Poverty
After reading
Honky and watching Grapes of Wrath and Pursuit of Happyness, do you feel poverty is something that can be elimnated or effectively reduced in our American society? Justify your position and engage your classmates as you discuss Poverty in America.
106 comments:
I don't believe poverty can ever be eliminated in a capitalist economy.
I personally think that povery is something that cannot be elminiated because of the fact that some people are just content with getting benefits and not working. People lack the self drive to get a job.
Poverty cant be avoided in a society where there is freedom. If people had assigned jobs and everyone made the same amount of money
I believe that because two of the biggest causes of poverty are advancing technology and just bad things happening randomly, poverty cannot be effectively reduced today.
I think poverty can be reduced but not completely eliminated. You can always help those who want to progress, but you can’t help somebody that is not willing to help themselves.
I feel that poverty can be reduced. I wouldn't go all out and say that it can be eliminated. The help cannot only come from the government but it also has to come from the people. People have to want to help other people, but we live in a society where people are so selfish, that they would rather see another family suffer just so they can succeed.
poverty can not be eliminated in a capitalist economy. someone is allways going to have more.
While it can never be eliminated, poverty can be effectively reduced, but not without some sacrifices by the upper classes.
I think that as long as we live in a capitalist society where people have the ability to amass large fortunes, those same people will always have to do so on the backs of the poor. I don't think that people will ever be able to eliminate poverty unless we first eliminate greed.
People don't want to work jobs with no prestige. People don't want to be the McDonald's or WalMart worker. They want a job where they feel respected and valued as an employee.
Someone always has to suffer in order for others to succeed unfortunately. Maybe not necessarily suffer but be less successful at least from a financial standpoint.
I think that poverty could be eliminated, but it would require us to take such great measures that I don't believe it ever WILL be eliminated. Let's face it: poverty is not a hot topic these days, or anytime. We talk about jobs, education, etc., but we never face the issue of poverty itself. Maybe it's because we feel guilty for having so much when others have nothing, or maybe we feel awkward talking about our incomes. Whatever the reason, we haven't directly tried to eliminate poverty yet, and we can't eliminate poverty if we don't talk about it.
i agree that it can be eliminated but it would take a lot of hard work and determination not just from citizens in america but also the government
I think that poverty will never be eliminated. I think that the definition will change as our society changes, but there will always be inequality. Now, people in poverty are struggling with feeding their families, getting a job, finding a stable place to live, etc. but in the future this may change. People in future generations in poverty may struggle with sending their kid to a prestigious school or wearing the right clothing brands. Inequality will always be present although it may take different forms.
I feel that poverty is not something that could be elimnated in America. I say this because there are so many people in
America that struggle to keep the little that they do have. When it comes down to people having good jobs and anything like a recession could happen then it would cause a lot of people to lose what they do have. When they didn't really have much at all.
Of course we can never eliminate poverty, but there are ways to reduce it. Like giving the poor more opportunities to get jobs. Like you know how colleges reserve spots for minorities to go to college, can jobs reserves spots for people with certain incomes? That way you can give them 'fish' and still attempt to make 'fisherman' at the same time.
I feel as if poverety is a fence built soley because of perspective, In america someone is always gonna be less rich than the other.
I believe poverty can be reduced if the right programs are installed but never eliminated fully. What are the types of programs we need to reduce poverty???
I don't believe that poverty could be eliminated in our society in any practical way. I'm sure that it could be reduced. To what extent I don't know. When it comes down to it we live in a capitalist society where we have the right make our own money. I wouldn't say that it's a perfect system but if you were going to "eliminate" poverty it is the entire system that would have to be changed. When looking at other choices we have the jealous nature of human beings to be considered.
Personally I believe that lowering the poverty level in America is acheivable, but only based on a certain individuals strive to reach this goal. Often times I think that a person experiencing poverty believes that it is impossible for them to get themselves out- without even researching or trying to attempt to find lifeboaots that would help them. It's easier for them to collect a check from the government than try to find a job. Though that is a strong statement, I don't feel that ALL poverty cases are like this. I also agree that our government could do more to help those who actually need the help. I think the first step is to try and find a way that there can be no loop holes in the system. Also, to not only give people who need money a check, but find an effective way to bring them out of poverty.
If Marijuanna was decriminalized then the economuy would be so much better!
