Throughout the last century, poverty has been a major issue in the society of the United States. The government has tried to help those who are living in poverty through numerous acts including Franklin D. Roosevelt's plans to get the country out of the depression or the welfare reform in 1996. Although the government has sought to ease poverty, mainly by creating government anti poverty programs, their methods are in fact ineffective. The Federal governments anti poverty programs as a majority is not working, the programs may very well work for a few people out of thousands, but that is unquestionably not enough. Furthermore the government's methods to eliminate poverty have caused people to become dependent on government anti poverty programs, such as welfare. Moreover it is even harder today to ascend in American society than it has ever been before. Literary Review
In regards to the issues of poverty and welfare there are many debates on how to eliminate poverty and increase the effectiveness of welfare. The methods debated include cutting benefits to able bodied workers, creating better jobs for those on welfare, and increasing wages. One side of this debate argues that we must eliminate the reliance on welfare by cutting out benefits for those who are able to work, also limiting healthcare benefits to children, and promoting private charities to help out the poor in their community (Government Support of Faith Based Initiatives Can Help Reduce Poverty). One of the main arguments for this perspective is that the United States has spent billions of dollars on welfare over the past twenty years or so, and it has done very little to help the poverty situation (www.publicagenda.org). Also private charities and communities can help the poor better than the government is capable of doing (Government Support of Faith Based Initiatives Can Help Reduce Poverty). Another argument for this approach is that welfare creates disincentive to work which, in turn, creates a person to become dependent on welfare, people with this view believe that those on welfare need to become more self- sufficient (www.publicagenda.org). The opposition to those who believe on cutting benefits to those who are able to work argues that welfare cuts will not save the United States a sufficient amount of money. Also they believe it is morally wrong to cut welfare because it will harm the children of the parents who are on welfare, furthermore removing support to unskilled workers would hurt them because they can't find decent jobs that will let them live out of poverty (www.publicagenda.org).
Among those who debate on this topic, some people argue that a solution can be found by devising a plan in which those who are on welfare can get better jobs. Those who believe that this would work argue that education and job training are the best and least expensive ways to help the poverty issue, also if there are not enough decent paying jobs there is no way people can come out of poverty (www.publicagenda.org). On the other hand those who oppose this argument believe that companies would be forced to lay off workers therefore creating more people in poverty (Increasing Minimum Wage is Counterproductive). Those who argue this also believe that the best way to solve this problem is for the people rely on motivation and hard work instead of welfare (A Lack of Individual Responsibility Causes Poverty). Also those who consider that finding a way for those who are on poverty to find better jobs would help curb poverty believe that the cause of poverty today is the shortage of jobs with livable wages (www.publicagenda.org). This argument states that one way to ease the poverty is by subsidizing day care, job training, and public transportation therefore allowing people to work. Also expanding job training programs so that people can learn skills for decent jobs will help with poverty. This side also debates that the government should...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document