Electronic Resource Centre for Human Rights Education:
Critical Choices for Hungary

-

Critical Choices for Hungary



  || Contents || Introduction || Unemployment ||
|| Poverty... || Crime || Youth at Risk ||
|| Grading || Hungary's National Security ||
 
 

Poverty in Hungary
 

Contents
 

Introduction
Choice One 
Individual Responsibility 
Choice Two 
Common Responsibility, Common Burdens: Citizens' Rights to Social Assistance 
Choice Three 
A Broader Understanding of Poverty: Local Support, Cooperation, Self-Help 
Summary 

Written by: Tibor Dessewfy and Ferenc Hammer
Research: László Gergely
Translated by: Eric B. Weaver

Once upon a time, and a long time ago it was, there were two stepbrothers.

The older brother had inherited all the property - the big house, and all the livestock. His little brother didn't have a thing in the world, he was poor as a church mouse. The older brother lived off the fat of the land. He had everything you could want.

One day Ms little brother knocked on his door. His older brother came out - all proud and arrogant - 'Whatchou want?'
- 'Gimme sump'n to eat, sump'n to drink, or I'll die.'
-  'I'm not gonna give ya a thing to eat, but you can drink whatcha want. There's a barrel of water under the spout. Drink as much as you want.' That really put the younger brother to shame.
He set sadly back home.
As he was walking back he heard steps behind him. He looked back, but didn't see anybody. Then again, as he was walking, he heard steps behind him.
-'Who's that followin' me?'
- 'It's me, Poverty'
- 'How long you been following me'
- 'Since the cradle, and I'll be with you till the grave.'
That depressed the poor man. He thought about what to do. He grabbed a shovel, went to the corner of the cemetery, and started digging. Poverty said:
- 'Whatcha diggin"
- 'Whaddya think I'm diggin'? I'm diggin' my grave, and then I'll lie down in it. Why should I live anymore?'
- 'Then I'll lie down nexta ya'.
- 'Well, ifya want, you can get in now.'
It was a good big hole. Poverty got right in.
- 'I'm in'
Well, that poor man grabbed his shovel and buried Poverty as quick as he could. Then he shuffled on home.
From then on, things went well for him. He worked night and day. Everything was atright.
A year later his older brother couldn't stand it anymore, he asked:
- 'Hey, what's with you? Yer gettin' rich?'
- 'I buried my poverty.'
- 'You buried it? Where?'
- 'in the cemetery'
Whoo, that rich brother got really mad.
When it got dark he grabbed his shovel and went to unbury Poverty so his brother would be poor again. He started to shout:
- 'Poverty! Where are you Poverty!'
- 'Here I am, buried in the ground!'
He went over there, and dug Poverty up.
- 'Well, I've dug you up. Get on back to your master, cause he's getting rich.'
'Be damned if I will. Followed him faithfully, and what do I get for my care - he buries me.'
-'Then what'll you do?'
- 'You're the dear sweet soul who dug me up! I'm gonna follow you till the day you die!'
And if he's still alive poverty's with him now.

(I. Nagy, Z. Nagy, 1990 (eds.) Az lkertündérek - Nagyvarónai népmesék. Budapest. Akademia publishers. pp. 43-44. Trans. E. Weaver, 1995.)

 

INTRODUCTION

To speak about any term one needs a commonly accepted definition, so perhaps a discussion of the problem of poverty should begin with an exploration of what we commonly mean by poverty. As a guide to discussion it should be stressed from the start that poverty is more than simply the state of being poor: poorness, a simple lack of money, can be temporary - poverty is something ingrained.

Poverty is seen as a lack, and a lack of more than money - though money is doubtless the most pressing need: as the old song says "I got plenty of nothing. and nothing's plenty for me". In fact, folklore around the world is a rich in poverty imagery. Folk tales and songs often describe poverty as a weight or a sort of dirt. People are said to be unable to "shake off' their poverty, or are described as being born in poverty- "filthy poverty" - "stinking poverty". Poverty "holds people down". Poverty is described as something worse than just a want of money - a want of chances and initiative is clearly involved. A striking example of how individual experience is mixed with implicit notions of poverty was shown in Hungarian Television, when a little girl -asked what she thought of the poor- answered: 'The poor are sad and stupid'.

