The End Of Poverty? Movie Reflection

This was and interesting movie to watch. But if you are planning on watching it you need to plan to sit down and watch. You need to avoid distractions because there are people that are interviewed who speek other languages so you would have to read the subtitles on the bottom of the screen.

The first portion of the movie talked about how poverty and colonializm effected poverty today simmultaniously. When Europeans came it only took 500 years to export rescources and colonize the people and land. the Eupopean empire was built on the riches taken from the colonies. When something is taken so early of in the colonization it couldn't be used later of in the countries to get jobs so people can get money. The Europeans got Cheep or free labor from colonies. When the mother country let the countries only grow ceraaint things they would becoume dependant on the mother country for everything else which kept the mother country in control. As the movie progressed you came closer to present time and what factors are keeping poverty from being eradicated. Som e of them were, I guess you could say, understandable becasuse after WWII the world was afraid of more people coming to power that would do bad things, so when countries were made to keep to their own roles the effect now is that they aren't developed yet.

One major contrast made was the difference between North and South . The North was shown to be more development than the South. The South was shown to have unbalanced trade while the North became extremely wealthy. This contrast wasn't showed in the very beginning it came more of in the middle pert of the video.

There were facts about poverty displayed through out the movie. 60-80 million people today live in slave like conditions. That means that that they aren't payed enough, worked hard and long, and may not be given the necessary tools of needs.  Also the uneven distribution of welth was also shown at on point. "In Latin America, the richest 1% of the population receives over 400 times the income of the poorest 1%" Thats a big difference but that could be because of occcupation but still maybe it shouldn't be that large of a gap.  Also the rate of people living with malnutrion has gone up from 434 million in 1970 to 854 million today. that over two times the amount of people in just 40 years. The population size may have grown even steeper butr 854 million is still alot of people who aren't able to get proper food and the nutrition that comes from the food.

One thing that really shocked me was that; "Cutting global poverty on half would cost $20 billion, less than 4% of the U.S. military budget. " While $20 billion dollars is alot of money to me, if it's not even 4% of the Military budget it's not a bad trade off, even if it's only half of the poverty it's one step to help get things started and then hopefully finished. There are probably other countries who would like to contrubute to the reduction of poverty.


Nube de etiquetas