Poverty in Argentina
According to Tomas Raffo, an economist with the Argentine workers Central trade union’s Institute of studies and Training, 2004 “Argentina has beaten an all-time record: it is the only country in the world where poverty has grown faster than the population. ” In Argentina there are deep disparities in income and wealth. Rodriguez, (2002) In the year 2000 the richest ten percent of Argentina’s population earned roughly thirty six percent of the country’s income, whereas the poorest ten percent earned merely 1. 5 percent of the income. Needless to say, these statistics are sad to say the least.
These estimates are determined by surveys done on sub-groups, and the results then being weighted by the number of people in each group. An example would be rich nations employ more generous standards of poverty, than the poor nations do. Rodriguez, (2002) In 1970 the population of Argentina stood at twenty two million people, of which one million were poor. Now the population is at thirty eight million and eighteen million of these people are poor. This is basically stating that there are sixteen million more people in Argentina and seventeen million more are poor.
Majority of the nations unfortunate conditions come primarily from one issue, which is genetically engineered crops, the effect it has on children, and it’s relation with political regulation. One of the key underlying causes in regards to the poverty rate in Argentina has to do directly with genetically engineered (GE) crops. In many other parts of the world this is actually helping to feed the world, but in Argentina the effect is opposite of that, in which it is actually increasing poverty and hunger. Argentina has used GE crops more than any other location other than the United States.
Since they were originally introduced in the year 1996 the area that is under soya cultivation has more than doubled, but during this same period food insecurity has increased greatly (Rodriguez, 2002). If you set aside export led growth as well as models of globalization, the reality is that Argentina has hundreds of thousands of children who are currently malnourished or at risk of this. GE crops may not be the only reason for poverty in Argentina, but the spread of these crops has undermined the resilience and capacity of people to look after them when the government fails.
GE crops essentially lock Argentina into the wrong kind of trade: a model of export-oriented agriculture that serves a few privileged, but in turn undermines the food security of normal people at home (Rodriguez, 2002). A large part of their GE soya crop is actually turned into fodder and used on livestock. The production methods that are used rely on a heavy use of chemicals is destructive to local environments as well as local communities. There are also other false claims that go along with the production of GE crops such as they are no more productive than other varieties.
The gains in production that can be seen simply come from turning more land over to agriculture and not actual productivity movements. The GE soya production poses an even further threat to Argentina’s most valuable rainforest areas. There is much evidence that shows that GE-free, patent-free, and chemical free farming already is working in positively in other parts of the world as explained by Rodriguez, (2002). On top of this there is tremendous potential to provide livelihoods and food security to millions more not only in Argentina, but around the world as well.
Roughly 700,000 children are born each year, and 11,000 of them do not even make it to see their first birthday (Alonso, 2004). Alonso further explained that scenarios that could have been easily avoided cause six out of ten of these deaths. More than half of the children who suffer from anemia the cause of it is the lack of iron. This then in turn affects their brain development and influences their capacity to learn and interact socially. A majority of these children show a delay in growth as well and leven percent of children under the age of six are much smaller than they should be (Alonso, 2004). The latest National Institute of Statistics and Census (INDEC) showed that in May of 2003 the poverty affected 73. 5 percent of children under the age of 14. 41. 2 percent lived in extreme poverty, 64,2 percent between the ages fifteen and eighteen were poor, and 30. 8 percent of that proportion was destitute (Alonso, 2004). People are classified as poor if there family’s income can only cover food, and there classified as indigent or extremely poor if they cannot afford a basic diet.
For example, a family of two adults and two children with an income of less than 250 dollars is considered poor, whereas if a family this same size only made 115 dollars would be considered indigent (Alonso, 2004). A good start program being led by UNICEF is trying to be put together in order to remind the public of the rights children have and the specific care a child who is under the age of three needs. According to Andres Criscaut UNICEF representative, “The prenatal stage and the first three years of life are a critical period for the development of children’s cognitive, language and social and emotional skills” (Alonso, 2004).
They are arguing that a decent diet alone is not enough, but rather safety, and trust as well. In 1996 when Laura Padilla and her advocates protested against the political regime of governor Sapag, the working income was possibly way less than two dollars a day. Moreover, the people demanded the need for jobs, where much of the population didn’t have much steady income. Thousands of committed and courageous protesters took stance to for 7 days; hold up all entre to roads in the area, even halting goods and people for six nights.
These protesters were deeply involved and dedicated to a plane that was heavily organized and arranged. They had an effective plane that startled their opponent, yet made history worldwide. Goodwin & Jasper, (2009) when a federal judge in command of 200 soldiers of the Gendarmer?? a Nacional comesto Plaza Huincul with the intention of clearing national Road 22 of demonstrators. With the help of tear gas and rubber bullets the gendarmes clear out the first barricade less than a mile from the main blockade at Torre Uno (the oil derrick that memorializes the discovery of petroleum in he region) but as they attempt to move forward, they notice that approximately 20,000 people (close to half of the total population of both towns) are awaiting them. From the roof of a van, her arm held by a masked picketer, the judge addresses the crowd with a megaphone, recuses herself from the case, and tells protesters that she and the gendarmes at her command are leaving town. The crowd cheers her, sings the national anthem, and shouts: “The people won, the people won! ” A question arises as to, where did Laura Padilla get the courage and confidence to organize, thus stand before a powerful government system?
Laura was raised in a neglected area of Argentina; her life story has shaped her words and actions during the upraise of the protest. Laura’s thoughts and feelings throughout the uprising formed a deep connection by the history of her life. Political routines throughout the region and her town’s conditions sparked her fury towards government officials that cared little about the people. The relationship she had with other protesters also contributed to her stand out performance of leading a huge population of people. Everyday life for Laura was a drive and passion to change how the government system worked in Argentina.
As the famous quote said “Courage in women is often mistaken for insanity”. This quote is able to illustrate the ongoing trials that women have been facing for years. In the event that a man takes charge and spurs a movement it is seen as an heroic act, one that should be acknowledged as bravery. This contrasts greatly with societies views on women’s initiative to spark change. For so long women have not been given the credit for their great accomplishments because they have been stuck with the stereotype of mans lesser half for centuries.
When this inferior half begins to think and act on its own, not with the help or guidance of a man, it is an unusual occurrence in the eyes of society. In any case, digression from societies norms is taken on as insanity, which is what women innovators have been titled. One can note this double standard through out history and even in modern times although progress has been made. Laura became the main spokes person for the people, where she then developed the ability to argue and deliver an influential message that overturned Argentina’s previous ideas and created occupations and resources to help the general public.
Needless to say the poverty issue in Argentina is something that needs to be worked on immediately. The severity of this situation is only growing. The effect that is takes on not only these poor children, but everyone else in Argentina is indescribable. Regardless of whether you are an adult or a child, no one should have to do what these children are forced to deal with on a daily basis Things like the production of genetically engineered crops are only helping to contribute to this, and it seems that if they were to eliminate it, it would be very beneficial to those who are living below the poverty line.
It is just a matter of finding a way to produce crops that is equally efficient and not more cost effective. It takes more than just food and clothing though to help get and keep these people from becoming or remaining poor. People like Laura Padilla are going to have to continue to have confidence in stepping up and telling the government just how they feel in regards to what is taking place here. If more people had the passion and determination in which she carries, they ultimately could make a difference in the fight for a better life. Works Cited