The wealth of folk stories and tales indicates two things not necessarily lacking among the poor: intelligence and initiative. Social scientists have come to view poverty in a way which mirrors folk beliefs. Poverty is seen as inheritable and the inheritable nature of poverty is discussed with such terms as "lifestyle" and "way of life". In contrast to people who become poor because of misfortune, those born in dire poverty are characterized as having a fatalistic attitude, and of feeling that they are unsuited for another way of life. They are commonly poorly educated and are not taught by their parents to consider education an option. They may even speak a distinct dialect, and be able to switch speech patterns between a "can't", difficult for mainstream society to understand, and more common forms of speech.

"It takes money to make money"

Common experience tells us that the truly poor "dress poor", "act poor", and even (as poets have noted) "smell poor and think poor". People from poorer communities will often stigmatize one of their fellows who begins to act, dress or talk "like other folks". Such people are described as "putting on airs", as denying their birthright.

A famous black American poet once noted "how expensive it is to be poor" - to buy things in small quantities, not to be able to wait for lower prices, to buy things "on time" and to pay the interest thereby accruing over that time.

Those born and raised in poverty often lack the knowledge of how to save money, much less how to truly earn it. Even if -despite discrimination against their speech and dress habits - they are able to get a job, they are often lacking in behavior and skills required by modem employers. They
lack the needed education, and worse, their fatalism and upbringing often lead to inappropriate behavior: their parents may not have taught them the importance of punctuality or of cleanliness (values the newly poor still have).

Attempts to eliminate poverty are often poorly worked out - perhaps simply because of the daunting nature of the task to be carried out. Some are, in effect, "first aid" programs which provide the extremely poor with clothing, food, coupons, or (more simply) money in an attempt to keep them alive. Citizens are often baffled by the fact that after being given aid, the poor are soon back in their miserable situation. People grow angry that their taxes are used and used again to no avail, and say that "good money is being thrown after bad". And when experts suggest that what is really needed is a comprehensive program of education and allocation, citizens are shocked at the potential costs. In a country such as Hungary, where so many have become poor in such a short period of time, and where so little money is actually available for social programs, there is a real danger that the chronically poor, those born in the direst poverty will be (have been) neglected or forgotten. Their neglect will have implications for generations to come, and may more deeply ingrain the problem into Hungarian society.

The situation

Throughout Central Europe the establishment of market economy has been accompanied by a spread of poverty. However we should not forget that there were also poor people under the previous regime, but that the issue was officially regarded as taboo. An independent citizen initiative, The Fund for Supporting the Poor (SZETA) was banned and prosecuted as subversion in the 1970s. As the following figures (and everyday experience- ) show, the numbers of the desperately poor, those living under the poverty line, have drastically increased over the past years. (The poverty line is the sum of incomes of a household which allows those in the house- hold to feed and clothe themselves, and pay for beating and electricity).

  • In 1993, according to reliable statistics, 27% of Hungary's population lived under the poverty line.
  • There were about one million poor people in Hungary in 1980. Today their number exceeds 2,5 million.
  • The richest tenth of society makes 7.3 times more money than the lowest tenth.
  • Perhaps children are in the most severe situation. Almost half of the people under 18 live in a families under the poverty line.
  • In the past years in the 53% of households' real wages have decreased. This means that in these families the growth in incomes was slower than the growth in prices.

Who are we talking about?

People living under the poverty line are not simply unemployed or their family members: many of them work hard and are still unable to reach a decent standard of living. Families with three children are over represented in this group. There are also a lot of young people living around the poverty line, but for many of them poverty is a temporary situation. This is not the case for about 200.000 retired citizens. They have no hope of recovering from poverty on their own - they need support from the rest of the society. Social research show that there is a heavy fluctuation in the composition of the poor. Families of relatively small number tend to only temporarily experience poverty. But this is not the case for about five percent of society for whom poverty seems to be a permanent state. This data sufficiently shows that the poor can not be regarded as a homogenous group. Four social groups are seriously over represented: the retired, families with three or more children, the permanently unemployed, and gypsies.

