Murray's Arguments Against Abolishing Welfare

365 Words1 Page

Abolishing welfare has long been considered a solution to the issues it has caused. The idea was first proposed by Charles Murray, an American political scientist, sociologist and author, around a decade ago. Murray believed that welfare should be abolished to prevent the rates of out of wedlock births from increasing any more than they already had. But, Murray failed to acknowledge a fundamental and larger cause of financial troubles: the government. Many of the issues associated with the U.S. welfare policy have been created surrounding the government's lack of unity and structure, which has made the nations policy more inefficient than any other developed areas (Berrebi). Today's economy spends more supporting welfare than it does supporting national defense. According to Goodman, a …show more content…

In addition to the absence of coherence in the nation's government, the welfare system also struggles because of its inability to change society's concepts of what a family should be, as it completely disregards those with single parent incomes (Berrebi). Unfortunately, the regulations and methods of the welfare system do not vary depending on an individual's circumstances, which can make it difficult to vouch for whether or not government aid should be awarded (Goodman). While welfare has many negative aspects associated with it, it also has positive effects, though they are rarely advertised.With the aid of technology and social science research, it has been proven that forms of government assistance are efficient in the fight against poverty, despite the issues associated with it (Berrebi). The abolishment of welfare would have significant effects on many individuals, which leads to the conclusion that welfare must not be abolished, but rather simply

More about Murray's Arguments Against Abolishing Welfare

Open Document