Exploiting the Poor or Offering Market-Based Products?

"The best way to alleviate poverty is to raise the real income of the poor by creating opportunities for steady employment at reasonable wages." Annel Karnani Annel Karnani's article, "Romanticizing the Poor," in the Stanford Social Innovation Review discusses how poor people often suffer more deeply than their wealthier counterparts by making poor decisions, usually in an attempt to escape their realities of poverty. And corporations, universities and governments are doing their part in making sure that it stays that way by targeting the BOP as consumers rather than focusing on sustainable revenue generating businesses that would allow them to actually increase their income. In fact, some corporations and businesses are exploiting the BOP so that they are able to profit on the desperation that poverty entails. Several examples illustrate this in Karnani's article, from the acknowledged use of tobacco and alcohol that permeates all socioeconomically challenged people to the specifically inane skin whitening lotion that is targeted to women in over 40 countries. The justification for targeting specific populations with market-based solutions is that if consumers had more choices to pick from then they would make better decisions. However, Karnani states, "Yet these advocates do not acknowledge that the poor lack the education, information, and other economic, cultural, and social capital that would allow them to take advantage of - and shield themselves against- the vagaries of the free market." It does not seem that the poor haphazardly squander what little income they have on frivolous items, but that they lack so many resources, including emotional safety regarding their poverty and lack of options that it is easier to simply pick instant gratification. Karnani offers some convincing evidence and Nobel Peace Prize economist Amartya Sen agrees, " Deprived people tend to come to terms with their deprivation because of the sheer necessity of survival, and they may, as a result, lack the courage to demand any radical change, and may even adjust their desires and expectations to what they unambitiously see as feasible." It is easy for corporations, politicians and society in general to simply blame poor people for their poverty, however, that is an easy answer for a difficult problem that those casting blame might have never faced - desperation is a powerful emotion. On a personal and empathetic level, I found myself getting frustrated FOR the poor. I recalled moments in my life, though not nearly as desperate and despondent as what the majority of the population in this article face, when I worked really hard on a daily basis and never felt like I was seeing progress. When my level of frustration and disgust reached the level of, "what's the point? I'm not getting anywhere," and suddenly, it made sense to me why the temptation to spend a significant portion of income on cigarettes, alcohol, lotion or a party might make sense. Karnani states, "In addition, poor people more often encounter stressors-including hunger, pollution, crowding and violence-that lead them to act in ways that may alleviate suffering in the short term, but hinder economic prosperity in the long run." If poor people are unable to make good decisions because of their lack of resources and the economic world creates unwanted or harmful products for the sole purpose of increasing sales, then where does the responsibility lie? If the poor truly feel that they have no ability or right to demand quality products that contribute to their quality of life, then who does? And if we are able to relate to that desperation, even in some small way, then how do we justify solely blaming the poor for the bad decisions that they make regarding their income?