The short article cut from “America’s New Working Class”, by Kathleen R. Arnold, depicts the failure of the American’s federal welfare system. It seems like mostly Americans agree that the propose of federal welfare programs is to provide economic assistance such as food stamps to people who need it. However, Arnold states that the real propose of welfare programs is to maintain a supply of cheap labor in order to make them to have obedient adaptive function and closely keep watch on those welfare recipients. For example, the bad treatment for parole people will only lead them go back the prison; and for those noncompliance workfare recipients, the bad treatment and poor support will lead them to become homeless and malnourish, which make them become much more poverty. …show more content…
Arnold announced some facts which have already been demonstrating that poverty and joblessness is a result of personal failing is particularly American. And the major reason to indicate this bad result is because the united states’ welfare system is extraordinary undemocratic: outdoor relief is limited and plenty of working positions are coercive which means workers have no choices. Also, general public assumption that poor people are irresponsible and had attitude. Much worse, the federal welfare itself have many problems like cheating and dependency which cause a large amount of paupers won’t get their welfare. All in all, as I could say the cures for these situation is let those people who live in a poverty condition have right to speak up and give them more chance to have a flexible job which means gives them more chances. Also the government should drop the surveillance and political control in order to make those powerlessness worker have their confident and legal
“The Economic Policy Institute recently reviwed dozens of studies of what constitutes a “living wage” and came up with an average figure of $30,000 a year for a family of one adult and two children, which amounts to a wage of $14 an hour.” (213). According to Ehrenreich, about 60 percent of American workers earn less than $14 per hour. In all of places where Ehrenreich worked paid seven dollars or less per hour, which means those of people who work in those place cannot even afford to have some essentials services such as health insurance and telephone. Since they cannot even struggle to get out, politicians could takee an action; however, they didn't do any works. “The Democrats are not eager to find flaws in the period of “unprecedented prosperity” they take credit for; the Republicans have lost interest in the poor now that “welfare-as-we-know-it” has ended.” (217). And, they also had a catastrophic error. “In fact, very little is known about the fate of former welfare recipients because the 1996 welfare reform legislation bithely failed to incude any provision for monitoring their postwelfare economic condition.” (217). Congressmen need to read this book to realize the problem, and not satisfy themselves by ignoring failures because they have
In Leslie Reynolds’ “Misuse of Welfare in American Low Class Citizens,” she employs various logical methods to support her argument that welfare in the United States is being misused by our citizens and something must be done to prevent the welfare misuse. Reynolds relies on definition, facts, statistics, personal and public experience, and also tries to find different solutions for this heavily impacted issue. Reynolds believes something should be done to prevent the many low class recipients from abusing and misusing the welfare system. For example, Reynolds suggests the government could restart the welfare system, have stricter guidelines, and have more monitoring of the system itself to prevent our money being misled. Reynolds blends her
A great number of those who reside in New York find the current U.S welfare reform to be very exhausting, humiliating as well as fraught. According to New Yorkers, this welfare will fail them. These simply because they are not poor enough, most of the citizens are already working (De Mause & Lewis Pp 1). The centerpiece of this welfare reform demanded that every citizen to work. There is a need that the state should ensure that almost half of the citizens get public assistance from the government. The beneficiaries should be working for at least thirty hours a week since working for more hours is one of the necessary in welfare reform (Eaton 7)
Welfare, enacted by one of the greatest presidents of the United States’s existence, Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt, is an effective and useful means to assist American families in need. Throughout history, welfare has proven to help people get back on their feet and into society. Despite the system’s many useful benefits, like most attributes in this world, welfare has kinks in the system. In fact, welfare has yet to be perfected, even though it was established in the year of 1935 and is still in use today. The system may never be perfected, but it can be improved. There are many different thoughts and ideas pertaining to how welfare should change. Some believe it should be eliminated entirely. In doing so, many people all across the nation would be harmed in financial and mental manners. How can welfare be reformed? Is it even possible? The answer is absolutely. It must be reformed, and many would agree on the matter. It is, however, a sensitive and controversial topic to most. Political parties tend to take interest in the discussion of welfare reform, as well. The typical, left-wing Democrat wishes to give more to welfare users, while the standard right-wing Republican would like to decrease what is given to Americans. If everything has its imperfections, why should welfare be reformed? Why not leave it the way it is and let the government figure out the fine print? There are those that take this sort of stance on welfare reform, and there are some that believe differently.
