Lesson video

Hello, my name's Mrs. Rawbone, and I'm your RE teacher today for this lesson on attitudes to wealth and its uses.

In today's lesson, you will be able to explain the benefits and problems of wealth and how it is distributed and used in society.

Key words that we'll be using today are inequality, poverty, and wealth.

Inequality is the unfair or uneven distribution of resources, opportunities, or rights amongst people in society.

Poverty is the state of being without the things needed for a reasonable quality of life, so that day-to-day living is a struggle.

And wealth is the money, possession, resources, and opportunities a person has.

Our lesson today will form two parts.

We'll be looking at wealth and poverty and at perspectives on wealth.

So let's get started looking at wealth and poverty.

"Poverty" comes from Old French, from a word, "povrete," meaning lack of resources or need.

By the 12th century, it referred to lacking material wealth.

And it has now come to mean the state of being without the things needed for a reasonable quality of life, so that day-to-day living is a struggle.

There are different ways of defining poverty.

Poverty can be absolute.

Now, in this case, we're talking about an acute state of deprivation, whereby a person cannot access the most basic of their human needs.

So for example, they can't access food or water.

But we also have what's known as relative poverty.

And this is more about the standard of poverty measured in relation to the standards of the society in which the person lives.

So in the UK, it might be that you are living on a certain percentage, X%, of the average UK income.

The term "absolute poverty" is usually used to refer to lower and middle-income countries where poverty is defined based on a fixed income threshold of what is needed for basic survival.

We can see here in the bar chart the poverty line as set by the World Bank in 2022.

$2.

15 is the poverty line for lower-income countries such as Afghanistan and Haiti, $3.

85 for the lower-middle-income countries such as India and Nigeria, and 6.

85 for those higher-middle-income countries like China and Brazil.

This map shows the share of the world population living in extreme poverty.

And we can see that the darker the colour, the more likely someone is to be living in extreme poverty in the year 2023, which is when this data was published.

These are people living on below $2.

15 a day, so below the international poverty line.

Have a look closely at the map.

In which areas of the world are more people living on $2.

15 per day or less? Take a moment.

If you can turn and talk to someone nearby, please do, or you can pause and talk to me, and come back when you're ready to move on.

You might have noticed that more countries in Sub-Saharan Africa were in darker red, showing that more people there are likely to be living on $2.

15 a day or less.

This chart shows the share of the population living in extreme poverty moving from 1968 to 2021.

And we can see that the line indicates the UK, the United Kingdom.

In general, poverty in the UK is relative rather than absolute.

So the Department of Work and Pensions defines a household as living in relative poverty if its income is below 60% of the median income.

So below that average by 60%.

Now, that can change year on year.

So that data is for the time of this publication.

This graph shows us that in 2021, 0.

25% of the population of the UK were actually living in absolute poverty, which means less than $2.

15 a day.

So that might not sound like a huge percentage, but it does, of course, equate to quite a large number of people.

Let's check your understanding.

So what is absolute poverty? Well, it's an acute state of deprivation, whereby a person cannot access the most basic of their human needs.

I'd like you to think about what is relative poverty.

So take a moment to write down a definition of relative poverty.

Pause if you need to, and then come back when you are ready to check your work.

So well done if you mentioned it's a standard of poverty measured in relation to the standards of a society in which a person lives.

For example, living on less than X% of average UK income.

Lucas and Sofia are talking about what makes someone wealthy.

Lucas says, "I think my cousin's family is wealthy because her parents seem to be able to afford expensive things like holidays abroad and the latest technology." Sofia says, "It does sound like they are, but I think wealth is more than just how much money you have.

It's also about access to opportunities like a good education." So what do you think? Which gives someone more advantages, the opportunities they have or how much money they have access to? Take a moment to think carefully about this.

Turn and talk to somebody nearby if you can, or you can pause and talk to me, and come back when you're ready to move on.

"Wealth" is a word that comes from Middle English, from "wele," wellbeing or prosperity.

By the 13th century, it had evolved to mean material prosperity.

So it was more than just wellbeing.

It has come to mean the money, possessions, resources, and opportunities a person has.

This map shows the income share of the world's richest 1% before tax.

So what that means is it's all about how much percentage of the income of their country rich people, the richest people, actually receive.

And where the countries have darker shading, the richer people have more of a share of that country's income.

So a smaller share is divided between the people that are less well off.

So in which places do the wealthiest 1% have less of a share of their country's income? So we are looking at countries that have richer people having less of the whole income of their country than others.

Take a moment to look carefully at the map.

Pause the video if you need to, have a conversation with someone nearby if you can, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

So you might have noticed countries with lighter shading included, for example, Norway and Australia.

So how can we tell where there is more inequality in terms of wealth? So that means where there is more of a difference between the income of the richest in the country and the income of those who are living in the most poverty.

Pause again, have a look at the map, talk to someone nearby if you can, and then come back when you're ready to move on.

So you might notice that the darker the shading, the smaller the number of people who are wealthy.

And by that, it therefore means that wealth is more unequal because they have a larger share of the country's income between them, even though there are fewer them.