I believe that poverty can definitely be reduced with a lot of work but i dont think it can ever be really eliminated because people are going to be people.if you tried to eliminate poverty, some people would take advantage of your uses to eliminate it and would just push themselves into poverty even more to get those advantages they would be given.
I think that the lobster is right in that a lot of people may not want jobs that they don't view as prestigious, but that's because society as a whole tends to look down on those people that flip burgers or work at the checkout line. We need to show a little more respect towards these people that are working hard as anyone else to earn a paycheck and maybe people wouldn't be ashamed or hesitant to work these jobs.
I feel that poverty can't be elimanted or even effectively reduced in our current day. Government assistance, cultural capital,personal drive, and all the other tooks to getting out of poverty we've talked about can help only a handleful of people. The number of people currently in poverty and the amount of money it would take to give them assistance or start any program to get cultural capitol or motivation is way too high to make eliminating or even making a decent dent in poverty seem possible. Not to mention that the government has more important matters they put before helping those in poverty, and most people who could afford to try and help don't normally tend to care enough to bother.
I do not think that poverty can ever be completely eliminated. However, I do think that it is possible to reduce poverty. There are many causes of poverty, one being unemployment. In today's world getting a job is very difficult. If there were more jobs provided I think poverty could be reduced. How to provide more jobs, I don't exactly know where to begin with that. Maybe if the United States wasn't so dependent on other countries like China for imported goods, citizen's here could have a better opportunity to maintain a job. Generations ago, the United States was known as a country that manufactured many goods. Now many companies and factories have been moved to outside countries for cheap labor...
So some changes that could occur: Overhaul of the Social Security/Welfare/Medicare/Medicaid/healthcare systems, overhaul of the tax system, etc. What else could be done to help the poor?
Kelly
would you allow higher taxes on the wealthy in order to provide services to help ease the effects of poverty?
Elise
Explain what decriminalization has to do with reducing poverty.
i dont think that poverty can be fully eliminated from american society, but i think that we can help lower the poverty rate by providing government programs that would help the poor start back up. For example, the government should create a program that will give food,shelter and create job oppurtunities(resource centers that help unemployed poor people to find jobs)
@Eirbua I agree. It can be easier for someone to collect a check from the government then it is to work for it in some cases. It maybe that the government is almost handicapping some people. There needs to be a program that doesn't just give cheese to the poor but availiable jobs as well. Besides, don't you think if there are more jobs, more people working, it stimulates the economy even more? In America, don't you think we should have the right to be able to work? And if that's what America wants, we need to make jobs for these people.
Elise: Decriminalizing marijuana would do nothing to end poverty. It would only reduce deterrents that currently discourage the poor from wasting their money on drugs.
What does weed have to do with anything? See if we want to get serious about stopping poverty than we really have to put together some good quality ideas! not random crap
I don't think that some people will never know the sadness of poverty because they don't experience hard times in their life. Some people are content knowing that there are starving people and they do not care simply because their life is okay. I don't think it is right for things to be that way, but it is true. People always say celebrities do not care and everything but that's not the case. Most famous people support and donate to a lot of charities. I think it is the rich snobby people that just do not see it as a problem because they are sooooo0o0o0 successful. Others see it as everyone has the same opportunity. Our government should help work to get people a job and create more jobs in that sense. It is hard to sit and think about how to do that.
Just like Cameron Diaz stated, it's hard to do that when our country is so dependent on other countries to do everything for us. Maybe the USA is just a lazy country. We are really obese maybe because we have nothing to do since everyone else does it for us....
Honestly the only way to avoid poverty is socialism. The only way to be completely truly equal is socialism. However, this would eliminate personal drive and ambition. It kind of defeats the purpose of the freedom America was founded on. However, people will always strive for more or be greedy and I do not think there is anyway to dicsonnect people from their personal drive. Individuals that truly want something will do whatever it takes to get it.
I think that poverty could be reduced, but never eliminated. More jobs could be created, but there would still be people who choose not to work. There is always a chance of something going wrong, so you can never really control the economy or if someone can get or keep a job. You cannot have rich without poor, especially in a capitalist society.
We live in the world's wealthiest nation. Yet 15.1 percent of people living in the United States live in poverty. why?
