How do we reduce global poverty?

I don't agree with you completely on the creation of debt being due to wageslaves and waves of defaults.

Until Ronald Regan came around we were only at 1 trillion debt, which reached 3 trillion by the end of his presidency.

President Bush brought it to 5 trillion and Clinton to 6 trillion. We began spiraling out of control because of decreased tax being taken in (republican laws) increased expenditures for automatic stabilizers (like unemployment insurance) and pressure to cut social security while making the defense budget untouchable or changable due to *cough* terrorism and assorted security issues.

I believe the american system can work when both sides can agree on making a balanced budget.

They'd have to purge socialist tendencies for starters.

Second is to create robust punishments and barriers to corruption. Then build infrastructure, encourage domestic production of goods (otherwise you just fall into the free trade dependency trap and standards of living will plateau quickly), enhance education and prevent educated labor from immigrating to the 1st world, and ensure that industry has quality equipment to work with (farmers using tractors and combines rather than the inefficient hoe and sickle that they're currently using). For the infrastructure and equipment, it's inevitable that subsidies will be needed but that's a small thing in the long run.

China has protectionism which allows domestic production to flourish (same story for post WWII Japan and S. Korea). Free trade is a meme holding back most of the impoverished nations in the world.

>They'd have to purge socialist tendencies for starters.

>encourage domestic production of goods
>prevent educated labor from immigrating
>For the infrastructure and equipment, it's inevitable that subsidies will be needed but that's a small thing in the long run.
LOL

Subsidies and tariffs aren't socialist. The 'means of production' aren't being socialized--in fact, it's all privatized.

What do you mean "global poverty"? Theres regional poverty, or country wide poverty... but global? Nah, Luxemburg is still good.

Hopes this resolves some confusion, when it's just regional or country poverty then it's actually easy to reverse.

First, trade and society must be protected. So, borders and militaries must be strengthened, along with stern actions toward local crime. You then address education, and because the country is being so coorperative and will likely be your ally when it becomes strong, you make trade easy for them.

Once the country is wealthy and strong it can become fully independant, though you may want to resist letting this happen as we can see with the poor condition of the british empire.

>how do we reduce global poverty?

You white people have sick habits.

You keep feeding niggers who have no ability to support or do anything for themselves.

All you are doing is breeding pet niggers into a cycle of poverty just so you white faggots can pat your selves on the back.

Lower the trade barriers somewhat between rich and poor countries
Stop subsidies to farmers in Western countries, let the market sort out itself, turn unused farmland into national parks
Stop sending so much food aid, free food destroys incentive for local farming
Send immigrants back, stop the brandrain so those people can improve their own countries instead of depressing wages in the West

Another thing is that the world, generally, is moving forward and getting better, we just hear so muchnegative from the media that we forget that technology, the fall of the ussr and ever stronger trade is uplifting billions of people from eat dirt poor to eat several times of day poor while posting dank memes on their 20$ secondhand imported from the west smartphone

Strong infrastructure and eradicating illiteracy help

>Lower the trade barriers somewhat between rich and poor countries
>Stop subsidies to farmers in Western countries
This would actually hurt them in the long run because of labor arbitrage (assuming they actually have access to the same equipment, otherwise it does nothing for anyone). The only reason why the impoverished country would be able to sell their products abroad is because they are impoverished--meaning that their extreme low standard of living is what keeps their goods competitive. If their standard of living increases much beyond the impoverished state, their goods lose competitiveness, the market seeks more desperate labor to exploit, and the country which is trying to raise its standard of living slumps back down into an impoverished state because their industry sinks from lower competitiveness. All this while the wealthier nations experience a similarly sinking standard of living for the ordinary worker--citing peak real income occurring in 1999 in the US, shortly after the advent of free trade.

Every great nation was built on protectionism, not free trade.

You don't understand, Western food products sell cheaper in Africa than African products because of subsidies and industrial farming

This destroys incentive

For one, subsidies aren't a bad thing. Secondly, the impoverished African farmers are using medieval farming tools to produce food, hell, a lot of them still engage in slash & burn.

What the African farmers need is tractors, combines, etc. and some education about best farming practices to increase crop yield and that would eliminate the majority of the discrepancy in prices at market. If the impoverished African farmer were to receive subsidized tractors and equipment and their government implement floating tariffs to strip out the effect of subsidies, the impoverished African farmer--and the particular nation as a whole--would prosper.

But they never will when Western food is so much cheaper, they simply cannot compete, and a tractor costs 30 peoples life wages + they can't afford to keep it maintained.

They have a massive surplus of labour, and yes they should be educated about good farming, the video further up the thread is an excellent example of what Africans can do with simple labour and some heavy nudging from sensible and educated people.

But the trade barriers between the continents, and the extremely cheaply priced Western food, is aiding in keeping Africa trapped in the mud

>and a tractor costs 30 peoples life wages
That's what subsidies are for.

> they can't afford to keep it maintained
Sure they can. Now that they have better tools, they're price competitive and can sell their goods to the local populace--making the profit that would otherwise go to foreigners. They can probably even export their crops too.

