Why Governments of Top Economies Fail to Eliminate

Poverty, Homelessness, and Unemployment

Ian Y.H. Chua

1, 2, 3, 4

Email: ianyhchua2024@gmail.com

12 January 2025

Introduction

Despite their immense wealth and advanced infrastructure, the top economies of the

world, including the United States, Germany, and Japan, struggle with persistent poverty,

homelessness, and unemployment. This paradox has led to extensive scholarly

discourse, highlighting systemic, structural, and political factors as the root causes. This

paper investigates why governments in these nations fail to eradicate these social issues,

focusing on systemic economic inequalities, political constraints, and the unintended

consequences of global economic dynamics.

Systemic Economic Inequalities

Economic inequality is deeply ingrained in the global capitalist system, which prioritizes

prot maximization over equitable wealth distribution. In top economies, a signicant

portion of wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small elite, while the bottom quintile

struggles to meet basic needs. The Gini coeicient—a measure of income inequality—

remains high in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, underscoring

the disparity between rich and poor [1].

1. Labor Market Disparities: High-income economies often exhibit labor market

segmentation, where well-paid, secure jobs coexist with low-wage, precarious

employment. Workers in the latter category face job instability and limited

upward mobility, perpetuating poverty and underemployment [2].

2. Structural Barriers: Structural factors, such as unequal access to quality

education and healthcare, exacerbate poverty. Marginalized communities often

encounter systemic discrimination, further entrenching their economic

disadvantages [3].

Political Constraints

Governments in top economies are frequently constrained by political inertia, lobbying,

and ideological divisions, which hinder the implementation of eective policies.

1. Political Polarization: In many democracies, partisan gridlock prevents the

passage of comprehensive welfare reforms. For instance, debates over minimum

wage increases or universal healthcare often become mired in ideological

disputes, delaying action [4].

2. Inuence of Special Interest Groups: Corporate lobbying exerts considerable

inuence over policy decisions, often skewing priorities toward business

interests rather than social welfare. Tax policies favoring corporations and high-

income individuals reduce government revenues available for anti-poverty

programs [5].

3. Welfare Stigma: In some cultures, social safety nets are stigmatized, leading to

underfunded and poorly administered welfare systems. This fosters a cycle of

poverty as individuals lack the necessary support to escape economic hardship

[6].

Global Economic Dynamics

Globalization and technological advancement have signicantly altered labor markets,

creating both opportunities and challenges.

1. Outsourcing and Automation: The oshoring of manufacturing jobs to low-

wage countries and the rise of automation have displaced millions of workers in

top economies. While these trends enhance corporate prots and economic

eiciency, they exacerbate domestic unemployment and underemployment [7].

2. Economic Shocks and Crises: Recessions, such as the 2008 nancial crisis,

disproportionately aect vulnerable populations, leading to spikes in

unemployment and homelessness. Despite government interventions, the

recovery often favors wealthier individuals and businesses, leaving marginalized

groups behind [8].

Policy Failures and Unintended Consequences

Even well-intentioned policies can fail due to design aws or unintended consequences.

1. Housing Policies: Eorts to address homelessness often fail due to insuicient

aordable housing. Zoning laws, high construction costs, and gentrication

exacerbate housing shortages in urban areas, pushing low-income individuals

into homelessness [9].

2. Unemployment Benets and Incentives: While unemployment benets

provide short-term relief, they may inadvertently discourage job-seeking if poorly

designed. Furthermore, these programs are often underfunded, providing

inadequate support for long-term unemployed individuals [10].

Conclusion

The persistence of poverty, homelessness, and unemployment in top economies reects

a complex interplay of systemic inequalities, political constraints, and global economic

dynamics. Addressing these issues requires comprehensive policy reforms that prioritize

equitable wealth distribution, strengthen social safety nets, and mitigate the adverse

eects of globalization. Achieving these goals demands not only political will but also a

societal shift toward valuing collective well-being over individual prot.

Acknowledgments

This paper was developed with the assistance of ChatGPT 4.0, which provided insights and renements in the

articulation of philosophical and scientic concepts.

Founder/CEO, ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd.

M.Eng. Candidate, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX.

M.S. (Anatomical Sciences Education) Candidate, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL.

M.S. (Medical Physiology) Candidate, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH.

References

1. Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.

2. Autor, D. H., & Dorn, D. (2013). The growth of low-skill service jobs and the

polarization of the US labor market. American Economic Review, 103(5), 1553-

1597. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.5.1553

3. Chetty, R., Hendren, N., Kline, P., & Saez, E. (2014). Where is the land of

opportunity? The geography of intergenerational mobility in the United States.

Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(4), 1553-1623.

https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju022

4. McCarty, N., Poole, K. T., & Rosenthal, H. (2006). Polarized America: The dance of

ideology and unequal riches. MIT Press.

5. Gilens, M., & Page, B. I. (2014). Testing theories of American politics: Elites,

interest groups, and average citizens. Perspectives on Politics, 12(3), 564-581.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595

6. Moitt, R. (2015). The deserving poor, the family, and the US welfare system.

Demography, 52(3), 729-749. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-015-0395-0

7. Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor

markets. Journal of Political Economy, 128(6), 2188-2244.

https://doi.org/10.1086/705716

8. Reinhart, C. M., & Rogo, K. S. (2009). This time is dierent: Eight centuries of

nancial folly. Princeton University Press.

9. Desmond, M. (2016). Evicted: Poverty and prot in the American city. Crown.

10. Meyer, B. D., & Mok, W. K. C. (2019). Disability, earnings, income, and

consumption. Journal of Public Economics, 171, 51-69.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.03.011