The Problem of Poverty: Welfare in America
For centuries, nations, cities, and individual families have dealt with the problem of poverty; how to remedy current situations and how to prevent future ones. For most of history, there have been no government controlled poverty assistance programs. The poor simply relied on the goodness of their families or, if they did not have a family, on the generosity of the public at large. In the United States, this situation changed in 1935 with the passage of the Social Security Act. The Social Security Act has seen many successes, but it also faces many critiques of its structure and function. In the past, most governments did little to actively aid their poor population. This duty was understood to fall on the families of the poor individuals, charity groups, and generous individuals. Some governments aided their needy in indirect ways. One of the first government-mediated assistance programs was passed by the English Parliament in 1601 as the Act for the Relief of the Poor. This act set up local 'parishes' that were responsible for taking care of the poor in their own district. However, the government provided no funds to facilitate this program?the parishes were responsible for levying and collecting taxes to finance their programs. Though it would be considered a very primitive form of welfare by today?s standards, it was a large step toward government-mediated welfare compared to the English system 250 years before that. In 1349, Parliament forbade charity on the grounds that it might encourage laziness. Since then, public attitudes have changed about the responsibility of the citizens and the government to provide for the assistance of the needy. Limited federal assistance was given to war veterans and their families beginning during the Civil War, but large scale assistance to the general needy community was not available for almost 75 more years (Komisar 48). A large contribution toward the assistance of the poor in the United States came during the Progressive movement around the turn of the century. Activist groups championed not only workers rights in the form of unions, but also the right of every citizen to have access to decent living conditions (Komisar 67).
The Progressive movement slackened during the prosperous ?20s, but the social welfare issue was forcefully placed back into the public con...
... middle of paper ...
...banks could meet the needs of the increased number of people who seek their services. Although it is probably impossible to achieve complete freedom from poverty, society need not sit idly by in the face of such a monumental challenge. Indeed, it is the public duty of each individual to aid in the improvement of the lives of poor persons around the nation and around the world. Large-scale, complex systems such as the one now in place in America, only serve to create an inefficient, costly effort that could be achieved with less manpower and fewer dollars. Government oversight and subsidizing of private contributions toward the elimination of poverty is a far more efficient, adaptive, and economical way of working toward the eradication of the problem of poverty.
Bibliography
Garfinkel, Irwin. ?Welfare?, World Book Encyclopedia, World Book Inc., New York, Vol 21, pp. 191-193, ©1988.
Komisar, Lucy. Down and Out in the USA: A History of Public Welfare. Rev. ed. Watts, Chicago, ©1977.
Patterson, James. America?s Struggle Against Poverty, 1900-1980., Harvard Press, Boston, ©1981.
Segalman, Ralph. Poverty in America: The Welfare Dilemma, Greenwood, Los Angeles, ©1981
Dolgoff, R. & Feldstein, D. (2003). Understanding social welfare (7th ed). New York, Allen & Bacon
Introduced by Steinbeck with a discussion of monstrosity in humans, Cathy walked through life with the vestments of a human but the soul of a devil. Though Cathy maintained a façade of innocence to ward off suspicion, the darkness of her soul was revealed in her few moments of weakness throughout the novel. From the time she was a child, Cathy had “face of innocence” and beauty that attracted children and adults alike (73). Behind her wide eyes, however, something darker lurked. As described by Steinbeck, “…she had some quality that made people look…back at her, troubled at something foreign. Something looked out of her eyes, and was never there when one looked again” (73). Cathy was skilled at using her natural beauty and poise to manipulate others, always maintaining her impeccable appearance. The events of her childhood, however, revealed her to be a creature much darker than her attractiveness would suggest. Her parents died in a mysterious fire, and the lives of the men she manipulated were without exception destroyed. When she finally arrived on the doorstep of Charles and Adam Trask’s farmhouse, her deception continued; she entranced Adam and the two eloped within months. Adam fell head-over-heels for his golden bride. He and many others saw nothing but goodness and virtue in her hazel eyes. Samuel Hamilton, however, saw something more. As he described after his chilling first
In any case, the reader can wonder if Cathy’s means of control are logical to the fashions of society; if sex was not viewed in depository light as it has been for most of human history, would characters such as Cathy exist as monsters and demons? Regardless, Cathy's monstrous demeanor frequently presents itself in the novel where sex remains decisive to her sovereignty of manipulation.
Issitt, Micah, L. Flynn. "Welfare: An Overview." Points Of View: Welfare (2013): 1. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 5 Jan. 2014.
The prospect of the welfare state in America appears to be bleak and almost useless for many citizens who live below the poverty line. Katz’s description of the welfare state as a system that is “partly public, partly private, partly mixed; incomplete and still not universal; defeating its own objectives” whereas has demonstrates how it has become this way by outlining the history of the welfare state which is shown that it has been produced in layers. The recent outcomes that Katz writes about is the Clinton reform in 1996 where benefits are limited to a period of two years and no one is allowed to collect for more than five years in their lifetime unless they are exempted. A person may only receive an exemption on the grounds of hardship in which states are limited to granting a maximum of 20% of the recipient population. The logic behind this drastic measure was to ensure that recipients would not become dependent upon relief and would encourage them to seek out any form of employment as quickly as possible. State officials have laid claim to this innovation as a strategy that would “save millions of children from poverty.” However, state officials predict otherwise such as an increase in homelessness, a flooding of low-waged workers in the labour market, and decreased purchasing power which means less income from tax collections. The outcomes of this reform appear to be bleak for many Americans who reside below the poverty line. How does a wealthy country like America have such weak welfare system? Drawing upon Katz, I argue that the development of the semi-welfare state is a result of the state taking measures to ensure that the people do not perceive relief as a right and to avoid exploiting the shortfalls of capitalism ...