The government's role in social policy

About the one tenth of the national budget is spent on social policy. The items covered by this fund include retirement and sick-leave payments, unemployment benefits, family support, maternity payments, support for the handicapped, poverty pay-checks distributed by local governments, housing assistance, or funding of activities such as family counseling, maintaining homeless shelters, youth programs, and support for orphanages, nurseries and kindergartens.

Three options

There are several of the causes of poverty that prevail among citizens. Based on polls and social policy debates we have developed three lines of argument about how to eliminate poverty. Each option sees the issue differently, and points out different characteristics of society today as decisive factors. Each choice is accompanied by arguments against it. These options have been designed to enrich discussion and to help group or class create their own option.

 

CHOICE ONE

Individual Responsibility

It should not be the burden of society as a whole to provide for the well-being of every citizen. As a rule, people can be expected to care for themselves. Government need only concern itself with the care of the most desperate. Yet even -this aid should not take the form of hand-outs. Provisions to enable the poor to become a vital part of the workforce, in the form of incentives and training, should be standard policy.

An evaluation of Hungary's social policy should not begin with what is lacking, but rather with our actual situation. More than ten percent of the workforce is currently unemployed. While this alone is an unacceptable problem, we need also consider that it is roughly 51 percent of the population which provides economically for themselves and everyone else. The other 49 percent - pensioners, women taking maternity leave, unemployed workers, students and children - can safely be called economic dependents. And when the working poor are considered - those families living below the poverty line -we arrive at a situation where only a third of the population is driving the economy for everyone else. Economically this cannot be borne. In wealthier industrialized nations officials refer to an "economic crisis" when only two-thirds of the population can be viewed as providers of income and wealth.

The best social policy is economic development. A program of tax breaks and a general reduction in the level of required payments to finance social security, coupled with incentives for investors to inject money into Hungary will motivate sustained economic growth. People will then be freed from a dependence on government welfare programs to choose an opportunity to improve the quality of their lives through their work and ideas. The recent flight of many people from poverty to entrepreneurialism gives only a taste of what is possible if energies and innovation are released. The high cost of today's social programs will be shouldered by those small companies with the greatest promise. Unless costs are reduced, programs downsized, and bureaucracies slashed, in the future we will have neither social programs nor economic growth.

Hungary is known abroad for the quality of its education. Foreign companies are often amazed at the level of knowledge and skills we possess, most particularly in the fields of mathematics and natural science. If we know nothing else, Hungarians know how to study. Combined with the proper policies to foster economic growth, namely the financially-liberating ones described above, and Hungary's superb schools and disciplined scholarship will start to pay off in a big way. Still, as reliable sources indicate, the scene may not be so bleak as it looks through "official" eyes.

"The numbers we have regarding income are not reliable," says social science researcher Tamas Kolosi, "when we compare recorded income to the amount people spent in 1993, we find that on the national level people spent some four billion dollars more than they earned. In the legitimate economy alone, people are making some twenty per cent more than they are saying. If we include the black market, the figure jumps some 30-50%."

Poverty: the price of freedom?

What is a shame in wealthier industrialized nations is often considered a virtue among Hungarians. To depend, in Hungary, on social assistance for one's livelihood or as a supplement to one's black market income is not looked down upon or seen as a mark of failure or criminality, but rather as a sign of one's cleverness and ability to cheat the "state." Even after the fall of Communism, many here still fail to see government as an empowering extension of themselves, but see it rather as something alien and obtrusive, something to oppose and deceive, even exploit whenever possible. Social assistance programs must therefore be designed and implemented with a measure of caution; financial support should not simply be limited to those in desperate need (e.g. welfare should not be a viable alternative to working at minimum wage), but recipients of such aid should have their eligibility regularly evaluated.