@jasmine knows best yeah that is true i agree that's the only way that poverty could be elimnated if the people in the American society works together and be determined that they can elimnate poverty then that is the only way i believe that it could be elimnated.
In order to reduce poverty, the government should have programs that temporarily help people out. Just enough to get them on their feet. Are we all in agreement that the government should provide certain "life boats" such as healthcare, food, and housing, but shouldn't there be some sort of training program for jobs? These people in poverty are most likely lacking an education and a training program might be a great segway to a job. That way, they would be able to support themselves sooner and get off of the government assistance for food and housing.
With people being so stingy, I think that people would try to outdo the other person. Nobody really likes someone else having more and better than them.
Elise: I disagree with you. There will always be something that people believe should be "legalized" to make the economy better. But that is such a small thing assigned to such a large task. It would take millions of people buying marijuana every day to even make a dent in the economy. Like i said, it's just one product. There is no way it could make a difference in the entire economy as a whole.
Do you guys think America would be the same without poverty??
It depends, what exactly means eliminated? I think that poverty will still exist because I believe that there will always be a difference of wealth between people, I know it's sad. However, I believe that we can decrease poverty by the help.
I understand how elise is bringing this to relate to poverty based on the fact that most people who cant afford the drug, even if it is illegal, go and buy it off the streets which causes them to become addicted to it and it can cause you to be out of money completely.then you get hooked in bad situations where you cant pay for anything and you're then STEALING to be able to buy the stuff.I dont think whether marijuanna is decriminalized or not has anything to do with poverty itself, but what people do for it could put them into poverty.so eliminating it, could reduce poverty.
Decriminalizing marijuana wouldn't do anything for the poor. If they were dealing then they've just lost a source of income since it will be controlled and taxed by the government. Otherwise they might turn to it in its legal form and make themselves even poorer.
It depends, what exactly means eliminated? I think that poverty will still exist because I believe that there will always be a difference of wealth between people, I know it's sad. However, I believe that we can decrease poverty by the help.
Yes, I think the whole "no incentive to work" argument against the whole thing is a little bit radical and is due to a general lack of perspective. I live in a radical conservative household and I get it, but yes I would.
As child we had the naive opportunity to view things in a yes or no format. As our brains developed we absorbed various means of logic which would ultimately apply reason to our yes or no philosophy. Yes or no looks at the big picture and comes to a simple conclusion, usually based off of personal perspective rather than in relation to a mass. This natural thinking process makes issues that are not similarly experienced difficult to assist. i.e. poverty.
Since humans are naturally selfish I feel as though correctly labeling poor persons in America as poverty stricken would be very difficult. For the fact being, you could have nothing and still be selfish. A large step in the consideration to end poverty would be to idenitify rightly those who are living in poverty. With such a huge reform on the table there must be precautions in establishing the poor and a wise attempt in eliminating 'exceptions' in society.
It depends, what exactly means eliminated? I think that poverty will still exist because I believe that there will always be a difference of wealth between people, I know it's sad. However, I believe that we can decrease poverty by the help.
A recurring argument that I've seen in the previous posts is the idea that poverty cannot be eliminated because some people will always have more money than other people. I agree that there will always be class divisions, but that doesn't mean we can't end poverty. I think of poverty as going hungry, not having a roof over your head, going into massive debt because you can't pay the bills, that sort of thing. When I say poverty can be eliminated, I mean that everyone can have a decent standard of living. We don't all have to be millionaires and we don't all have to make exactly the same amount of money to eliminate poverty as it stands today.
@CoachB I ,personally, would tax the wealthy. I mean why not? What do *they* have to lose? If they want to live in America and actually be apart of this country. Why not help the people this country? I mean if they don't want to help out, they can afford to live somewhere else LOL. Rich people can spend all this money in charities in Africa and other poor countries. That's great, but what about here? Though I guess, I can't talk because I'm not that rich and wouldn't know their side of the story.
Socialism is not the solution either. Pure socialism cannot exist because it idealizes the individual; it needs a total lack of greed to exist. That is impossible.
It depends, what exactly means eliminated? I think that poverty will still exist because I believe that there will always be a difference of wealth between people, I know it's sad. However, I believe that we can decrease poverty by the help.