It is a commonly known fact that a large percentage of Americans are living on and relying on welfare, which is a government program that provides financial aid to individuals or groups of people who cannot support themselves. Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. There are several types of assistance offered by the government, which include healthcare, food stamps, child care assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance. The type of welfare and amounts given depend on the individual, and how many children they have. There are many people who honestly need the government assistance, but there are also many who abuse the privilege.
Welfare programs are an important part of American society. Without any type of American welfare, people will starve, children will not receive the proper education, and people will not receive any medical help simply because they do not have the resources available to them. Each of the three aspects of the American welfare system are unique in their own ways because they are funded differently and the benefits are given to different people. While support for these welfare systems has declined in the more recent years, the support for it when it was created was strong.
The morality of social welfare systems, or the morality of crafting laws to aid American citizens in poverty, is a subject that (like myriad ethical issues) is hotly debated to say the least. For example, some opponents of social welfare institutions maintain the view that such programs "increase the reward or reduce the penalties" of poverty; thereby ostensibly making an impoverished state appealing even to people who might initially have been motivated to earn a living by conventional means. In other words, welfare programs (according to opponents) encourage otherwise productive individuals to embrace laziness, for basic human needs would be met by such institutions, eliminating the need to work at all. Those opposed to social welfare plans have also been known to claim that an "unfair burden is placed upon workers who must pay for the system." When one considers the above opposing views, it would then stand to reason that proponents of social welfare programs might maintain that it is the moral responsibility of working citizens to provide assistance and funding for programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, the Food Stamp program, or the like. This supposition is confirmed upon examination of the notion that, when basic human needs such as "food, housing, and medical care" are not met, one is consequently rendered unable to uphold any level of social freedom. Given the above information, one can safely deduce that modern supporters of social welfare organizations are under the impression that such programs provide the impoverished masses with the means by which to obtain the level of general well-being vital to acquiring work in the first place.
Welfare has been a safety net for many Americans, when the alternative for them is going without food and shelter. Over the years, the government has provided income for the unemployed, food assistance for the hungry, and health care for the poor. The federal government in the nineteenth century started to provide minimal benefits for the poor. During the twentieth century the United States federal government established a more substantial welfare system to help Americans when they most needed it. In 1996, welfare reform occurred under President Bill Clinton and it significantly changed the structure of welfare. Social Security has gone through significant change from FDR’s signing of the program into law to President George W. Bush’s proposal of privatized accounts.
O?Beirne, Kate. ?The State of Welfare: An old and tricky question resurfaces.? National Review 54.2 (February 11, 2002): 1--2. Online. Information Access Expanded
The United States is often referred to as a ‘reluctant welfare state.’ There are various reasons for this description. One of the primary reasons for this is the differences and diversity of the political parties which are the motivating forces that control government. The Liberal Party, for instance supports government safety nets and social service programs for those in need. “Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all.” ("Studentnews," 2006) They believe it is the responsibility of government to ensure that the needs of all citizens are met, and to intervene to solve problems. The responsibility of government is to alleviate social ills, to protect civil liberties and sustain individual and human rights. Liberals support most social and human service programs; such as TANF, including long-term welfare, housing programs, government regulated health care, Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and educational funding. Their goal is to create programs that promote equal opportunity regardless of gender, age, race, orientation, nationality or religion, along with many others. Liberals believe that government participation is essential and a means to bring about fairness and justice to the American way of life.
In 1962, President John F. Kennedy raised the current welfare payments and renamed the program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children. Kennedy allowed states to require work in order to receive welfare, but didn’t require it. Kennedy also laid out the new goal for welfare in America, it was to “end poverty, not just alleviate poverty” (Background: Time for a new Approach). Kennedy said welfare should be “a hand up, not a hand out." Welfare continued to change...
In Oedipus the King, one of Sophocles’ most popular plays, Sophocles clearly depicts the Greek’s popular belief that fate will control a man’s life despite of man’s free will. Man was free to choose and was ultimately held responsible for his own actions. Throughout Oedipus the King, the concept of fate and free will plays an integral part in Oedipus' destruction.
...e of joy and pain in Catherine’s life, as their love was so powerful that it can only be embraced by the extent of death. With many other important messages in the novel, the most important is the changes that occur in and between the characters. The numerous characteristic aspects, the characters in the story are enthralling. Although, Cathy Linton may be recognized as a duplicate of Catherine Earnshaw due to the parallelism of generations, their traits and personalities are entirely individual. Cathy is an innocent and fine young lady, and Catherine is a selfish evil monster. Throughout the progress of the story the reader can clearly appreciate the mismatched traist of the mother and daughter. And like, psychologists have said, “Often children avoid the ways their parents have gone”. Although Cathy doesn’t experience her mother ways, she lives the opposite way.
The relationship and cooperation in handling the issue in Southern Thailand between Malaysia and Thailand government since a long time ago, has become disappointed, frustration and unsatisfied. This is might be best description that has been looked up since the working relations between past Thai governments and their Malaysian counterparts was comes to Southern Thailand (Thanet, 2013). For the Thailand government, cooperation with the Malaysian authorities is really needed while in dealing with the separatist insurgents that often to the slip across the porous border from Thailand. Meanwhile, for the Malaysian side, through the sharing of same ethnicity and Islamic religion in the Southern Thai Muslims, was means that their politicians ought to have a key role to play in understanding and resolving insurgency issues in Southern Thailand. Therefore, it might can be seem in logically think that, without the help by the Malaysian government, the issues that regards to Muslim separatist moments in the Deep South would be difficul...