The creativity that is used harmfully to exploit social programs could become the engine for economic growth if the system were effectively restructured. To redirect such energy individuals should not be punished with high rates of taxes for making money in legitimate business practices. Such businesses creates jobs and provide the best insurance policies for Hungary's economic future. Tax rates should be reasonable, and the programs they fund should not be of the sort that create economic dependence or invite people to become cheats. Further, what taxes must be paid should be collected more effectively. With black market activity responsible for some 40 per cent of Hungary's GDP, taxes need to be such that people are willing to pay, and severely punished if they do not.

Opposing Views

  • Keeping one's head above water is a situation open to interpretation. Simply feeding oneself and one's family without a spare forint for anything else, not even clothing, is no way to escape poverty. People fall into poverty for particular reasons and it is just these reasons which must be addressed by Hungary's social assistance programs if we hope to become a just and prosperous country. To address the specific concerns of impoverished individuals (Did they become poor because they lacked the skills needed in today's technically advanced workplace?; Did they suffer an injury or debilitating illness which has left their family with no means of support?) only a package of programs with enough organization to make them effective can prevent the formation of a permanent Hungarian underclass which will threaten both the stability of the larger economy as well as the safety of our streets.
  • No pain, no gain, say many economists. A streamlining of government, the removal of price controls, the privatization and subsequent downsizing of large state industry, an "acceptable" level of "short-term" unemployment upwards of ten per cent; all this, we are told, will lead to golden age of free enterprise with an abundance of jobs and money for investment, schools and life-enhancing good government. Yet what is to guarantee that those who suffer in the short-term - today's poor and underprivileged - will benefit in the long-run?


CHOICE TWO

Common Responsibility, Common Burdens: Citizens' Rights to Social Assistance.

At a time when many industrialized countries are reexamining their welfare systems, it is crucial that Hungary not lose sight of its current mission to create a system of welfare compatible with a market driven economy, rather than to dismantle one that has not yet been constructed. A hasty dismantling of those welfare mechanisms put in place under communism may well exclude a significant portion of the population from the benefits of the positive economic changes now occurring. The resulting social disparity could lead to the popular perception of an unjust society and be the cause of worrisome tensions between people.

Katalin Levai No man is an island in today's society. The interwoven nature of our lives brings with it a responsibility shared by every citizen to maintain social integrity and well-being. Such responsibility demands that those who have, be mindful of, and sympathetic toward those who have not. An effective and humane system of publicly-funded social assistance is currently in place. What is needed are improvements in both efficiency and in the actual quality of aid:

  • As to assistance to the poor, a system of occasional aid should be replaced by a coordinated disbursement of funds to those in need, based on the understanding that such aid is a fundamental right. This assistance would include universal family support, aid to individuals below the poverty line, maternity support, unemployment benefits, post-retirement payments and aid to those on sick leave from work.
  • The minimum wage should be raised to a level that can feasibly support a family. The concept of "working poor" is unacceptable.
  • Health care needs to be understood as the right of every citizen, not a service to be provided to those who can pay for it from their own pockets.
  • Disenfranchised citizens, those divorced from traditions of learning and social advancement, need to be compensated for with special programs.
  • Government needs to be more involved in the job-creation process - within the framework of a market-driven economy.
  • Government incentives are necessary to urge firms to hire disabled and otherwise underprivileged individuals.

Such broad-sweeping policies will, of course, cost money. But given the fact that human beings are the best possible investment, returns will be unbeatable. Two sources of funding come quickly to mind. Trimming the fat from government bureaucracy will bring significant savings to pay for those programs tailored to aid citizens in need. The second source would be the increase in public monies which will arise from raises in income and property taxes.

However, just throwing money at our social problems will be no answer. The government must play an active, coordinating role for the programs described above to be successful. Trade unions and industrial associations can also be of great assistance in organizing these programs effectively.

We now stand at the dawn of a new era. With the revolutionary political changes coming in recent years, including the rediscovery of individual tights, along with a greater separation of government from public life, Hungary finds itself in an emerging economic reality, strongly influenced by the West, if somewhat haphazardly. There is a select few who live more comfortably now than ever as a result of these changes, but there are far too many who suffer from greatly diminished standards of living. It is a unique situation, unexperienced by a democratic, industrialized nation.

