Living on less than $2 a day

written Sunday, 9 December 2007

 

Like everyone else, when I was in America I saw commercials requesting charitable contributions or sponsorships of children for various peoples around the world living on less than $2 a day.  I read articles with statistics about what percentage of the world's population is living on the equivalent of less than $2 a day.  And I would compare that to what I was spending on a just out of grad school, working at an NGO, with lots of student loans to pay back lifestyle in a big, expensive city: $2 a day just for internet in my apartment.  And it seemed clear to me: $2 a day to live on means you are POOR.

 

I still think $2 a day is not much to live on, but it is not at all clear to me how poor it means.  How are they calculating the $2?  Does it only include cash on hand for buying food or whatever, or are they also calculating in the per-night value of people's homes, or of food they haven't had to pay for (like if they grew it themselves)?  And when they say people are living on less than $2 a day, do they mean everyone, including children, has the equivalent of $2 a day for their needs, or do they mean wage-earners are earning (or farmers are producing the value of) $2 a day to support their whole families?

 

I have been wondering exactly what these statistics mean pretty much since arriving in Senegal, but I bring it up today because I was having a conversation with some of my village men this morning in which they told me that the going rate for unskilled labor around here (like helping farm someone's land, herd animals, or working as a driver or security guard in town) is 600 CFA a day - about $1.20.  Not much money at all.  And even less if you divide it among the many family members that a Senegalese wage-earner is usually supporting.  Sounds awfully poor.  But the situation is not quite so dire as that.  Except for in towns, land doesn't have to be bought or rented; permission to use it is granted by the village chief.  So in the villages the cost of housing is only the cost of the initial construction of the hut.  And then the food: most of it is grown by the family (ie the women), so that's essentially extra income.

 

So here is what I want to know: how does my village family measure up on the poverty scale?  We've got two adult men as wage earners (working in the banana plantation) to support a family of about 20 people.  The women in the family all farm (peanuts, corn, okra) in addition to doing all the household work, so that's a lot of food that they don't have to buy, and then of course you could calculate in the value of all the domestic work like cooking and washing clothes.  And then there's the value of their compound, which they don't have to pay rent for but also don't own so they can't sell it or use it as collateral for a loan.  So what would the statistics people say? Is my family living on $2.40 a day divided by 20 people?  Or would they calculate in the value of non-paid labor and other assets?  I guess what I really mean is, when they talk about people living on less than $2 a day, are they talking about people who have the standard of living of people here, or people who are a lot poorer?

 

What about a homeless person in, say, Washington DC, where I lived before coming here.  Suppose he receives "charitable contributions" from passersby of $2 a day.  Suppose he is also given a hot meal at a soup kitchen with a value of, say, $3, and spends the night in a shelter - we'll say the value is $5 - I have no idea what a shelter bed should be valued at.  Would the statistics people say he's living on $2 a day or $12?  And who would the stats people say has the higher standard of living? The homeless man may be consuming the equivalent of more money a day than my villagers, but I'd much rather be a Senegalese villager than a homeless person in DC.

 

Who are these "less than $2 a day" people?