Let's check your understanding.

Is this true or false? Wealth is not just about money, it also refers to the possessions, resources, and opportunities a person has.

Take a moment.

Pause if you need to.

I'd like you to decide if it's true or false, but also why.

Come back when you are ready to move on.

So well done if you put true.

That is a definition of wealth.

But why is it true? Well, all of these elements together contribute to a person's ability to live well.

So they need to be able to make choices and achieve their goals.

So wealth is broader than just money or income or finances.

Well done if you managed to explain why, as well as get the answer correct.

For task A on wealth and poverty, I'd like you to write a paragraph explaining how wealth and poverty affect a person's ability to achieve their goals.

So there are some suggested points to include.

Firstly, definitions, such as absolute and relative poverty and wealth.

Secondly, explaining the impact of poverty and wealth.

And then, finally, comparing how poverty and wealth affects individuals.

I've also suggested some sentence starters you might want to use, such as: Relative poverty means.

Absolute poverty is when.

Wealth refers to.

People in relative poverty may struggle to.

Absolute poverty makes it difficult to.

Wealth allows people to.

Whiles wealth helps people, poverty often means.

So pause the video.

Take your time.

Use the sentence starters if you need them, make sure you follow the guidance, and then come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

You could have said, "Relative poverty means having less than most people in your society.

Absolute poverty is when someone does not have enough for basic needs, such as food, water, and shelter.

For example, living on less than $2.

15 a day.

Wealth refers to money, possessions, and opportunities that help people live well and achieve their goals.

People in relative poverty may struggle to afford things like education, healthcare, and other opportunities that could improve their future.

Absolute poverty makes it difficult to focus on future goals because survival becomes the main concern.

Wealth allows people to access better opportunities, such as education, healthcare, and technology, which helps them achieve their goals.

For example, families who can afford holidays and new technology.

While wealth helps people plan for the future, poverty often means focusing on daily survival and not being able to look ahead." So well done if you've got those definitions, but you also included the examples of what wealth can allow people and how poverty can prevent people from achieving goals.

In the second part of our lesson, we're going to be looking at perspectives on wealth.

Lucas and Sofia are discussing the statement "wealth is a force for good in society." Lucas says, "I think wealth is a good thing.

Pursuing wealth creates jobs and helps businesses grow, which helps the economy.

Wealth also makes people happier by giving them more freedom, security, and choices in life." Sofia says, "I'm not so sure.

In my view, wealth leads to inequality between people.

Focusing too much on it can lead people to ignore the needs of others, and sometimes the wealthy exploit people who live in poverty." Why might Lucas and Sofia have different views on wealth? I'd like you to take a moment to think about where those views might have come from.

Pause the video, turn and talk to someone nearby if you can, or you can talk to me, and then come back when you are ready to move on.

Lucas is describing the positive aspects of wealth.

He says, "I think wealth is a good thing.

Pursuing wealth creates jobs and helps businesses grow, which helps the economy.

Wealth also makes people happier by giving them more freedom, security, and choices in life." So he said that pursuing wealth creates jobs.

This is a positive.

That wealth increases people's overall happiness.

Again, a positive.

And that wealth gives people freedom, security, and choices.

Adam Smith, an 18th-century economist and philosopher, believed that society benefits when people pursue wealth in a fair market.

He called this "the invisible hand" because the actions of individuals pursuing their own interests unintentionally drives economic progress, which is good for everyone.

So it starts with people seeking wealth.

They invest in business and in new ideas.

This creates jobs and grows the economy.

And society improves with better living standards, technology, and services.

So this is an example of the positives of wealth working out.

Here's a photograph of Peter Singer.

He's a utilitarian philosopher.

Now, a utilitarian might argue that wealth is good for society because it can lead to the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

It improves an individual's wellbeing, benefits the economy, and can be used to help others.

The utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer argues that the wealthy should help those in need as it will reduce suffering and maximise overall happiness.

The 20th-century philosopher Ayn Rand argued that people should have the freedom to pursue wealth without interference from the government, for our wealth is a way to gain personal freedom because it enables individuals to make choices about their lives.

Individuals should not rely on government assistance or regulations, but should instead be free to use their wealth to pursue their own goals.

So we have wealth leading to personal freedom, making choices like where to live or what to buy, or how to invest in the future.

So another positive here of wealth.

Let's check your understanding.

According to Adam Smith, how does pursuing wealth affect society? a, it makes the wealthy richer, which means they can choose to help those living in poverty.

b, it creates jobs, grows the economy, and improves living standards.

c, it leads to inequality by encouraging selfishness.

And d, it allows people to be free to make choices about their lives.

So which of those is the correct answer for Adam Smith's view on pursuing wealth? Take a moment, pause if you need to, and come back when you are ready to move on and check your answer.

So well done if you chose b.

According to Adam Smith, wealth is good because we invest in new businesses, technology which creates jobs, grows the economy, and has the knock-on effect of improving everyone's living standards.

Sofia is describing the negative aspects of wealth.

So she said, "In my view wealth leads to inequality between people.