In recent years, countries facing economic hardship have been advised by Western experts to reform and "downsize" their governments, with the hopes of achieving some forlorn ideal of classical capitalism dreamt up some 150 years ago. We are fed commercial rhetoric telling us we are now free to convert our ideas into gold, this with the help of the latest marketing techniques. This is not, however, the road to prosperity for everyone or even the majority. The clock need not be turned back 150 years for the answer to be found. A mere sixty or so would be enough. The sort of policies which helped lead the industrial world out of the Great Depression hold the solution to Hungary's current economic crisis: a publicly-funded job creation program, employment retraining, aid to the poor, government-backed low interest loans for new businesses; to name but a few. One need only look to Scandinavia to find countries that continue to use such policies to protect both labor and business interests as a means to maintain prosperity.

Opposing Views

  • A blue-ribbon committee of economic experts in these matters sees things differently. According to them, the establishment of a broad sweeping package of welfare programs would be wasteful, as are most such policies in their view. They believe that every welfare program eventually creates dependents, instead of liberating individuals to become economically self-supportive. One change they do suggest is an increase in the mandatory retirement age.
  • There is, of course, the issue of costs. Just to develop the organizational structure needed to make such social assistance proposals would be very expensive. There are many who say that an increase in income tax would in fact punish those who have suffered most in recent years: the middle class, the very people whose ingenuity and enterprise are needed in these difficult times.

 

CHOICE THREE

A broader understanding of poverty: local support, cooperation, self-help

"Poverty is not the opposite of wealth, but rather, a dead end. Those forces which lead to poverty simply illustrate how fragile our lives are. They stem from a variety of difficulties experienced by individuals in today's rapidly changing world."

To effectively address the problem of poverty, we need to look at more than its causes and effects - we need to examine its very reality. Poverty is a state of mind, a culture that develops in response to a disconnection from possibility, a disconnection from community, a disconnection from hope.

That more people do not slip into poverty is no small wonder. The view held here is that we have our communities to thank. The strength of such communities can be found among family members, helpful neighbors, church groups, and among understanding colleagues and superiors in the workplace. When a community functions well, it is because of the active solidarity among its members. People look out for each other, help each other, if for no other reason than the fact that they can imagine themselves in a state of need. When individuals slip into poverty it is not simply because they have run out of money - it is also because their community has failed. For poverty to be effectively addressed, it must be addressed at the local level, at the community level.

Of course, the solution of poverty should not be left for our communities to solve alone. Rather, government should move away from the creation of monolithic bureaucracies and tailor social programs to strengthen those aspects of our communities which can prevent poverty from becoming a deeper problem. State sponsorship of community self-help programs, tax breaks for community volunteers as well as government supported incentives promoting charity work are all part of what is needed. The goal here is not simply be to help those individuals threatened by poverty to meet their basic needs, but also to pave the way out of poverty, through education and employment as well as through such otherwise unreachable aid as emotional and spiritual support. Communities by their very nature are better able than government to locate and help those in need. It makes sense that the focus of an anti-poverty campaign should be set at the community level.

Help Is Painful, Too

To be a success, social assistance must in itself be somewhat of a paradox:. needy individuals who manage to receive the most benefits are in general those, among eligible beneficiaries, who are best able to help themselves. But what of the homeless? They lack even the most basic foundations from which to rebuild their lives "The crisis of the homeless", says a leading social scientist, "is one which threatens the very life of the individual involved; it is, at bottom, a medical problem." To help the homeless, the suggests the following:

  • Design support to address the particular needs of specific individuals rather than trying to solve the entire problem in a single stroke.
  • Talk to the homeless, ask them about their lives. Give people who feel rejected by society a sense of worth and you will be rewarded with their trust.
  • Treat an individual's homelessness as a temporary condition, and try to have them adopt the same thinking. Discourage long-stays in shelters- , as these often lead to apathy and tensions among the residents.
  • Try to place the homeless individual in 11-12 person, alcohol- and drug-free group homes. Such groups foster an individual's role in society by giving them roles in a small community.


