Chruches>Rich>Wealthy>Poor>Desperate

Is poverty necessary. Well, not according to Nike, however i fear if we base too much on their principals, we will be back to the enslavement of anyone from the phillipines and foot locker will become a place of prayer. Basically, yes, there will always be poverty, because there will always be someone with more power, more money or more x than you. Unless one can infiltrate perfect Communism into the entrie global community, then Nike are wrong. Everybody loses, because no-one is ever the richest. What about the poorest though. Is there a certain line that poverty could define that we would accept. What if absolute poverty, in fifty years time, actually meant not owning a car, or not having enough money to buy free range, rather than not being able to get educated, eat or drink. It's an interesting thought, but almost certainly one that could never possibly be acheived. Ok so then what is the first step? Well global aid is currently worth about 107 billion dollars. if you think about it, that isn't that much. While there are billionairres abundant in America and institutions and governments with unbelievable sums of money on access to them, why is there such a little amount of money in aid given worldwide?