If we instituted a series of incentives for companies to do business within the United States, I think we would see a dramatic increase in the amount of jobs created in America and we would see our unemployment rates drop to a more understandable rate. In addition, creating a living wage is something that is necessary and is something that I believe (when coupled with the increase of American jobs created by the new government incentives that I'd like to see) would result in many people that are currently poor or unemployed not only having jobs but being paid fairly so that they can provide for themselves and their families. This wouldn't end poverty, but it would certainly be a step in the right direction.
instead of trying to put a band-aid of the issues that cause poverty we need to put some neosporin on the boo-boo and heal it the correct way. by lowering the education qualifications for jobs so jobs can be more accessible for the lower class.
Lets face reality, Honestly poverety isnt going any where fast with a slow reacting economy such as ours,
I don't think america would be the same without poverty, but if we could work it out I'd be willing to deal
@ araña discoteca: I do not think that America would be the same without poverty. People would honestly not know how to act with everyone being on the same palying level, especially the wealthy.
America would never be the same without poverty.I dont know whether or not it would be a good or bad change but i do think that if there wasnt such a thing as poverty and everybody could at least pay for their families well being along with their own, there would be less debate about who has more of a chance to do something rather than someone else. But its always going to exist in some way since people never think they have the equal chance to do something as everyone else does.Poverty could not exist every again but still be "there"
I agree with Anna in that part of educing poverty has to do with how we define poverty. If there was a socialist government and everybody had basically the same amount of money would people still find a way to say that they are poor, just in comparison to their neighbor?
Precipitation, I disagree. I believe that we will always instinctively find things to worry about. The poor face starvation and the middle class face depression.
@percipitation i agree with you 100%. Like it or not America is the place it is because of the competitive drive to obtain a better life. No poverty, No America!! but i still believe that things can be done to reduce it.
@B: I think you mean communism, not socialism. Anyway, your comment seems kind of hypocritical to me. It would take away personal drive...but personal drive can never be taken away? What? So then socialism/communism wouldn't really take anything away from us, right? So what's wrong with that?
Precipitation: Do you believe that our society would be worse off if we eliminated poverty?
I recently watched a movie in my law and justice class about prisons. In all prisons, it is required that all prisoners are given the opportunity to work. They are given easy jobs, such as chopping wood, building walls out of bricks, etc. and are payed as much as 40 cents an hour. Though this seems small to us in a middle class society, doesn't every cent count to those who literally have nothing? I believe a program like this would greatly benifit our society, it's small but it's something. If we can afford to pay our prisoners, can't we afford to have a program like this for our innocent, struggling citizens in need of a helping hand?
Poverety is something i was apart of when i was 5 till i was 13, its not a pleasant situation to be apart of. staying somwhere where your momz said yu gotta be in the house by 7 because of what happens after that time. i am jus saying i dont wish that lifestyle upon anyone beacuse ive been in those shoes.
The question is: How do we go about redistributing the wealth in America where the poor can eat and have shelter and basic living needs, but the wealthy do not feel like their achievement means nothing and they have been stolen from to benefit the poor? I like the idea for the benefits given to businesses who have their jobs within America and do not outsource as many jobs.
Okay I think the majority is saying that poverty can't be eliminated or that America would be America without poverty. So many we can eliminate a certain kind of poverty. So like the only people left in poverty is the people who brought it on themselves. Harsh, but we all know those type of people that spend money for no reason O.O
I agree that social class works to provide hope and drive, but I also believe that if in some ideal world we eliminated poverty we would find hope and drive elsewhere.
@kelly ripa what do the upper class face is everyone face something?
I personally believe that poverty can never be elimnated fully but I do however believe that it can be greatly reduced in American society. I don't think it will ever be elminated for multiple reasons. One being the fact that people in poverty think that there is no way out of that lifestyle. Two because government programs, as helpful as they can be, also give help to the wrong people.. ones cheating the system. The money that can be used for those is being wasted instead of giving it to the ones who need it a great deal more. A third reason I don't think it will ever be elimnated, at least not any time soon, is because our national debt is so large. Not only is our debt so enormous but on top of that, we are trying to help other countries with their crisis' instead of helping our own first. In order to fix that and reduce the national debt is through the legalization of marijuana. This legalization, in one year, would income almost 2.5 billion dollars in taxes alone, not only that but it would save the federal government 7.7 billion dollars from trying to prevent the prohibition of the drug. I also think that if there are more opportunities and chances for the poor. People who have money and have connections are lucky. Many would say that it would be as if the poor wouldn't be earning it; American's justification of inequality. This justification isn't fair because people in poverty do not have the chances someone else may which makes it harder and might even deminish any chance of trying to get out.
