October's comment of the month comes from James in Portland, Oregon. James commented on our story Poverty Isn't Always Ugly. He reminds us that poverty rears its ugly head in many forms — not just monetarily. For his efforts, we will make a $25 donation to a project of his choice on Global Giving.

There are definitely a few issues to consider and discuss relating poverty. In reading Muhammad Yunus' book "Creating a World Without Poverty". He felt, and I agree, that the definition of poverty isn't going to be the same from country to country. For Bangladesh the Grameen Bank developed there own definition of poverty for their internal purposes and to measure impact over time.

Many organization attempt to place a dollar amount of income/day to determine poverty, we've heard the $2.00 per day used frequently. Income isn't a solid method because it doesn't factor variables outside of money. Location and access to natural resources for instance are variables that change the need for money, or an individuals dependence upon it.

Bottom line, I think it's important to realize that poverty can't be defined the same way in every community we visit. Poverty includes physical need and extends into the mindset of individuals and how they view the world around them. It's also important to be culturally sensitive when working with people around the world. Sure, we have it pretty good here in the U.S. but we have problems too. We shouldn't seek to cookie cut our cultural values everywhere we go.

Keep writing in and share your though-provoking comments for a chance to win $25 towards the well-deserving charity of your choice!

* Lest anyone think $25 is not a lot, consider these figures from our affiliate Mercy Corps: $25 delivers clean, safe drinking water to 50 people in one of eastern Congo's sprawling displacement camps. $25 provides seeds to farmers in cyclone-devastated areas of Myanmar to plant five acres of rice. $25 gives traumatized children in Darfur 12 weeks of activities and psychological care to help them heal.

Microfinance has worked in the developing world, but will it work here? Photo: PetroleumJelliffe (flickr)

A few weeks ago microfinance pioneer Professor Muhammad Yunus was in Queens, New York. No, he wasn’t soliciting funding or international support for his Bangladesh-based microlending institution. He was cutting the ribbon on the brand new Grameen Bank America building.

Thousands of miles away from the original Grameen Bank, the American version will function much like its Bangladeshi counterpart: loaning to groups of women rather than individuals. Like the women who first participated in Yunus’ innovative banking scheme, American borrowers will convene at one member’s house to collect weekly dues. This type of group-lending model increases accountability, since defaulting on your loan affects your peers' access to credit as well as your own.

The Grameen Bank targets women because they're more reliable borrowers. To date, Grameen America has loaned upwards of $250,000 dollars to more than 100 women who are using their $500 to $3,000 loans to establish or expand businesses ranging from floral arranging to house cleaning.

But Yunus has some skeptics to win over. Many question whether the Grameen model will resonate with Americans. Microfinance expert Saiful Islam says "Bangladeshis, Indians, Latinos will follow it, but I don’t know about others." In 1985, a similar program started by Yunus in rural Arkansas at the request of then-Governor Bill Clinton failed due to mistrust among participants, according to Shorebank's Mary Houghton, who helped advise the microfinance experiment in Arkansas.

It does seem somewhat of a strange fit: banking targeted to empower the poorest of the poor in one of the most prosperous countries in the world?

The United States does have its fair share of people living in poverty, however. Immigrants in particular have a hard time accessing credit and are more likely to use predatory lending agencies that charge steep interest rates. What's more, the Center for Financial Services and Innovation, reports that approximately 40 million American households are considered underbanked.

Also, contrary to public perception, microcredit is not aimed at the poorest of the poor. "It’s actually supposed to help those below a certain poverty line who are looking for self-employment as a route out of poverty," says Raj Desai of the Brookings Institution.

In that case, the U.S.-based bank may run into trouble. Approximately 1 out of every 11 Americans work for themselves, while about 1 in 4 in Bangladesh are self-employed.

Yunus will need time to prove that the American model can be successful. It may be that American women need more than greater financial access to climb out of poverty. But Yunus' large following and wide array of awards — including a Nobel Peace Prize — suggest he has a fighting chance.