Those who regularly move in and out of poverty like small farmers are calleda)Chronic poorb)Churning poorc)Occasionally poord)NoneCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

UPSC Exam > UPSC Questions > Those who regularly move in and out of povert...

Those who regularly move in and out of poverty like small farmers are called

a)
Chronic poor
b)
Churning poor
c)
Occasionally poor
d)
None

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

Those who regularly move in and out of poverty like small farmers are ...

Churning poor is a sub category of poor, in which a person keeps on struggling to stay above the poverty line. In this type they regularly move in and out of poverty.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

Those who regularly move in and out of poverty like small farmers are ...

Churning Poor

Churning poor refers to those individuals or households who frequently move in and out of poverty due to various reasons such as seasonal employment, illness, crop failure, etc. These individuals or households may not be considered chronically poor as they do not remain in poverty for a long period of time, but they face the risk of falling back into poverty repeatedly.

Examples of churning poor are small farmers who may have a good harvest one year but face crop failure or low prices the next year. They may also have to borrow money for expenses such as healthcare or education, which may push them into poverty.

Churning poverty is a complex issue that requires targeted interventions to address the underlying causes of poverty and provide support to individuals and households to help them build resilience and improve their economic conditions. This can include access to credit, education, healthcare, and other social safety nets.

Efforts to reduce churning poverty can also contribute to reducing overall poverty rates and improving the well-being of vulnerable communities.

Answered by Notes Wala · View profile

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for UPSC exam

Similar UPSC Doubts

Which of the following are correctly matched?1. Occasionally poor - who are rich most of the time but may sometimes have a patch of bad luck2. Churning poor - who regularly move in and out of poverty3. Chronic poor - Who may sometimes have a little more money

View answer

Passage 4The period between 1880 and 1900 was a boom time for American politics. The country was for once free of the threat of war, and many of its citizens were living comfortably. However, as these two decades went by, the American farmer found it harder and harder to live comfortably. Crops such as cotton and wheat, once the bulwark of agriculture, were selling at prices so low that it was nearly impossible for farmers to make a profit. Furthermore, improvements in transportation allowed foreign competition to materialize, making it harder for American farmers to dispose of surplus crop. Finally, years of drought in the Midwest and the downward spiral of businesses in the 1890s devastated many of the nations farmers. As a result of the agricultural depression, many farm groups, most notably the Populist Party, arose to fight what farmers saw as the reasons for the decline in agriculture. During the last twenty years of the nineteenth century, many farmers in the United States saw monopolies and trusts, railroads, and money shortages and the demonetization of silver as threats to their way of life, though in many cases their complaints were not valid.The growth of the railroad was one of the most significant elements in American economic growth. However, in many ways, the railroads hurt small shippers and farmers. Extreme competition between rail companies necessitated some way to win business. To do this, many railroads offered rebates and drawbacks to larger shippers who utilized the railroads services. However, this practice hurt smaller shippers, including farmers, for often times railroad companies would charge more to ship products short distances than they would for long trips. The rail companies justified this practice by asserting that if they did not provide such rebates, they would not make enough profit to stay in business. In his testimony to the Senate Cullom Committee, George W. Parker stated, "... the operating expense of this road...requires a certain volume of business to meet these fixed expenses....in some seasons of the year, the local business of the road...is not sufficient to make theearnings...when we make up a train of ten of fifteen cars of local freight...we can attach fifteen or twenty cars...of strictly through business. We can take the latter at a very low rate than go without it..." Later, when asked of the consequences of charging local traffic the same rate as through freight, Mr. Parker responded, "Bankruptcy, inevitably and speedy ..." While the railroads felt that they must use this practice to make a profit, the farmers were justified in complaining, for they were seriously injured by it. The railroads regularly used rebates and drawbacks to help win the business of large shippers, and made up this loss in profit by increasing the cost to smaller shippers such as farmers. As a result, many farmers, already hurt by the downslide in agriculture, were ruined. Thus, the farmers of the late nineteenth century had a valid complaint against railroad shippers, for these farmers were hurt by the unfair practices of the railroads.Near the end of the nineteenth century, business began to centralize, leading to the rise of monopolies and trusts. Falling prices, along with the need for better efficiency in industry, led to the rise of such companies as Carnegie Steel and Standard Oil, which controlled a majority of the nations supply of raw steel and oil, respectively. The rise of these monopolies and trusts concerned many farmers, for they felt that the disappearance of competition would lead to erratic and unreasonable price rises that would hurt consumers. James B. Weaver, the Populist partys presidential candidate in the 1892 election, summed up the feelings of many Americans of the period in his work, "A Call to Action: An Interpretation of the Great Uprising". He wrote, "It is clear that trusts are...in conflict with the Common law. They are monopolies organized to destroy competition and restrain trade.... Once they secure control of a given line, they are master of the situation... They can limit the price of the raw material so as to impoverish the producer, drive him to a single market, reduce the price of every class of labor connected with the trade, throw out of employment large numbers persons...and finally...they increase the price to the consumer...."Accordingly, it appears that the main weapons of the trust are threats, intimidation, bribery, fraud, wreck, and pillaging. However, the facts refute many of Weavers charges against the monopolies. While it is true that many companies used questionable means to achieve their monopoly, many were not out to crush competitors. To the contrary, John D. Rockefeller, head of Standard Oil, competed ruthlessly not to crush other refiners but to persuade them to join Standard Oil and share the business so all could profit. Furthermore, the fear that the monopolies would raise prices unreasonably was never realized. Prices tended to fall during the latter part of the 1800s creating what some have called a "consumers millennium".Q. According to the passage, the advent of what component of business made it difficult for farmers to dispose of surplus materials?