Social Security, medicare are there to help.
poverty in need in capitalist economy.
but can we do more to help out or do more?
I agree with Irene. People will always want to strive to have more. And even if everybody was happy and decided "I'm rich. I'm just going to relax and spend my wealth" I don't see how that makes America not America. Being rich and being able to relax is the American dream.
Chershire Cat--You have some thoughtful and provocative questions that get to the heart of the dilemma concerning poverty and capitalism.
eiruba, i feel like that is almost just a slap in the face
XClassof2012: Harsh but how do we differentiate between who is poor because of their own doing and who is poor because crap happens? It's so easy to say "He brought it on himself," but I can say from personal experience you never really know unless you’re that person.
Unfortunately I don't think there is any way to make the wealthy feel like they have not been stolen from. Even the strongly Conservative Christians seem to forget their religious belief in helping the poor when it comes to taxes and wealth redistribution.
LADNAHPA, I feel like you totally missed the point of what I said. It's all the same.
More than one in five American children lives in poverty. we need to do more for them.
@ Casey I completely agree. if we were reward companies for not exporting but importing i think the results would be nothing but positive. Making homegrown businesses and companies that make things within the confinds of the United States would create more jobs and more money and would have few negative effects. Its like green energy though where we have the resources and tools to do it but we just don't for some reason. I think that if we have the resources and the man power(and with over 10% of the US unemployed I think we do) i do not see why we wouldn't try to become the homegrown, self reliant superpower we were in the 1800s
kelly ripa: how so?
Alot of people are talking about how bad the wealthy 1% is and how they are the problem, but ask yourself what would you do in their situation? no matter if they got lucky or worked really hard to get where they are. I wouldnt want anything to change either. i dont think we can blame them, if were blaming poverty on someone it needs to be focused on the government.
@Grand Prix No, i think its a good thing to eliminate poverty and theats a good goal to have. im just saying itll change the face of america whether thats good or bad.
In order to come to a practical conclusion I feel as though we must identify the source of our concern for poverty. Is this more about sympathy or societal structure?
Could we reduce taxes on the poor instead of increasing taxes on the wealthy?
Everything someone does is because of their circumstances. i don't believe that there are any people that are naturally "bad" and deserve to be poor. the question is where do we draw the line.
@ Grand Prix: definitely! You can't judge if it was someone's own fault unless you know exactly how they got into poverty and what they're doing to get out of it (or even why they're "not trying" to get out).
I think there's a problem with making these overarching solutions; some people get left out although they really deserve the help, and others will cheat the system to make money. It would be much more efficient to take everything on a case-by-case basis...but of course, there's no money for that! :(
@jasmine knows best
but if you lower the qualifications then you take away the motivation most students have. Let's be honest, how many of us would still be in school right now if we knew we could drop out and still get a decent paying job? We should be do something instead to try and give lower class or undereducation more motivation and drive to want to work hard and do well to move up. Rather than making the jobs easier to access, we should make a decent education easier to access instead.
i think that the government should figure out a way to monitor people's greed and keep it in check but also allow them to achieve their goals. I feel like greed and poverty are almost directly related.
kelly ripa:
no one "deserves" to be poor. no one deserves to get cancer, lose a job, or get in a car accident. but things happen, that's a part of life. it's what you do with the circumstances you're given that makes you who you are and gives you the motivation to change it. if you're poor then it's your responsibility, as well as the government, to help.
I think it is equally fair to reduce taxes on the poor AND increase the taxes on the wealthy...
I never said that any one "deserved" to be poor. In fact thats the exact opposite of my statement. My point is, we have to start somewhere. Whether it's 40 cents an hour or 10 dollars an hour, it's something more than nothing. It's a program that's already implanted into prisons (though mostly so prisoners can have self worth and something to do during the day). It may help society and maily people in poverty slowly get back on their feet. I agree that the government should help people in poverty, but i DONT believe that people who are capable of working should be babied by the governemnt.
