprise does not produce adequate profits, has to take the impoverishment if the enterprise does not succeed in innovation and growth. For the same reason management has a public responsibility to make sure of tomorrow's management without which the resources would be mismanaged would lose their wealth-producing capacity and would finally be destroyed. Management is responsible for conducting the enterprise so as to undermine our social beliefs and cohesion. This implies a negative responsibility: not to usurp illegitimate authority over citizens by demanding their absolute and total allegiance. In a free society the citizen is a loyal member of many institutions; and none can claim him entirely or alone. In this pluralism lies its strength and freedom. If the enterprise ever forgets this, society will retaliate by making its own supreme institutions the state and omnipotent. The tendency today of so many, especially of larger enterprises to same paternal authority over their management people and to demand of them a special allegiance, is socially irresponsible usurpation, indefensible on the grounds alike of public policy and the enterprises self interests. The company is not and must never claim to be home family, religion life or fate for the individual. It must never interfere in his private life or his citizenship. He is tied to the company though a voluntary and cancelled employment contract, not through some mystical and indissoluble bond. But responsibility for our social beliefs and cohesion also has a cohesive component. At east in this country it imposes on management the duty to keep open the opportunity to rise from the bottom according to ability and performance. If this responsibility is not discharged the production of wealth will, in the long run, weaken rather than strengthen our society by creating social classes, class hatred and class warfare. There are other areas in which responsibilities can be asserted. It is a responsibility of the management of the large company to develop a capital-expenditure policy which tends to counteract the extremes of the business cycle (with Automation such a policy becomes a business necessity. Management has a responsibility to develop policies that will overcome the deep-seated hostility to profits, for the simple reason that this is threat to our economic and social system. Any business, in the present world situation, has the responsibility to make its best contribution to the defensive strength of its country. But what is most important is that management must realize that it must consider the impact of every business policy and business action upon society. It has to consider whether the action is likely to promote the public good, to advance the basic beliefs of our society, or contribute to its stability, strength and harmony.

-

The impact of management's decisions on society is not just public responsibility but is inextricably interwoven with management's responsibility to the enterprise. Still it is a responsibility of management to the public interest as such. This is based on the fact that the enterprise is an organ of society and that its actions have a decisive impact on the social scene. The first responsibility to society is to operate at a profit and only slightly less important is the necessity for growth. The business is the wealth creating and wealth producing organ of our society. Management must maintain its wealth producing resources intact by making adequate profits to offset the risks of economic activity. And it must besides increase the wealth creating and wealth producing capacity of these resources with them the wealth of society. It may seem paradoxical that the responsibility of management is most clearly recognized in the Soviet Union. Profitability is the first and absolute law for Soviet management and the essence of what the Russians proudly proclaim to be their great economic discovery management by the Ruble. But a source which the Kremlin would hardly admit as authority has said as much. This responsibility is absolute and cannot be abdicated. No management can be relieved of it. Managements are in the habit of saying that they have a responsibility to the shareholder for profits. But the shareholders, at last in a publicity owned company, can always sell his stock. Society however, is stick with the enterprise. It has to take the loss if the enterprise does not produce adequate profits, has to take the impoverishment if the enterprise does not succeed in innovation and growth. For the same reason management has a public responsibility to make sure of tomorrow's management without which the resources would be mismanaged would lose their wealth-producing capacity and would finally be destroyed. Management is responsible for conducting the enterprise so as to undermine our social beliefs and cohesion. This implies a negative responsibility: not to usurp illegitimate authority over citizens by demanding their absolute and total allegiance. In a free society the citizen is a loyal member of many institutions; and none can claim him entirely or alone. In this pluralism lies its strength and freedom. If the enterprise ever forgets this, society will retaliate by making its own supreme institutions the state and omnipotent. The tendency today of so many, especially of larger enterprises to same paternal authority over their management people and to demand of them a special allegiance, is socially irresponsible usurpation, indefensible on the grounds alike of public policy and the enterprises self interests. The company is not and must never claim to be home family, religion life or fate for the individual. It must never interfere in his private life or his citizenship. He is tied to the company though a voluntary and cancelled employment contract, not through some mystical and indissoluble bond. But responsibility for our social beliefs and cohesion also has a cohesive component. At east in this country it imposes on management the duty to keep open the opportunity to rise from the bottom according to ability and performance. If this responsibility is not discharged the production of wealth will, in the long run, weaken rather than strengthen our society by creating social classes, class hatred and class warfare. There are other areas in which responsibilities can be asserted. It is a responsibility of the management of the large company to develop a capital-expenditure policy which tends to counteract the extremes of the business cycle (with Automation such a policy becomes a business necessity. Management has a responsibility to develop policies that will overcome the deep-seated hostility to profits, for the simple reason that this is threat to our economic and social system. Any business, in the present world situation, has the responsibility to make its best contribution to the defensive strength of its country. But what is most important is that management must realize that it must consider the impact of every business policy and business action upon society. It has to consider whether the action is likely to promote the public good, to advance the basic beliefs of our society, or contribute to its stability, strength and harmony.

-

measures to provide healthcare for those in need

diarrhoeal diseases,typhoid,cholera,hepatitis and other contagious diseases

Pro-Poor Tourism (PPT) is tourism that results in increased net benefits for poor people. PPT is not a specific product or niche sector but an approach to tourism development and management. It enhances the linkages between tourism businesses and poor people, so that tourism's contribution to poverty reduction is increased and poor people are able to participate more effectively in product development. Links with many different types of 'the poor' need to be considered: staff, neighbouring communities, land-holders, producers of food, fuel and other suppliers, operators of micro tourism businesses, craft-makers, other users of tourism infrastructure (roads) and resources (water) etc. There are many types of pro poor tourism strategies, ranging from increasing local employment to building mechanisms for consultation. Any type of company can be involved in pro-poor tourism - a small lodge, an urban hotel, a tour operator, an infrastructure developer. The critical factor is not the type of company or the type of tourism, but that an increase in the net benefits that go to poor people can be demonstrated.

Yes, of course. Like nearly all Democrats, and unlike most Republicans, Senator Obama thinks that addressing poverty is an important part of improving society generally. however, there will always be poverty. you can't change that

It was the anti-globalisation movement that really put globalisation on the map. As a word it has existed since the 1960s, but the protests against this allegedly new process, which its opponents condemn as a way of ordering people's lives, brought globalisation out of the financial and academic worlds and into everyday current affairs jargon. But that scarcely brings us nearer to what globalisation means. The phenomenon could be a great deal of different things, or perhaps multiple manifestations of one prevailing trend. It has become a buzzword that some will use to describe everything that is happening in the world today.

Purely in Economic context, yes, poverty can set off a vicious circle, culminating in even more poverty. It goes something like this :

Poverty > Less Income > Less Consumption > Low Consumption Expenditure > Low Revenue for firms > Lesser Production > Lesser Income for Factor Inputs > Poverty

Therefore, this vicious circle will keep on incrementing. This can be prevented by suitable injections of capital investment by governments to increase availability of credit in the economy.

1. Cambodia

2. Papua New Guinea

3. Laos

5. Timor Leste

6. Vietnam

7. NORTH Korea

8. Indonesia

9. Philippines

10.Thailand

11. Malaysia

12. Brunei

The poverty rate in Greece was 23.2 in 2015.

Answer It can. When people are living in poverty they cannot get the things they need like food, medicine, and clothing and sometimes they get so desperate they will steal to get things they need. Sometimes young people growing up in poverty turn to drug dealing and stealing because they feel there is no other way for them or they have grown up in a home where it was already a way of life. Many times they don't know there are other options for them out there.