economics

Reducing Hopelessness

Standard

Here’s an idea that I’ve been chewing on lately: reducing hopelessness. What do I mean by this crazy, seemingly idealistic concept? Before I go into the details, a little detour into the topic of poverty reduction is in order.

Over the past several weeks, I’ve thought a lot about the thesis of Jeff Sach’s, The End of Poverty. He argues that although poverty still exists, through further effort, extreme poverty can be eliminated within our lifetime. Since reading his book, I’ve also read other aid-related books: Bill Easterly’s, The White Man’s Burden, and Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo’s, Poor Economics.

Although I feel like I’ve just scratched the surface of development economics, one emerging theme that I’m realizing is this: a lot has already been done to eliminate poverty. Until the Marshall Plan, the concept of aid did not exist. Today, thousands of professionals at a variety of institutions (IGOs, NGOs, nonprofits, agencies, etc.) are working daily towards ending poverty. Not to mention the academics who’ve studied and have raised countless perspectives on how to correctly end poverty.

Now, reducing hopelessness.

First, what do I mean by reducing hopelessness? By hopelessness, I’m referring specifically to two related things: depression and suicide. My concern is on how to address these two issues.

Second, where did this idea come from? Reading Kay Redfield Jameson’s Night Falls Fast made me realize that, in comparison to poverty reduction, there’s been much less discussion and action taken towards addressing mental illness and suicide prevention. Sure, the topic might be taboo, but why? Depression and suicide should not be simply swept under the rug.

Third, why does it matter? Though the magnitude might not be as huge as compared to extreme poverty, the facts concerning mental illness and suicide prevention are just as grave: every 17 minutes someone commits suicide. 1 in 10 Americans have experienced some form of mental illness. At the turn of the last century, poverty was a fact of life. Poverty was a huge problem, but given the global scope of the issue, addressing it seemed virtually impossible. Through advocacy and action, the world has taken significant steps to eliminating poverty.

If the world has done so much towards reducing poverty, why can’t the same be done with reducing hopelessness? It’s just as important of a problem, and affects many people, both in the developed and developing world.

From Race to Class

Standard

Interesting point by Paul Krugman in the Times over the weekend:

“Yet if King could see America now, I believe that he would be disappointed, and feel that his work was nowhere near done. He dreamed of a nation in which his children “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” But what we actually became is a nation that judges people not by the color of their skin — or at least not as much as in the past — but by the size of their paychecks. And in America, more than in most other wealthy nations, the size of your paycheck is strongly correlated with the size of your father’s paycheck.”

For the most part, I agree with Krugman’s argument. Aside from a couple slurs I experienced at Penn by non-students, I can’t really think of anytime in my life where I felt I was being judged negatively because of my color. Though racism (even reverse-racism) most definitely exists, I don’t doubt the issue of race in America has become increasingly a non-issue. In contrast, I absolutely believe that America is already a society based on class. I liken the shift from race to class as an issue to the saying, “Birds of a feather flock together.” Whereas in the past color defined the feather, today that feather is defined by our education and work.

Social Mobility in America

Standard

Earlier this past week, I came across this article from The Times about the increasing difficulty of social mobility in America. It goes on to cite that when compared to the other countries in the West, family background has a huge impact on how likely an individual in the States moves up, down, or remains at the same economic level as their parents.

Obviously, this problem isn’t new. As the occupy movement demonstrates, it’s pretty clear America has a growing inequality problem. I certainly agree that an unequal society means unequal opportunities. It might be more difficult to “rise up,” but I don’t think it’s certainly impossible. Regardless of increasing disparity and economic background, I think social mobility, like every other goal, is really dependent on an individual’s determination and perseverance to achieve.