@ Casey and B: Yep, I agree. I think we should be able to depend on ourselves for all we need. We need manufacturing just as much as we need white-collar jobs. There will always be people who just aren't meant to go to college and get white-collar jobs (I'm sure you know some of them in our school now), and we're just shipping their jobs overseas and telling them to go to college. (Plus we can make better-quality goods without the lead risks.)
hellen keller, if you have a miserable poor man that isnt doing anything about his situation, why do you think that is? I don't believe he's just a terrible person, There are circumstances beyond what youre talking about. But we also have to be practical. What i asked was where do we draw the line?
@Kelly Ripa:
im not arguing against you? im say that if you think poor people deal with things, and you gave an example.then you said middle class deal with depression? but you didnt give an example of what the upper class deal with.EVERYONE goes through something in life that is hard to swallow.its not just the poor, the middle, or the rich.just the circumstances and the things they go through, differ. I personally think saying that all of the middle class deals with depression is false.Some people are content with their lives minus a few minor things they have to go through.but thats everyone.
How do we actually, and affectively go about changing poverty? 'Cause we all know it will not go away over night. Also how do we get people motivated to do better after being down for so long? How do we give them the courage and make them trust that they will recover?
Eirbua, that wasn't directed at any specific person
I absolutely agree with Goldy Locks. If people had more access to education it would definitely be easier for them to get jobs. At the same time when would these people have the time to go to school? My mom works full time and my dad has to take care of all the kids and he's tired most of the time. When would either of them have the time to go get a college degree? And if everybody has a degree it loses its significance.
I agree with Goldy Locks in that we can't simply just reduce education qualifications. I don't know about you, but I don't want to board a plane where the pilot hasn't completed a degree in aviation. For certain careers, education is needed to create an efficient and effective worker. However, I do think education needs to become more accessible to people of lower income. Higher education in our country is extremely expensive. Unless that changes, the same type of people will miss out on a higher education and better jobs.
I'm not going to list every problem that everyone in the world faces, i understand they exist, it was a metaphor
1 in 6 americans live in poverty. by only providing food assistance is not enough to even reduce poverty by the slightest percentage.
@ Goldy Locks,
Who says we need a college education? If you want one, you should be able to get one, but we shouldn't be so focused on requiring everyone to go to college. In a lot of cases it's a waste of time and money.
Also, I don't agree to lowering education requirements for some jobs, but for a lot of jobs, they want way too much education. My dad is looking for a new job (computer systems analyst) and almost everything he found required a Masters degree or PhD. He only has a Bachelors degree but he's done that one job his whole career and he's really good at it. He shouldn't need to go back to college to get practically the exact same job that he has now.
Helen Keller,
I don't know whose shoes you're walking in but they seem like they light up and have velcro. It's the cliche naive points like that, that corrupt society. Life from the beginning has been about survival not expression. Having your parents to financially support you does not show much responsibility on your part, whether you have a personal job or not. So by your logic, you are no help to society or yourself.
But we also have to be practical. What i asked was where do we draw the line?
probably because he doesn't feel like much can be done.. which can in fact come from being turned down so many time. that is practical. things like that happen every day. for example about 3400 people are diagnosed with cancer every day. i think the line though, to answer your question, is there is none. i think people will always need help.
@Irene
I wasn't even just talking about college, though. Areas that have high level of poverty tend to reflect that through their schools. And even if they want a college education, the cost is way too high for anyone in povert to afford. And if you're from a bad high school in the first place, you aren't very likely to be able to get scholarships. And getting a loan will just put you in debt and possible poverty again in the future.
in 1980 the tax rate on the wealthy was 70%, and in 1988 the rate was 35%. however the government made more off of the wealthy in 88.
I'm walking in my shoes. For you to have the audacity to say that to me shows how ignorant you are. I can't help I cover things up well but you have no idea what you're talking about. My circumstances are probably completely different from what you think. Not everything the eye sees is the truth. So don't you dare try and belittle me. Especially because I actually have a job, pay for my phone, car insurance, gas or anything else I might need. Yeah, my parents help me out but to me that's what parents are supposed to do. Not everything is handed to me. I work my butt of to get what I want and succeed. My experiences have also allowed me to talk to people easier which probably helps too. Oh yeah, and I will be paying for my college. So who's no help for who now?
Post a Comment