Comparing the past to the present, one of the things that have not changed in the economy is the people’s love for money. Lots of money. There have been many attempts to further increase the amount of money that an economy or an individual can gain. Whether this is through ideas like welfare state where the government supports its people by providing things such as financial support or individualistic ideas like pursuing your own self-interest. The source provided wants all of us to believe that by supporting the ideologies of collectivism through welfare state, it will only result with us depending on the government instead of striving for our own success. The statement from the source, “The welfare state arose out of a misguided desire to …show more content…
Collectivist ideology such as welfare state puts the whole state in an economic hardship because we must rely on one another to be able to stand up. However, in a society that promotes individualism economically, we are able to create individual reliance and basically, “each man for himself.” This promotes each person economic freedom and growth because a capitalistic society that rejects economic collectivism does not require everyone in society to “pitch in” and help those who are not economically stable. By relying on welfare state, you are also relying on the pocket of the people. This makes it harder for the state to achieve economic growth since the money is not circulating around the economy. It is being used by those who cannot support themselves economically. An example of this is the ainti-poverty programs in America. Instead of pulling people out of poverty, it is increasing the federal spending even more. America has spent nearly $20 trillion dollars in attempt to defeat the war on poverty. Since the government is spending so much money on this welfare, it is just giving many people a greater reason to stay on the program. According to the Senate Budget Committee, recipients are making $30/hr per household. Instead of lifting people out, welfare state gives them more reasons to stay and abuse the privilage. This does not …show more content…
We must work for it ourselves and strive for greatness by pursuing our own self interest. By relying on the state, our success will be directly proportional to theirs. Once their success crashes, so will ours. An example that greatly depicts this perspective is the “Grest Leap Forward” in China in 1958. This idea was meant to develop and expant China’s agriculture and industry. For this to work, China adapted a collectivist idea called “communes” where a group of people work as one and share responsibilities. They no longer worked for themselves but worked as a collective. The idea of a welfare state is similar to what the government was able to provide its people. Essential needs such as health care, schools, nurseries were all provided. Elderls were taken care of so that all those who could work were able to work. However, as great as it may sound, consequences were met. The government crashed and the people could no longer support themselves since they gave everything that they owned up. Over 40 million people died. Eventhough this example is extreme, it illustrates the idea that collectivism creates a domino affect in an economy. Once the wall in whcih everyone is leaning on, falls down, everyone falls with
When speaking about Welfare we try to avoid it, turning welfare into an unacceptable word. In the Article “One Nation On Welfare. Living Your Life On The Dole” by Michael Grunwald, his point is to not just only show but prove to the readers that the word Welfare is not unacceptable or to avoid it but embrace it and take advantage of it. After reading this essay Americans will see the true way of effectively understanding the word welfare, by absorbing his personal experiences, Facts and Statistics, and the repetition Grunwald conveys.
Source one demonstrates and embraces the perspective of a collectivist. The speaker of the source, Chief Seattle, a prominent leader of the Native American tribes, represents his collective point of view of how each and every one of us are connected illustrating the “web of life”. His statement indicates his primary focus of how humans are creatures that needs to be dependent on others in order to survive. This view is placed on the left side on the political spectrum with the assumptions that all people are created equal where they value the goals of the group and the common good over the individual goals and rights. The way he stated that, “whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves”, strongly expressed a collective perspective and that the actions of an individual will not only affect himself/herself, but others as well. An example would be global warming, it will not only affect the countries that create pollutions, but everyone else is also involved and affected in this issue. People may call it the ‘butterfly effect’, where it is a scientific theory that describes how one s...
Money, money, money, money, money. People just care about the Benjamins, the moolah, the cash, the dough— but is it really essential to the human existence, or does society just accept the systematic oppression that comes with the dog-eat-dog nature of our economic system since it benefits the people on top? Monetary gains are all well and good; however, when does it commence to overtake our lives and when does it become our end goal? Instead of relying on money for food, shelter and our overall well-being, society views it as a tool that gives them power over other people, thus putting one’s economic status on a pedestal and making life a difficult competition. So yes, it is a dog-eat-dog world, but that’s not exactly a healthy perspective
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 today’s America, there are many people who would either be disgusted at the very mention of Welfare or be highly grateful for its existence. I believe that in order for welfare to be more effective in America, there must be reform. From the time of its inceptions in 1935, welfare has lent a helping hand to many in crisis (Constitution Rights Foundation). However, at present many programs within the system are being abused and the people who are in real need are being cheated out of assistance. The year after the creation of welfare unemployment was just about twenty percent (Unemployment Statistics). The need for basic resources to survive was unparallel. Today, many people face the same needs as many did during the 30s. Some issues with
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. There are three aspects of the American Welfare System that include social insurance programs, public assistance programs, and private or sector welfare.