As these suggestions illustrate, we cannot rely on institutions alone for the solutions we need. Such institutions are useful primarily to insure a fair distribution of aid to a large number. Still, the facelessness of the institution can be intimidating to those in need. Long-term solutions to the problems associated with poverty and neglect can come with an approach that is at once both fair and personal.

A French social policy expert warns us that the language we use when talking about the have-nots is very important- "There has always been a danger that society will become divided distinctly between rich and poor, because there always exists the potential for vulnerability and uncertain living conditions in any society. But a society is tom apart if it creates a symbolic wall dividing inside from outside, and us from them. A society takes the phenomena of vulnerability and uncertainty of life for granted when it places economic necessity and unbound individualism as the highest moral principles, and makes a distinction between society and marginalized groups possible. Instead of using such terms as poverty, marginalization, deviance, exclusion, I propose terms like uncertainty of lives, vulnerability and disintegration. The purpose behind such terms is to suggest that we are witnesses to a changing process, rather than static conditions. This affords us the optimism of placing such social phenomena-  in a dynamic context which we are able to improve: to help those in need before their vulnerability becomes entrenched in a fated, frightening reality."

Opposing Views

  • A reliance on local communities is no panacea. Local communities can offer protection, but some cases reveal worrisome, indecent control practices-  as well. At times, in a community setting, the negative opinion of/a few can make life more miserable than the most impersonal bureaucracy.
  • One can also argue that there are regions in the country where this option is not viable, because the entire region has become impoverished.

SUMMARY

Social policy is a public issue which cannot contribute to the development of a democracy unless there are informed citizens who actively contribute to the decision making process on issues of social concern. Further, this is precisely the way in which dependents authoritarian systems can turn into deliberative citizens within a democracy.

Zsuzsa Ferge


Three options have been presented to the reader as solutions to the problem of poverty. The first stressed individual creativity and responsibility as the crucial element of social progress. The second dealt with social responsibility, and urged general government policies to promote it. The third emphasized the role of local communities in easing the pains of neediness. We deliberately did not place one social group over another, and we did not take a stand as to whether any group among youth, single parent families, retired citizens or others is in greater need than any other group. Instead, we discussed principles and values which drive people to form their opinions and preferences with regard to social issues.

Deliberation on poverty must include such questions as "What is the minimum level of social aid that everyone should be able to expect?", or "Which phenomena now present in society can no longer be tolerated, and therefore require immediate attention?"

When addressing poverty, we must be wary of what we are talking about. Who do we really mean when we talk about the poor? What is real poverty? Are the poor those who simply have less money than the majority of people? Or are they those who were not poor yesterday, but find themselves poor today? Or are they those who were poor yesterday and, without doubt, will be poor tomorrow? Or are the poor those who are unable to meet such basic needs of human existence as food, clothing and shelter And if we call them all poor, who is the poorest of the poor? And if we identified those who are the poorest,what proves that they need (or get) the most immediate help?

All these concerns can be addressed if we take the responsibility of talking about poverty, social justice and social policy. Every one of these concerns is significant when designing programs of social assistance. These concerns embody our deepest motivations and values when we consider issues of justice and fairness. But if we expect our governments to be just and fair and "to serve people's well-being", firstly and most importantly, citizens have to come to terms with such questions as what we can expect from each other and further, what is it that we can only expect from ourselves. This is the mission of the Hungarian Issues Forums.

In the course of deliberation you will notice that sometimes noble principles contradict one another, such as fairness, equal opportunity, self-ownership and equal rights. It is impossible to make clear-cut decisions regarding these pressing concerns. And these concerns are not ones we can wait for experts to solve. Making choices regarding human values and finding a balance among them is ultimately our duty as citizens.
 
 


|| Contents || Introduction || Unemployment ||
|| Poverty... || Crime || Youth at Risk ||
|| Grading || Hungary's National Security ||

-

 

Electronic Resource Centre for Human Rights Education:
Critical Choices for Hungary