Focusing too much on it can lead people to ignore the needs of others, and sometimes the wealthy exploit people who live in poverty." So her first point was that wealth concentrated in the hands of a few leads to inequality.

She also said that focusing too much on it leads to greed, and that wealthy people can quite easily become people who exploit those living in poverty.

So looking at the other side then, here we can see a picture of Amartya Sen.

He's an economist and philosopher known for his work on inequality and poverty.

He argues that when wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, it creates inequality.

He supports a fairer distribution of resources, such as better public services, to give everyone a chance to succeed.

So wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, and we saw this on one of our maps earlier.

It leads to inequality in opportunities.

And that in itself leads to social injustice because the wealthy have more power, leaving others to struggle.

In 2012, the psychologist Paul Piff conducted a series of experiments on the impact of wealth on helping behaviour.

In one variation, the participants were drivers and researchers observed their behaviour at a pedestrian crossing.

What they found was that wealthier individuals were less likely to stop for people crossing the road, whereas low-income individuals were more likely to stop.

Across a variety of experiments, the researchers consistently found that wealthier individuals were often less likely to show empathy or engage in helping behaviour.

So an interesting point against wealth, that wealth can actually lead people to become less helpful towards others.

Here we can see a picture of Karl Marx, a German philosopher, economist, and political thinker.

Now, he believed that wealth is a tool of oppression.

So he said that the wealthy control production and profits.

The working class do the hard work but receive little in return.

And now Marx saw this system as unfair, and he believed that workers should unite to create a fairer society where wealth is shared more equally.

It was his ideas that led to communism and also influenced movements for workers' rights.

So for him, wealth is a negative.

Let's check your understanding.

What is the missing word? When wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, it can lead to, because it creates unequal access to opportunities like education and jobs.

So take a moment to think about that missing word, pause if you need to, and then come back when you're ready to check your answer.

So well done if you put inequality.

So the main concern, the negative of wealth, is that it leads to inequality and to things like social injustice.

So for your task B, part one, I would like you to complete the table below, setting out some of the arguments for and against the statement: "Wealth is a force for good in society." Keywords that you could use to help you would be: Adam Smith, Amartya Sen, Ayn Rand, economic progress, freedom, inequality, Karl Marx, opportunities, oppression, Paul Piff, and utilitarianism.

So take your time.

Think about how you could organise the arguments for and against, or the arguments for and for a different point of view on the statement.

Pause the video and come back when you are ready to move on.

Let's have a look at what you could have said.

On the arguments for, Adam Smith believed that pursuing wealth in a fair market drives economic progress, creates jobs, and improves society.

The utilitarian Peter Singer argues that wealth should be used positively to help others.

So you could argue that wealth is a good thing because we can use it to help others.

Ayn Rand argued that wealth gives personal freedom, enabling individuals to make choices about their lives.

Now, looking at a different point of view, Amartya Sen argues that concentrated wealth creates inequality.

Paul Piff's 2012 study found that wealthy people were less likely to show empathy and help others.

And Karl Marx saw wealth as a tool for oppression, with the rich controlling profits while workers earned little.

So well done if you managed to use some of our learning today to organise some arguments for and against the statement.

There were lots of ways you could have organised that.

You could have said things a little bit differently, but well done if you managed to include some of those key ideas.

For part two of our task, choose the strongest point to agree or disagree that "wealth is a force for good in society" and explain why it is a strong argument.

So this is a really useful skill for GCSE if you are aiming for some of the higher bands in evaluation questions.

So it's better than just saying, "Here are the arguments for, here are the arguments against." What you are doing is you're saying, "Here's an argument to agree, and I think this is a really good argument and this is why," because that really improves your evaluation.

So here are some suggested sentence starters.

A strong argument that agrees or disagrees that wealth is a force of a good in society is.

And then you could use: This as a strong argument as.

This argument is compelling because.

This argument is powerful as it.

Or this argument is convincing because.

So you're gonna look at that table that you've already created, choose a point, preferably one that you agree with, that you can talk about in a convincing way as to why it's strong.

Pause the video and come back when you're ready to see what you could have written.

So you could have said, "A strong argument which disagrees that 'wealth is a force for good in society' is Paul Piff's 2012 study, which found wealthier people were less likely to show empathy.

This argument is compelling because it suggests that wealth can lead to a lack of concern for others, contributing to social divisions and inequality." There are lots of arguments you could have chosen.

This is just one example.

But well done if you managed to choose the argument, but also to stress what in particular convinced you about the argument.

In today's lesson, we have learned that wealth means the money, possessions, resources, and opportunities a person has.

The absolute poverty is lacking basic needs for survival.

For example, living on less than $2.

15 a day.

Relative poverty is measured in relation to where a person lives.

So in the UK, at the time of writing, it is living on less than 60% of the median UK income.

There are ongoing debates about whether wealth is a force for good.

Some see it as driving economic growth, maximising happiness, and allowing for personal freedom.

But wealth is linked to inequality, people having less empathy, and is sometimes viewed as a tool for oppression.

Thank you for working with me on this lesson today and for engaging with all of these issues.

Well done.