The poor will always be with you

Le Keqiang, China’s Prime Minister in his four-country (Ethiopia, Nigeria, Angola, Kenya) visit of Africa, is reported to be addressing poverty reduction and people’s livelihood upfront in his pronouncements, as opposed to the E.U. and U.S.’ rationale for trade as promoting a country’s economic growth. No judgment here, just noting the difference in story.

China’s trade is mostly through infrastructure like rails and roads, community health and universal education, plus loans for medium and SME’s capital investment. In Le Keqiang’s case, also a hefty grant on environmental protection projects, which does not translate into a statistical abstraction of a country’s GDP but on the qualitative benefit of the population. At the World Economic Forum meeting in Abuja, capital of Nigeria, he added partnering with locals in high-tech businesses, e.g., aeronautics, to stem the fast exodus of African talents to the West.

This was particularly relevant in fossil-fuel rich Nigeria, the largest economy in Africa. I was in Nigeria early 1980s, diverted on my flight from London to Kano on the northeast because of a sandstorm. I saw why it a misnomer to consider the economy as one. Nigeria of late not only has not seen any economic growth in its primary export industry crude; it also has one of the highest unemployment rates in the continent. A powder keg, as 60 percent of its population is classified as “youth.”

The local folks in Nigeria’s early ’80s were like those of Nauru of the same period who drove themselves into obesity riding fancy cars and powerful motorcycles around the small phosphate-rich island. The government also invested its resources in real estate in Brisbane, Honolulu, Manila, Los Angeles, Guam, and, yes, Saipan. We still call the rotating restaurant building in Susupe as the “Nauru building,” though Nauru disposed of it a long time ago.

“Trade, not aid” was a chant we had in the ’80s as the United States hammered “aid” in the form of military assistance to dictatorships we supported around the world. I saw how that panned out in Chile and Nigeria, heavily emphasized in Ferdinand Marcos’ martial law in the Philippines while I was orienting Peace Corps volunteers.

In economic algebra, the “poor” is not part of the Wall Street equation. In fact, Christian folks who claim the authority of Scriptures as their guide, if asked to quote a section on the poor (true of the Christians on Saipan as well), generally repeat the gospel of Matthew’s line: The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me.” This results in the widespread idolatry of Jesus; the messenger becomes the object of adoration rather than the message, which gets lost! Luke rectifies the record with: “But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.” This last verse is rarely quoted.

In politics, we hear decried those who are in “entitlement” programs of government like many in the CNMI. These are allegedly the poor who intentionally stay that way so they can continue receiving government benefits, an argument often used to further the cause of sending former CWs and authorized Micronesian off-island residents back to their home of origin because they are a burden to tax-paying wage earners.

USAID development consultant David Korten (in Manila when I was there) wrote a book on “phantom wealth” not too long ago. He documents the measure of wealth in terms of financial assets by an accountants’ assessed value rather than the actual production of real assets. His insight is reflected in the gain of 50 percent of the action in one of NYC’s exchanges, made from smart investors’ purchases on the stock exchange floor a split second before an offering is available in the open market through advanced technology. The phantom wealth created is added to the accounted value of the nation’s economy, then charged in real terms on the back of actual labor elsewhere that depends on the U.S. financial system.

Broad strokes, the U.S. economy involves 3 percent of its population in agriculture, 7 percent in manufacturing, and 90 percent in services. In all, the gap between the “haves” (top 1 percent of population owns the equivalent of the lower 60 percent) and the “have-nots” has become so embarrassing that calling our system democratic is a public relations act rather than actual definition. The divide in the ’80s was 15/85; now it is 01/99!

In the U.S. real estate market, the sale of homes for the wealthy is active, while the middle class market is stagnant. Look it up. BTW, that is also true in China but that is hardly a consolation.

“The poor will always be with you” is a systemic reality more than a category in the tolerated marginalized members of an economic system. Sadly, it has become an unquestionable part of our state of affairs, decried first before it is understood.

Then there is “blessed are the poor in spirit”; these intentionally mendicant poor will always be with you!