There are many reasons for this child poverty, and famine, international trade, corrupt governments, prolonged wars and crippling debts ensure it persists.
Despite various multilateral commitments to reduce child poverty since the early 1990s, a wide-ranging 2004 report into global poverty by UNICEF found that over half the children in the developing world lived without basic goods and services, while 640 million were said to be in absolute poverty.
Several dimensions such as intelligence, poverty culture, family life and the system of capitalism give explanation as to why poverty exists in the U.S.
According to data from UNICEF, the second highest child poverty rate (23.1%) is that of the United States, the world's wealthiest country. Also among economically advanced nations, the rate in Germany is 8.5% and in France 8.8%, far below the rate in Japan. In Germany and France, policies such as child allowance or elimination of tuition fees are substantial. The lowest rates have been achieved in four Nordic countries: Finland 5.3%, Norway 6.1%, Denmark 6.5% and Sweden 7.3%.
The child poverty rate is measured by comparison of relative actual income, as seen in the definition of the OECD. This means that it varies depending on the economic circumstance of households with children or how society supports them economically, regardless of a nation's GDP.
Aya Abe, researcher of the National Institute of Population and Social Security Research cites inefficiency of the government's efforts to reduce poverty as a main characteristic of child poverty in Japan. In other words, the child poverty rate hardly improves even after redistribution. Redistribution is the act of a government allocating money that the public has paid in taxes or social insurance fee back to the public in the form of benefits such as public assistance, child allowance and so forth. In general, after redistribution the rate is expected to improve. However, in Japan, the child poverty rate hardly changes before and after redistribution. During the Liberal Democratic Party's administration when child allowance had not yet been introduced, the rate was even higher after redistribution. To put it more clearly, Japanese society had spent money that its citizens had paid in taxes or social insurance fee mostly on the elderly, ignoring benefits for households with children.
Aya Abe also pointed to a prominently higher poverty rate among single-mother households as being a significant characteristic in Japan. Approximately 60% of single-mother households fall below the poverty line, which is quite unique to Japan among advanced countries. In Japan, employment is premised on the assumption that employees are given solid financial stability and a social position in exchange for being subservient to companies rather than just working for them. For that reason, stable employment for mothers, who have to devote a lot of time to child-rearing, is quite limited. Many of them are engaged in part time or temporary work for much lower wages under unstable employment, which means that they do not have any chance to receive a raise and can be dismissed at anytime. A nationwide survey of single-mother households in 2011 by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare shows that the average annual employment income among single mothers is just JPY1,810,000, about half of that among single fathers.
As these poverty rates in Japan were reported during a long-faltering economy, they tend to be taken as a sign of a stagnant economy. Feelings of resignation such as, "It's a recession, so it can't be helped," or "It's not only children who are suffering" are also pervasive. However, even in the past, the child poverty rates in Japan had been high compared to other countries. It was 10.9% in 1985 and 12.9% even in the bubble economy of 1988. It was higher than 14% during the booming economy under the Koizumi administration. Regardless of the state of the economy, government policies have continued to be insensitive toward impoverished child-rearing families.
Furthermore, poverty among young people has recently become a serious problem. According to a labor force survey by the Statistics Bureau of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, the percentage of non-regular employment among young people aged 15-24 is 45% for men and 55% for women, more than double compared to a decade ago. It can easily be imagined that the marriage rate among young people has drastically declined and that many young married couples with children are suffering from poverty.
Third world poverty and Appalachian poverty, which occurred in the United States of America, have developed for various reasons, and these situations have led to a great deal of problems....
What is understood from these findings is that the poverty rate can be improved by changing government policy, the nation's system and basically the whole concept of what society should be. The idea that economic growth and market revitalization are the only prescriptions against poverty is a falsehood. Improving the poverty rate depends on people's sense of value and what society thinks is important and puts priority on.
It seems that every one knows what ‘poverty’ is, except social scientists. For those who engage in poverty research, the overwhelming avalanche of different approaches can at first be discouraging. Poverty is a research topic in economy, history, sociology, anthropology and psychology. Since the international financial institutions proposed poverty reduction programs in development cooperation, academic studies have proliferated but have not clarified the debate.