View answer

Passage 4The period between 1880 and 1900 was a boom time for American politics. The country was for once free of the threat of war, and many of its citizens were living comfortably. However, as these two decades went by, the American farmer found it harder and harder to live comfortably. Crops such as cotton and wheat, once the bulwark of agriculture, were selling at prices so low that it was nearly impossible for farmers to make a profit. Furthermore, improvements in transportation allowed foreign competition to materialize, making it harder for American farmers to dispose of surplus crop. Finally, years of drought in the Midwest and the downward spiral of businesses in the 1890s devastated many of the nations farmers. As a result of the agricultural depression, many farm groups, most notably the Populist Party, arose to fight what farmers saw as the reasons for the decline in agriculture. During the last twenty years of the nineteenth century, many farmers in the United States saw monopolies and trusts, railroads, and money shortages and the demonetization of silver as threats to their way of life, though in many cases their complaints were not valid.The growth of the railroad was one of the most significant elements in American economic growth. However, in many ways, the railroads hurt small shippers and farmers. Extreme competition between rail companies necessitated some way to win business. To do this, many railroads offered rebates and drawbacks to larger shippers who utilized the railroads services. However, this practice hurt smaller shippers, including farmers, for often times railroad companies would charge more to ship products short distances than they would for long trips. The rail companies justified this practice by asserting that if they did not provide such rebates, they would not make enough profit to stay in business. In his testimony to the Senate Cullom Committee, George W. Parker stated, "... the operating expense of this road...requires a certain volume of business to meet these fixed expenses....in some seasons of the year, the local business of the road...is not sufficient to make theearnings...when we make up a train of ten of fifteen cars of local freight...we can attach fifteen or twenty cars...of strictly through business. We can take the latter at a very low rate than go without it..." Later, when asked of the consequences of charging local traffic the same rate as through freight, Mr. Parker responded, "Bankruptcy, inevitably and speedy ..." While the railroads felt that they must use this practice to make a profit, the farmers were justified in complaining, for they were seriously injured by it. The railroads regularly used rebates and drawbacks to help win the business of large shippers, and made up this loss in profit by increasing the cost to smaller shippers such as farmers. As a result, many farmers, already hurt by the downslide in agriculture, were ruined. Thus, the farmers of the late nineteenth century had a valid complaint against railroad shippers, for these farmers were hurt by the unfair practices of the railroads.Near the end of the nineteenth century, business began to centralize, leading to the rise of monopolies and trusts. Falling prices, along with the need for better efficiency in industry, led to the rise of such companies as Carnegie Steel and Standard Oil, which controlled a majority of the nations supply of raw steel and oil, respectively. The rise of these monopolies and trusts concerned many farmers, for they felt that the disappearance of competition would lead to erratic and unreasonable price rises that would hurt consumers. James B. Weaver, the Populist partys presidential candidate in the 1892 election, summed up the feelings of many Americans of the period in his work, "A Call to Action: An Interpretation of the Great Uprising". He wrote, "It is clear that trusts are...in conflict with the Common law. They are monopolies organized to destroy competition and restrain trade.... Once they secure control of a given line, they are master of the situation... They can limit the price of the raw material so as to impoverish the producer, drive him to a single market, reduce the price of every class of labor connected with the trade, throw out of employment large numbers persons...and finally...they increase the price to the consumer...."Accordingly, it appears that the main weapons of the trust are threats, intimidation, bribery, fraud, wreck, and pillaging. However, the facts refute many of Weavers charges against the monopolies. While it is true that many companies used questionable means to achieve their monopoly, many were not out to crush competitors. To the contrary, John D. Rockefeller, head of Standard Oil, competed ruthlessly not to crush other refiners but to persuade them to join Standard Oil and share the business so all could profit. Furthermore, the fear that the monopolies would raise prices unreasonably was never realized. Prices tended to fall during the latter part of the 1800s creating what some have called a "consumers millennium".Q. Which of the following is a possible final sentence to the final paragraph?

