2030 deadline for an end to poverty

Yunus

THERE was some consternation when the little economics professor from Bangladesh won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006.
There were some who said the prize should have gone to someone more well known, such as Bono. Or at least to someone who helped the peace cause, not just the plight of the poor as prize winner Muhammad Yunus had done.
Even 1983 Nobel peace laureate Lech Walesa seemed a bit put out, declaring that Yunis should have won the economics rather than the peace prize.

The Nobel Prize committee had the right idea. It said eliminating poverty would be a good way of bringing about peace.
Yunis, who helped lift millions out of poverty by lending small amounts of money, once said: “My greatest challenge has been to change the mindset of people. Mindsets play strange tricks on us.’’
He set up banks to give low interest loans to the poor and explained: “`This is not charity. This is business: business with a social objective, which is to help people get out of poverty.’’

His major problem, he said, was convincing bankers that poor people were credit worthy.

Prof Yunus said this week that the international youth community should set a new deadline for 2030 to eradicate global poverty.
The Nobel laureate described the present generation of young people as the most powerful generation in history because of their grip on communication and information technology.
“When Kofi Annan and the UN declared the millennium development goals in 2000 – people laughed and said they were crazy, they didn’t believe you can reduce poverty, but when Bangladesh announced it had achieved the number one goal to reduce poverty by half in 2013, you know it has been serious goal after all.”
This was significant news because Bangladesh was labelled as a basket case at its birth, said the founder of Grameen Bank.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “2030 deadline for an end to poverty

  1. Unrealistic assumptions are false assumptions:-
    “It said eliminating poverty would be a good way of bringing about peace.”
    It’s ALWAYS the richest (even if only in relative terms) nations that foment and fight wars.

    Territorialism ~ whether in terms of real estate, ideology, finances/whatever ~ is just about the most basic human instinct: predating even fear or flight, and is an element of the most basic survival instinct of all : sex/reproduction.
    The ONLY way to divert our instinct to fight for territory is to revert to the system that has worked for billions of years: reduce the population to the extent where territorialism is no longer and issue –> the possible contenders are too widely separated to make war necessary or even logistically feasible.

    …including the reality that even the genocide of a cultural or ethnic group has no great impact on the viability of the species.
    eg. Our blackfellers don’t ‘go to war’ even if they do have transitory skirmishes from time to time.

    Even dogs and cats and wombat understand and are in accordance with such natural-order injunctions, and seldom overstep he boundaries.

    Our species alone seems to be unable to grasp the facts, even from a billion-year-long reading of history.
    Blame god; he was the one who, in Genesis, drew the boundries on the map and in human hearts.

    Like

  2. How does he reconcile his views with the Bible verse that says “The heart is deceitful above all things, and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” Jer. 17:9.

    One one hand I have the professional dole bludger who’s never had a job, who knows all the tricks in the book on how to claim the dole and how to live quite well on the dole.

    On the other hand I have the rich person, whose only natural talent is to make money, and who despises anyone who is not on the same par as himself in accumulating money.

    And then there the person who believes that life is like a “s…T” sandwich. The more bread you have the less s…t you nave to eat.

    Ironically all these three people will give you some good speeches on virtures such as world peace and eliminating poverty.

    Like

    • Trying to reconcile any views with individual Bible verses, particularly from the O.T., is not a feasible task. Look instead at the over-riding message repeated consistantly by the Bible’s many authors

      Like

  3. Yunis, who helped lift millions out of poverty by lending small amounts of money, once said: “My greatest challenge has been to change the mindset of people. Mindsets play strange tricks on us.’’
    He set up banks to give low interest loans to the poor and explained: “`This is not charity. This is business: business with a social objective, which is to help people get out of poverty.’’

    Brilliant. People want to bring themselves out of poverty (or at least many do). They don’t want to be a charity case. There is also pride involved.

    I’m quite sure I saw him on a t.v. special a few years back. It made an impression on me then. A good man.

    Like

  4. It’s singular people like him, rather than money vacuums like the United Nations, that will make differences to poverty.

    It’s like Bryce Courtney said, a waterfall starts with just one drop of water.

    Like

  5. . Certainly low interest loans to the poor have proved effective and financially viable.

    Eliminating poverty could lead to peace, but only if it made a simple life fashionable, eliminating greed.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s