The Author: Sarjo Bayang
Uneven Distribution of National Wealth and other Resources
Not by any way a choice for some people, the truth about uneven distribution of money and other resources still stands tall above everything else. Largest chunk of money resides in few deep pockets. Some people have greater share than rest of us whether that is fair or not. Many of us have very little. Majority are left with not even what is enough from hand to mouth.
All the money in few deep pockets
By their collective possession, largest proportion of national wealth settles in fewer deep pockets of the superrich. Two contrasting explanations pop up regarding this situation.
Some people say that money and material come the way of those who work hard enough. The other perception is that if you are too rich, it may be part of your wealth is taken from someone else without their clear knowledge or authorised consent.
Extremes of wealth and abject poverty become acceptable norms in civilised society. As some people strive to grow their money wealth and material possession, others in the same society battle with biting pains of life without even the basic hand-to-mouth survival.
Those in possession of more than enough share insist they have worked for it. Although there are genuinely enterprising persons in society who create wealth by acceptable means. Some of them still take blame for unfair payment practices to those who by occasion of work help them create that wealth.
Some people have so much
In response to those who think that workers are exploited while their employers get richer, they insist the machines, land, and buildings are possessed or maintained at a cost needing compensation.
Governments tend to keep mute about how some people in society rake larger scoop of society’s money wealth and material possession.
The ordinary person in society blames government for failing to institute regulatory curbing mechanisms that will ensure fairest distribution of the national wealth. It is not expected that wealthy people in society will have their possession confiscated and redistributed to the compact majority poor.
What some people find eye watering painful contrast is this situation where poverty gaps get wider while the superrich remain in their limited number. Maybe government can come up with lasting solution aimed at narrowing the gap between rich and poor that brings little smile where it is due.
Other people have very little
Poverty impacts on health, education, status, and limited access to food stock among many disadvantages. Extreme poverty bites much deeper in the bone marrow.
In every society, rich and poor rub shoulders at busy streets, in public transport, and sometimes during shopping.
Even superrich nations have their poor population with very little at hand. Examples are street living, food and energy poverty. During winter periods, cold related deaths become common in some rich countries.
Extreme poverty imposes hard economic sanctions on affected individuals and communities. Whatever help that may come their way, least wealthy persons face hard decisions between heating, eating, and clothing in priority ranking.
It is not reasonable to expect government build houses, provide food and give everyone in society adequate pocket money. There is however no doubt everyone in society deserve living beyond hand to mouth.
International development agencies and government intervention
Government is the custodian of the nation’s economic superstructure. By occasion of providing the enabling environment for wealth creation, taxation is one certain way where government collects money collectively needed.
Those with little must not be reduced to beggars in their collective. More responsible governments consider the plight of deprived and disadvantaged communities or individuals without them asking for help.
The rest that have nothing even for hand-to-mouth deserve better attention than just being reduced to statistical data. Studies are carried by experts that came up with lofty proposals targeting poverty reduction.
International organisations have pool of desktop experts who are very good at beating the keyboard. It was the generation of pen pushing bureaucrats that filled up government offices and international development agencies. With electronic gadgets and help of the Internet, teleconferences make the job much easier.
Exactly when governments and development agencies will stop talking by putting those fine plans in real poverty reduction operation, that is where lies the real challenge.
To justify all the budget allocation in keeping government and public services going, they require fulfilling good purpose.
Where government and development organisations allocate so much for their own upkeep, there is no economic sense when that is not translated into best public welfare.
From what we can all see, cashflow operates one-way traffic. Experts and economists talk about growth by measure of their statistical projections. In real life, one-way traffic cashflow will only lead to economic situation of imbalances in reserved interest of the few.
Better review by government may produce longest lasting good results for all. How soon that is done remains to be seen. Every government has real duty of care for those being governed. In that duty, best shared economic interest is supreme.
Is anyone listening?