View answer

Passage 4The period between 1880 and 1900 was a boom time for American politics. The country was for once free of the threat of war, and many of its citizens were living comfortably. However, as these two decades went by, the American farmer found it harder and harder to live comfortably. Crops such as cotton and wheat, once the bulwark of agriculture, were selling at prices so low that it was nearly impossible for farmers to make a profit. Furthermore, improvements in transportation allowed foreign competition to materialize, making it harder for American farmers to dispose of surplus crop. Finally, years of drought in the Midwest and the downward spiral of businesses in the 1890s devastated many of the nations farmers. As a result of the agricultural depression, many farm groups, most notably the Populist Party, arose to fight what farmers saw as the reasons for the decline in agriculture. During the last twenty years of the nineteenth century, many farmers in the United States saw monopolies and trusts, railroads, and money shortages and the demonetization of silver as threats to their way of life, though in many cases their complaints were not valid.The growth of the railroad was one of the most significant elements in American economic growth. However, in many ways, the railroads hurt small shippers and farmers. Extreme competition between rail companies necessitated some way to win business. To do this, many railroads offered rebates and drawbacks to larger shippers who utilized the railroads services. However, this practice hurt smaller shippers, including farmers, for often times railroad companies would charge more to ship products short distances than they would for long trips. The rail companies justified this practice by asserting that if they did not provide such rebates, they would not make enough profit to stay in business. In his testimony to the Senate Cullom Committee, George W. Parker stated, "... the operating expense of this road...requires a certain volume of business to meet these fixed expenses....in some seasons of the year, the local business of the road...is not sufficient to make the earnings...when we make up a train of ten of fifteen cars of local freight...we can attach fifteen or twenty cars...of strictly through business. We can take the latter at a very low rate than go without it..." Later, when asked of the consequences of charging local traffic the same rate as through freight, Mr. Parker responded, "Bankruptcy, inevitably and speedy ..." While the railroads felt that they must use this practice to make a profit, the farmers were justified in complaining, for they were seriously injured by it. The railroads regularly used rebates and drawbacks to help win the business of large shippers, and made up this loss in profit by increasing the cost to smaller shippers such as farmers. As a result, many farmers, already hurt by the downslide in agriculture, were ruined. Thus, the farmers of the late nineteenth century had a valid complaint against railroad shippers, for these farmers were hurt by the unfair practices of the railroads.Near the end of the nineteenth century, business began to centralize, leading to the rise of monopolies and trusts. Falling prices, along with the need for better efficiency in industry, led to the rise of such companies as Carnegie Steel and Standard Oil, which controlled a majority of the nations supply of raw steel and oil, respectively. The rise of these monopolies and trusts concerned many farmers, for they felt that the disappearance of competition would lead to erratic and unreasonable price rises that would hurt consumers. James B. Weaver, the Populist partys presidential candidate in the 1892 election, summed up the feelings of many Americans of the period in his work, "A Call to Action: An Interpretation of the Great Uprising". He wrote, "It is clear that trusts are...in conflict with the Common law. They are monopolies organized to destroy competition and restrain trade.... Once they secure control of a given line, they are master of the situation... They can limit the price of the raw material so as to impoverish the producer, drive him to a single market, reduce the price of every class of labor connected with the trade, throw out of employment large numbers persons...and finally...they increase the price to the consumer...."Accordingly, it appears that the main weapons of the trust are threats, intimidation, bribery, fraud, wreck, and pillaging. However, the facts refute many of Weavers charges against the monopolies. While it is true that many companies used questionable means to achieve their monopoly, many were not out to crush competitors. To the contrary, John D. Rockefeller, head of Standard Oil, competed ruthlessly not to crush other refiners but to persuade them to join Standard Oil and share the business so all could profit. Furthermore, the fear that the monopolies would raise prices unreasonably was never realized. Prices tended to fall during the latter part of the 1800s creating what some have called a "consumers millennium".Q. According to the passage, what is the most accurate definition of bulwark as it is used in the first paragraph?

View answer

Passage - 3The rural poor across the world, including India, have contributed little to human-induced climate change, yet they are on the frontline in coping with its effects. Farmers can no longer rely on historical averages for rainfall and temperature, and the more frequent and extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods, can spell disaster. And there are new threats, such as sea level rise and the impact of melting glaciers on water supply. How significant are small farms? As many as two billion peopre worldwide depend on them for their food and livelihood. Small-holder farmers in India produce 41 percent of the countrys food grains, and other food items that contribute to local and national food security.Q.What is the most logical and rational Corry to the above passage?

View answer

Top Courses for UPSCView all

Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Lucent for GK

History for UPSC CSE

Indian Polity for UPSC CSE

CSAT Preparation