>But the trade barriers between the continents
What barriers? Barriers are lower than ever in history, both with the elimination of tariffs and much cheaper costs of shipping.

>and the extremely cheaply priced Western food
Which is why you make your domestic production similarly efficient and enact tariffs to strip out foreign subsidies.

If African countries enact tariffs the IMF, which owns their goverments, will wreck them

Also, at least the EU has some hefty trade barriers and legal fencing

The IMF doesn't own their governments at all. The most the IMF would do is claim that the tariffs would lead to the earth spinning off its axis and plunging into the sun or some other kind of sensationalist nonsense. The IMF has worked with socialist nations in the past after all.

The EU is all about the elimination of barriers to trade.

Other way round, user. The wageslaves and debts created the waves of defaults.

Beautiful keep it going

Carpet bomb Africa and the Middle East

The reason you are wealthy is because they are piss poor.

I believe better more efficient social programs. Capitolism with restrictions on the insane rich loopholes. And financial edutaction.

I mean basic fucking finances dont even get tought in our shit school

>Regulated capitalism with social safety nets provided to keep people from getting stuck in the poverty-loop for generations.
>Spending more on education and less on subsidizing already wealthy companies that do not need the help
>Part of regulating capitalism means reducing predatory businesses like human trafficking in shitty countries, but also things like predatory lending and loansharking in better off countries
>If you want to give companies incentives, incentivize the practice of letting workers take paid volunteer service sabbaticals
>fix higher education in countries that have issues with it, try to fund projects that bring education to shittier places
>Make everyone aware that they have basic human rights which includes things like "you have a right to not have the govt come to your house and kill your family"
>develop solar, wind, and other renewable types of energy that are self-sustaining; eventually shitty countries will adopt them themselves but the better places have to be the early adopters

>ITT we are all neo-liberal capitalists because fuck poverty
This thread is /pol/ tier shit ideology

actually i am ancap faggot

With reducing the world population.

The world is overpopulated. It isn't about creating more recources if more people are born anymore, at least not in the same way it was 100+ years ago.
Right now it's only about allocating recources to the growing population, which is getting harder and harder to do since it's growing.

When the population finally decreases (it will) automated systems will fill in for the a large part of every day work.

How the population will decrease in the near future worries me.

Governments aren't taking any measures since more people means more money, financially it's the same as cutting of your arm to lose weight.

I suspect that in the near future a poverty, hunger and thirst will grow far more quickly than the increasing population.

This will probably also result in a economic crash that in turn will result a free-for-all, especially in 3rd world countries.

There are a lot of solutions, I would start with advising and educating, nobody is doing that atm.
Closing borders is also a good one imo, but may be considered immoral depending the situation.

Utilizing discoveries like CRISPR to create therapies that allow the genetic traits of unborn children to be manipulated. This can be used to significantly increase the IQ of sub Saharan Africans and development of the continent would likely take off within a generation or two, provided every new born child received this treatment.

1 - Cut taxes. Deflate the state.
2 - invest in education and invest in tec production.
the only problem i dont know what should be better :
protect the wage slaves rights with regulations, or turn the rights flexible so the wageslaves and the employers can get to an agreement. what could happen :
- since there are more people than jobs the employers can allways get low price workforce. witch can be bad for both the employees and the economy.
- on the other hand it can make business grow since the work contracts are cheaper now. more grouth = more profit and more opportunity to jobs.

i dont know how to fix this. halp.

Let me say it to you differently.

These "people" are dirty and smelly. They will steal from the stores you own, and will leave trash on the ground, they will shit in the streets, they will get pregnant young, they will have a lot of children, they will have and spread diseases, they are a net loss from the wallets of others. I could go on.

As long as you can get behind the idea that theres many different types of people you'll be able to understand why a person would prefer a specific type of human that doesn' do anything of the things I listed, then you'll realize our pattern recognition abilities actually enable us to know exactly who these people are and if there happens to be a group to identify them by.

If you have 3 cats to pick from
Do you pick the one that just shat in front of you, the one that just hissed at you, or the one that rubs its head against you and starts purring? Hey asshole those are all cats! They're equal! Well, it's tragic that they aren't sure, but it's also a fact and we have standards to uphold. So kill the other two.

by going back to our ancestors' practice of replacing native savages with our own

we don't. a side-effect of capitalism is that there will always be some people who are unable or unwilling to earn enough for themselves. capitalism is still the best way to go, but it will always result in some % being broke.

We stop importing every countries top talent, because they come here, take American jobs and make America better and never return to the shithole we took them from.

Another way to end world poverty is to build a multi-billion dollar company like Google or Elon Musk or Virgin, then solve world poverty.

Gas Africans, use resources to invest in developing countries.

How do I make China level gainz?

>Meanwhile in Australia
Jesus m8s
We were so close to being on the right track.
>No TTP/TPP/PEPE
>We WILL decide who comes here
>Focus internally until we can at least produce enough for our own consumption should SHTF
>Enviromen, because bushfires and floods duck suit up more then just using less fuel/prime cut steaks x3 per day
Or my personal dream
>THE YEARS OF PAIN
Three years (one political cycle) where all politicians and Gov bearcat take either a massive pay cut but keep their benefits, or lose all their enefits but keep their income. Also max tax for the wealthy (sorry), but also highly restricted gibmedats for those who are NEET (this excludes those who are actually retartded).
Three years.
It'd suck, it'll hurt, but we'd be done for the next century.