America spends an annual amount of 131.9 billion dollars on welfare alone (Department of Commerce). So many facts about welfare are overwhelming, such that over 12,800,000 Americans are on the welfare system. The entire social welfare system is in desperate need of a complete reform. In order for a proper reform to ensue, the people of America must combine efforts with the U.S. government to revitalize the current welfare system. This reform would involve answering two important questions. First, how has today’s welfare system strayed from its original state and secondly, how is the system abused by welfare holders in today’s economy?
Thousands of people are signed up to receive welfare in America, this program is designed to aid poor and needy families. However, it has become some people’s way of earning an income. Several argue against and say that welfare is not destroying our country and creating a dependent people who have learned to abuse certain privileges that come with living in this nation.
Many people believe that with no imposed time limit on welfare, individuals will abuse the system and not work; however, studies indicate that this is untrue. “no lazy person could raise and clothe a family on the tiny amount she was given for welfare and food stamps and that hers was a hard and often desperate struggle” (Ellwood 3). Even with the benefits from welfare, recipients are not given enough to sustain their families and
By definition, the welfare state is a means of giving assistance to those who do not produce an arbitrary amount of recorded capital for themselves. There is absolutely no encouragement to work, no obligation for productivity. Rather, the Heritage Foundation reported that only two of 80 tested welfare programs in America had
Over the past several years, Welfare reform has been a hot topic in politics in the United States. A lot of research has been done on the effectiveness of welfare and most research states that welfare is hindering rather than helping people get out of poverty. When talking about the role played by anti-poverty programs in America, David T. Ellwood and Lawrence H.
The Welfare Program is another program that is abused, although it has not run out money has created a burden on the American economy. The government is the blame for this by encouraging over use of the system. Instead of funding the entire livelihood of family households, the federal government could better manage this program by subsidizing the monthly incomes, versus taxpayers footing the entire expense. The federal budget is over spent and as a result the legislators are looking for ways to make cuts and that usually comes if the form of having states reducing state workers such as schoolteachers and state road crews. The welfare program could be a more efficient program implementing a workfare program thus increasing the workforce and discouraging abuse by generations of families of a much-needed program that should be used to assist the elderly and mentally challenged. It is no one’s constitutional right to receive charity; society does not owe healthily citizens a dime. It is however, the individual’s constitutional right to prosper and that is not by collecting a free hand out. To achieve success you have to go after it, it is not handed to you. "Ability is what you are capable of doing; Motivation determines what you do; Attitude determines how well you do it". Lou Holtz
There remains a remnant of citizens who honestly cannot do without the welfare system and who abide by the regulation of the welfare system, however, the system unintentionally invites scam artists. The ways of abusing the welfare system continuos to grow. Here are just a few of the examples. Citizens are staying single parents in order to receive aid. Parents view having more children as a gateway to receiving more money from the system. Recipients refuse to search for jobs and report employment in order to continue receiving assistance. People seem to easily make false claims, requesting assistance when they do not need it. Although, there is a set time period for receiving funds many citizens become comfortable and lazy during assistance. The whole purpose of the system is to get citizens through rough economical problems and back to a independent lifestyle without government aid. However, the systems seems to encourage complacency in society and provide fraud play in
United States Government Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt thought of this system as an aid for low-income families whose men were off to war, or injured while at war. The welfare system proved to be beneficial early on by giving families temporary aid, just enough to help them accommodate their family’s needs. Fast forward almost 90 years, and it has become apparent that this one once helpful system, has become flawed. Welfare itself and the ideologies it stands on, contains decent fundamentals; furthermore, this system of aid needs only to be reformed to better meet the needs of today’s society.
Throughout history, there have always been people willing to work for what they want, and those who expect things to be handed to them as if it was a natural-born right. While the welfare system does positively impact some families in need, many people take advantage of it. With this being a well known fact, the government still continues to use ten percent of the federal budget on welfare (“Budget” 1).
The history of welfare reform reveals that the question of personal responsibility versus assistance to those in need has been a constant in the debate over welfare. In the 1950s and 1960s, welfare reform was limited to various states' attempts to impose residency requirements on welfare applicants and remove illegitimate children from the welfare rolls. During the 1970s advocates of welfare reform promoted the theory of
The welfare system is made up of numerous large programs. For instance housing assistance can take the form of Public Housing, Section 8 or tenant support and each of these programs have various facets have their own unique program rules that need to be followed. The way the welfare system is set up with independent programs discourages work because at certain income levels benefit loss is greater than additional income earned. For example, benefits are lowered $0.50 for each $1.00 in additional income a participate earns however when benefits are examined in whole across the entire welfare