The Fortune Bottom Pyramid: Eradicating Poverty Through Profits

Words provoke preconceived ideas and images in the mind, when it comes to a situation like poverty these preconceived notions can have undesirable and unintended consequences. Diana George examines the semantics and the imagery of the word poverty in her article titled “Changing the Face of Poverty; Nonprofits and the Problem of Representation. While also addressing the issue of the perception poverty and what someone in poverty truly looks like (676). Prof. George is arguing that organizations like Habitat for Humanity, which are created to help people in poverty actually perpetuate the wrong image of what someone in poverty looks like (678). Most organizations created to help those in need, especially those in the US tend to portray poverty as what is seen and thought of as living conditions in Third World countries (683). In reality, poverty is all around each and every one of us in this country on a daily basis, and people might not always recognize it for what it is (681,682). Furthermore, the majority of people living in poverty in the United States do not live like or look like someone living in a Third World country. But in reality they are still living in poverty nonetheless (682,683). Organizations that portray people living in poverty here in the US as totally devastated and completely impoverished are doing a disservice to the people they are attempting to help. Consequently, by doing this they are giving a limiting idea of what someone living in poverty

America is recognized as a place where if you work hard enough you can become wealthy. In fact, the U.S. has more millionaires than any other country in the world. However, for all that prosperity, the gap between rich and poor has always been large. People have been attempting to fix this inequality for over a century now. Andrew Carnegie, a Scottish immigrant who became the second richest man in America by dominating the steel industry, and Terence V. Powderly, an American attorney, labor union leader, politician, and best known as head of the Knights of Labor, were among the first to propose solutions. Carnegie’s idea, called “The Gospel of Wealth,”

Throughout years poverty has been an ongoing situation that has only been increasing throughout the years. Many efforts have been issued by the government over the situation; but yet many of those efforts have failed to succeed. Increased dependency is the only long term impact that government efforts have had on poverty. By solving poverty the government could make the economy grow more for everyone , because many people would be going back into the workforce. The government has a responsibility to end poverty through providing education, better programs, and jobs.

Criticism of the economy can differ dramatically. Many might have very polar opposite ideas as to what needs to be done in order to better provide for a society's economic well-being. This is definitely the case between Karl Marx and Andrew Carnegie. Despite some basic similarities regarding the need for economic change, Marx's "Communist Manifesto" and Carnegie's "The Gospel of Wealth" prove incredibly different in how they claim to provide real solutions for economic problems. Marx demands that the people take back control of the means of production and redistribute wealth to all; while Carnegie insists that only an elite few in a society are responsible enough for handling the wealth and should remain in absolute control of it, even when determining how it is being redistributed into the society.

In this chapter, Levitt & Dubner begin with mentioning a scholar by the name of Sudhir Venkatesh who examined the crack culture of a specific group in Chicago named the “Black Gangster Disciple Nation.” That particular group was run and financed by the leader named J.T. He was well educated and smart when it came to his business. Freakonomics mentions the comparison between J.T., his Black Disciples, and the MacDonald’s franchise! The book states, “In other words, a crack gang works pretty much like the standard capitalist enterprise: you have to be near the top of the pyramid to make a big wage” (Levitt & Dubner 100). J.T, being the head leader of the gang, obviously was the one taking home the big bucks, while the Black Disciples also “took home well more than half the money” (Levitt & Dubner 100). However, J.T’s foot soldiers maintained minimum-wage jobs, similar to lower employees at MacDonald’s. In the American business world, employees commonly begin their career at the bottom of the hierarchy pyramid: waitresses, dishwashers, janitors, etc. They have hopes for reaching the top of the pyramid as managers or maybe even CEO’s. Just like in the business world, drug dealers begin at the bottom and pray to succeed all the way to the top, where they are paid double, triple, or even quadruple what they made before! Levitt & Dubner use this great example of the hierarchy ladder, “Well, for the same reason that a pretty Wisconsin farm girl moves to Hollywood. For the same

In reality, it is not the economy, but how the economy’s rules are set up that determines who benefits from the wealth generated. For instance, any one of the ten wealthiest individuals in America made enough money in 2012 to pay the cost of individual housing for every homeless person in America for an entire year. Upon comparing 141 different countries, the United States ranked 4th-highest in wealth inequality, with only Ukraine, Lebanon and Russia having a more polar distribution of wealth. These statistics would not present a problem if only Americans could work their way up the socioeconomic ladder. Despite their efforts, however, much of the data shows that upward mobility is improbable if not impossible in many cases.

