Essays academic service


The us government should address the creeping poverty in society

There are twice as many white poor as Negro poor in the United States. Therefore I will not dwell on the experiences of poverty that derive from racial discrimination, but will discuss the poverty that affects white and Negro alike. Up to recently we have proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils: The logic of this approach suggested that each of these causes be attacked one by one. Hence a housing program to transform living conditions, improved educational facilities to furnish tools for better job opportunities, and family counseling to create better personal adjustments were designed.

In combination these measures were intended to remove the causes of poverty. While none of these remedies in itself is unsound, all have a fatal disadvantage. The programs have never proceeded on a coordinated basis or at a similar rate of development.

Where We Are Going

Housing measures have fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies. They have been piecemeal and pygmy. Educational reforms have been even more sluggish and entangled in bureaucratic stalling and economy-dominated decisions. Family assistance stagnated in neglect and then suddenly was discovered to be the central issue on the basis of hasty and superficial studies.

At no time has a total, coordinated and fully adequate program been conceived. As a consequence, fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor. In addition to the absence of coordination and sufficiency, the programs of the past all have another common failing — they are indirect. Each seeks to solve poverty by first solving something else.

I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: Earlier in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation as destructive of initiative and responsibility.

In the simplistic thinking of that day the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber. We have come a long way in our understanding of human motivation and of the blind operation of our economic system.

Now we realize that dislocations in the market operation of our economy and the prevalence of discrimination thrust people into idleness the us government should address the creeping poverty in society bind them in constant or frequent unemployment against their will. The poor are less often dismissed from our conscience today by being branded as inferior and incompetent.

We also know that no matter how dynamically the economy develops and expands it does not eliminate all poverty. We have come to the point where we must make the nonproducer a consumer or we will find ourselves drowning in a sea of consumer goods.

We have so energetically mastered production that we now must give attention to distribution. Though there have been increases in purchasing power, they have lagged behind increases in production. Those at the lowest economic level, the poor white and Negro, the aged and chronically ill, are traditionally unorganized and therefore have little ability to force the necessary growth in their income. They stagnate or become even poorer in relation to the larger society.

The problem indicates that our emphasis must be two-fold.

  1. Welfare policy needs to address the causes of poverty for religion and civil society, at the heritage foundation poverty in the united states.
  2. In combination these measures were intended to remove the causes of poverty. If periodic reviews disclose that the whole national income has risen, then the guaranteed income would have to be adjusted upward by the same percentage.
  3. Though there have been increases in purchasing power, they have lagged behind increases in production.
  4. Why is there so much poverty in the united states is less than a poverty line set by the united states government in poverty impact society as a. As a consequence, fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.

We must create full employment or we must create incomes. People must be made consumers by one method or the other. Once they are placed in this position, we need to be concerned that the potential of the individual is not wasted. New forms of work that enhance the social good will have to be devised for those for whom traditional jobs are not available.

  1. Though there have been increases in purchasing power, they have lagged behind increases in production. In a state of society where want is abolished, work of this sort could be enormously increased.
  2. In the simplistic thinking of that day the absence of worldly goods indicated a want of industrious habits and moral fiber. While none of these remedies in itself is unsound, all have a fatal disadvantage.
  3. The reason we can't end poverty in america but if you live in a society where not being able further, we can see that the us government has been. Earlier in this century this proposal would have been greeted with ridicule and denunciation as destructive of initiative and responsibility.

In 1879 Henry George anticipated this state of affairs when he wrote, in Progress and Poverty: It is not the work of slaves, driven to their task either by the lash of a master or by animal necessities. It is the work of men who perform it for their own sake, and not that they may get more to eat or drink, or wear, or display.

In a state of society where want is abolished, work of this sort could be enormously increased. The poor transformed into purchasers will do a great deal on their own to alter housing decay. Negroes, who have a double disability, will have a greater effect on discrimination when they have the additional weapon of cash to use in their struggle. Beyond these advantages, a host of positive psychological changes inevitably will result from widespread economic security.

The dignity of the individual will flourish when the decisions concerning his life and in his own hands, when he has the assurance that his income is stable and certain, and when he know that he has the means to seek self-improvement. Personal conflicts between husband, wife and children will diminish when the unjust measurement of human worth on a scale of dollars is eliminated. Two conditions are indispensable if we are to ensure that the guaranteed income operates as a consistently progressive measure.

First, it must be pegged to the median income of society, not the lowest levels of income.

The us government should address the creeping poverty in society

To guarantee an income at the floor would simply perpetuate welfare standards and freeze into the society poverty conditions. Second, the guaranteed income must be dynamic; it must automatically increase as the total social income grows. Were it permitted to remain static under growth conditions, the recipients would suffer a relative decline. If periodic reviews disclose that the whole national income has risen, then the guaranteed income would have to be adjusted upward by the same percentage.

Without these safeguards a creeping retrogression would occur, nullifying the gains of security and stability. The program would benefit all the poor, including the two-thirds of them who are white. I hope that both Negro and white will act in coalition to effect this change, because their combined strength will be necessary to overcome the fierce opposition we must realistically anticipate. Indeed, it is a symptom of our confused social values that these two groups turn out to be the richest and the poorest.

The wealthy who own securities have always had an assured income; and their polar opposite, the relief client, has been guaranteed an income, however miniscule, through welfare benefits. If democracy is to have breadth of meaning, it is necessary to adjust this inequity. It is not only moral, but it is also intelligent. We are wasting and degrading human life by clinging to archaic thinking.

The curse of poverty has no justification in our age. It is socially as cruel and blind as the practice of cannibalism at the dawn of civilization, when men ate each other because they had not yet learned to take food from the soil or to consume the abundant animal life around them. The time has come for us to civilize ourselves by the total, direct and immediate abolition of poverty.