>how do we reduce global poverty?
3D printers (actually nano fabricators would be ideal)

Easy

Problem? Poverty
Cause? Overpopulated Planet
Solution? Lower birth rates, find ways to make women infertile

Result: More resources for everyone
Bonus: This ends pollution and any environmental issues the Earth faces

Cultural shifts that focus on making quality of life improvements habit. Thing is you have shit like teaching people not to shit in the street.

Solar Generators

you dont.

they're just too retarded to improve themselves.

either reduce the population of third world countries by forced sterilization or somehow raise their intelligence.

Stop all immigration/emigration from third world countries.
I mean it.

The brain drain in some of the poor African/ME/Asian countries is absolutely awful. You have the elite and their capital leaving, you have educated professionals leaving once they finish school, and you have anyone with entrepreneurial skills also leaving. You are left with a lot of just. . . average and below average people who don't really know what to do or don't have the drive to.

By forcing people that have money, have skills, and have drive, to stay in their countries (this would have to be for decades) they would be forced to become agents of change.

The second part of this plan depends on the population of the country/region, I WOULD NOT open them up to foreign markets so rapidly, a level of protectionism would be necessary to foster local firms to form and grow so that experience in running a firm at the highest levels is available locally in the economy. Small population countries would need to open up significantly, coupled with intensive education. Think Hong Kong, Singapore. Find a niche, get good at it.

After a few decades of a medium level of isolationism/protectionism, having found a niche(s), a country/region would be able to successfully compete on the global market.

Of course, none of this will mean jack shit if the populations culture involves who can rape the most village girls this week, 101 ways to pray to Allah and subjugate the infidels, or OOGA BOOGA GIBS ME DAT.

Well first of all capitalism won't work unless there's a government capable of enforcing contracts between individuals. So a nation like Somalia capitalism wouldn't really help if anyone who tried to start a business gets held up at gunpoint every day. So countries need to deal with that issue first.

The second issue is infrastructure. A country needs to be able to transport funds from people with no productive use for them to people who could use them. Hence capital markets and roads/bridges/etc, If a nation can ensure these two basic needs are met than the country can begin to start its freemarket activities so long as they're not over taxed or over burdened with laws and reguations.

In that case the solution would actually be more democracy. Take Iran for example, millions and millions of educated people leaving for the US and Canada and Europe because they don't want to deal with their shitty theocratic autocratic herpderp Isamic government

>1 - Cut taxes. Deflate the state.
>2 - invest in education and invest in tec production.
These are contradicting each other, dummy.

Colonisation 2.0.

Time to fix our original fuckup (helping africans)

Most problems in the world are complex and nebulous. Most ideas you can think of have already been tried and pushed as far as they can reasonably go before they encounter unforseen problems and the law of diminishing returns renders further progress prohibitively expensive. Any "Grand Plan" would need to work with existing institutions and will probably involve information gathering and carefully analyzing it to see where improvements can be made as opposed to trying to push for broad sweeping changes.

A repressive regime is preferable to endemic civil war, through history revolutions rarely changed much while democracies have often arisen through evolution. Penalizing an entire country's economy because of the behavior of its government is misguided, you can only use sanctions as leverage once a country is dependent on global markets and that can only be achieved through years of free trade. Dictatorships tend to stifle economic growth to prevent political instability or because they do not favor long term investments, but if free trade isn't a problem they will open up.

Poverty still exists even in the most developed countries. I think our welfare system has unintentionally become self-serving with voters fixating on their own problems and neglecting others, homeless people commit petty crimes and wait to get arrested so they can spend the night in a jail cell. I won't say their problems are minor compared to those of the homeless, just that the system needs better coverage, everyone should be part of it.

Developed economies seem to have hit a ceiling, most notably Japan. Heavy investment in R&D should be encouraged so civilization can reach new heights as well as speed up and ease growth in emerging markets. As I mentioned earlier we should work with existing institutions across the world and get them to work together and solve problems like bad science somehow making it through peer review and inefficient use of funding.

You need to start one by one. Fix one country and bring to to the standards of a first world country, then proceed to the next one. If all first world countries focused on a single country it would reach first world status immediately. Then you'd have more countries cooperating.

We would the people at the top of the food chain allow people to catch up to them

Teach a man to fish he can get his own.

Keep a man dumb enough to not fish, you sell him fish.

Legalize drugs, let Africa grow poppy / weed

Push free trade

>the Human Development Index of Cuba still ranks much higher than the vast majority of Latin American nations.[65] After Cuba lost Soviet subsidies in 1991, malnutrition resulted in an outbreak of diseases.[66] Despite this, the poverty level reported by the government is one of the lowest in the developing world, ranking 6th out of 108 countries, 4th in Latin America and 48th among all countries
And it's not like Hong Kong was an isolated island suffering from any kind of embargo from other powerful countries