Though evaluating the anti-poverty approach listed above, what I have come to notice is that the government had made very few progresses to remedy our poverty crisis. At the moment, one in five American children is subjected to “food stamp”. A lot of political and social changes have took place in American since the Social Security Bill was first introduced, yet a majority the policies that we use to address our poverty concerns remain the same. Our public assistance programs hesitated to adapt to the industrial transformations and hence, did not adjust the amount of aid toward the already vulnerable working-poor. Coupled with the lack of aid, our welfare system has become completely “rule based”. Our welfare system today focused more on formality, and has done little to counter the impacts of our ongoing recessions and globalization.

“Fighting Poverty the Old-Fashioned Way” is a socially-conscious article, written by Howard Husock on the growth of the underprivileged class in America. The topic of the article centers on the disadvantages that needy citizens faced with on a daily basis through the decades. Starting from the very first immigrants that set foot in the promised “land of the free”, to the house settlements of the mid-20th century. Husock focuses on the working relationship of the rich, bourgeois class and how they were able to insert themselves inside the unmotivated tribes to provide help. A constant fight between an indifferent government and those privileged, who worked towards bettering the unruly societies of poverty. As well references by Jane Addams,

1%- Upon reading chapter 16 I was profoundly shocked to see mention of the 1%. In the news over the last few years this has become a rather recognizable term however I did not realize this went all the way back to the beginnings of our country. I also find it shocking that after all this time we still have found no real resolution for the distribution of wealth in America. While I understand hard work for hard cash I do not understand how even back then these companies could profit so heavily off their employees with no care for their wellbeing or living situation. A company should never be allowed to pay someone less than the current living expense of the area. Also, I cannot help but feel like I am not reading history but instead an article from current times. Millionaires sit on snob hill while their employees struggle to keep on the lights.

As mentioned above, this article divides society into classes and reports that the top of the upper class in society is made up of people that, in most cases, hold leadership positions. This implies that they are in a position to invest in the middle class and help boost the economy. This doesn’t mean that the activities by the middle class are the only promoters of the economy. There are other factors such as, the price of capital, taxes, resource endowments, luck, chance, and many other activities that contribute to the growth of the economy.

The Bottom Billion as Tim Harford, Financial Times columnist and author of The Undercover Economist, has describe it,” is an arresting, provocative book. If you care about the fate of the poorest people in the world, and want to understand what can be done to help them, read it. If you don't care, read it

Mahajan, N. (2013, 31 juillet). Bottom of the Pyramid and Beyond. Forbes India. Retrived from:http://forbesindia.com/article/ckgsb/bottom-of-the-pyramid-and-beyond/35575/1#ixzz3QtAfwAuC

The life is one long journey. During the journey, one will behold one dark blue lagoon, easily noticeable among the dull, gritty, hard, and grainy sand and speckled prairie plants. From a distance, the lagoon appears beautiful and serene. The vivacious blue color twinkles in the sunlight and reflects the green of the stoic, tall mountain. Yet, it is far from pristine. The water that it holds is shallow, and salty; drinking it may be fatal. This is the lagoon of money. Though it may look tantalizing, those who are dehydrated from greed drink the saltwater, suffer and are unable to live life to their potential. Meanwhile those who are strong and have high morals to overcome the thirst, shun the lagoon, and travel on in pursuit of fresher water, thrive. There are many pieces of literature that support the idea that greed will lead to an unfulfilled life.

The top of the pyramid consists of half a billion people. These people live in great prosperity and where the economy is thriving. They mostly live in rich countries that are well developed. Within this group are the people that live where the economy is going well. These people are spread across almost all parts of the world and are composed of the middle and higher incomes of the developed countries. These people are also among the wealthy elites in developing countries. Below this group is another group of about two billion people with an income of 4,000 to $ 20,000 per year per capita. (Hammond, Kramer, Tran,

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to examine the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) proposition, where private companies can both be profitable and