One neat trick to end extreme poverty

When Thomas Malthus said that “Some human beings must suffer from want,” his statement was not merely a prediction: it was a condemnation, a notion so deeply ingrained that for centuries, no one truly believed a world without extreme poverty was possible. Yet today, the real challenge is no longer “Can we do it?” but “Why don't we do it?” Here is the argument that turns everything on its head: eliminating extreme poverty is not an unrealistic dream; it is an achievable goal—and the cost, compared to what we spend each year on a thousand other things, is surprisingly low. For centuries, we have accepted the idea that poverty is inevitable, almost natural. Malthus and Herbert Spencer, both convinced that poverty was a law of nature, shaped the way the world viewed the problem: “survival of the fittest,” wrote Spencer. However, as early as the 1940s, for the first time, there was a growing sense that no one should have to live on less than $2 a day. Today, the real revolution is not driven by a new religion or a charismatic leader, but by an algorithm. The latest research indicates that it would take $318 billion a year to eradicate extreme poverty from the planet—0.3% of global GDP, less than what we spend globally on perfume or video games. And the game-changer is that, using machine learning tools, we can identify those most in need and get the money to them directly, bypassing bureaucracy and waste. One scene sticks with me: a village in Kenya where, thanks to a simple mobile transfer, a family goes from not knowing what to eat to being able to send their children to school. The numbers are staggering: every dollar given directly to the poorest has an immediate and measurable impact on health, education, and the local economy. For years, it was believed that charity only served as a “band-aid,” not a solution. But today, the data say the opposite: extreme poverty can be eliminated if it is treated as a matter of collective choice and not as an inevitable fate. However, there is a question that no one asks often enough: If the solution is so simple and the costs so manageable, what is really holding us back? Perhaps the real obstacle is not a lack of money, but our habit of thinking that “there will always be poor people.” Here is the key phrase to remember: It is possible to end extreme poverty, but only if we stop believing it is inevitable. If this idea has resonated with you, you can click “I'm In” on Lara Notes—you're not just giving a like; you're saying that this opportunity now concerns you. And when you tell someone that extreme poverty can be eliminated with less than 0.3% of global GDP, you can mark the conversation on Lara Notes with Shared Offline: it's our way of saying that certain ideas deserve a platform beyond social media. That was The Economist, and you saved over a minute compared to the original article.