The United States is sometimes described as a “reluctant welfare state.” I agree with this statement. Too often there are programs created by our government that, although may be lined with good intentions, end up failing in their main purpose. The government may, and hopefully does, seek to help its citizens. However, by applying unreasonable qualifying or maintenance criteria, or too many restrictions that bar people from even receiving aid at all, they end up with many more problems than solutions. Three examples of policies that do this are: Medicare, No Child Left Behind, and TANF, or the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
...ican welfare system has many flaws and I have identified major problems and possible solutions/policy recommendations. We can’t completely dismiss government assistance because we are a land of the equality of all and should be proud to have services that help the less fortunate. However, we must identify people who misuse and people who become too comfortable. We can’t continue to fall deeper into debt by supporting people who are not making an effort to support themselves. Nonetheless, we should help and assist those who are constantly trying to become educated, skilled, and experienced enough to become self-sufficient. I will close with a quote from the article about welfare helping a lady survive while she was studying. Currently she has a degree and a job as a manager. “I had clear goals,” “I wasn’t raised to sit at home expecting a check to come in the mail.”
The welfare state is a political system that has been an important ideology used by countries that provide social programs to its people. One may say that the rise of the welfare state is caused by capitalist needs that lead to failure and end up hurting the well-being of its people. When the country is faced with a critical situation that hurts the people and the economy, the government is required to provide welfare programs that attempt to cure the consequences of failures of the country. For example, the Great Depression was the result of an economic crisis that caused the decline of people’s well-being. The society was faced with tremendous financial problems and the only way to fixed it was by providing an efficient welfare system, such as the New Deal. Among the programs certain acts passed, like the Social Security Act, provided benefits and compensation to workers and
For years, the welfare topic has been debated, and throughout history, both failed and thriving solutions have been seen to this dispute. The settlement of the matter of welfare came from independently sponsored programs only to be replaced by government funded organizations and devices to benefit the less fortunate using taxes, aids, and deductions. With the only hope to overcome the grief stricken state our country has been in over the centuries of seeing the destruction of nations over the word that stirs up a variety of emotions, welfare, to be the decreased amount and time government support should be offered. Most importantly, as seen through the effects of social welfare, the need for change in responsibility, the root of the problem, is to be Christians and the community rather than the government’s, whose failed efforts left our country in declining “poverty” as identified by the means-tested programs and raised taxes.
“Altruism — the sacrifice of self to others. This tied man irrevocably to other men and left him nothing but a choice of pain: his own pain borne for the sake of others or pain inflicted upon others for the sake of self.” This dramatic definition of altruism, from The Soul of an Individualist by Ayn Rand, provides a backdrop for similar ideologies. Along the same philosophical vein, one can examine the principles of collectivism, a way of life that puts priority on a group instead of a single member. Individualism, on the other hand, is the complete rejection of these two ideas and a way of thinking that stresses living on one’s own terms instead of being dictated to by a group. As shown
If one looks at liberty and individual freedom, it is evident that command economies tend to oppress their citizens. Therefore, socialism, which allows for basic needs to be met and personal freedoms to be upheld, is the best economic system for all of a country’s citizens. Market economies, as a whole, inherently and inevitably lead to poverty and a large class disparity. In a capitalist society, the ones who supply labor, the ones who work the hardest, are the ones who are paid the least. The owners, who are already rich, receive most of the profit and accumulate large masses of wealth.
Our lives are greatly affected by our culture, ecological environment, political environment and our economic structure. The overarching method of organizing a complex modern society relies heavily on the founding economic theories regarding method of production, method of organization, and the distribution of wealth among the members of. This paper, specifically deals with the views and theoretical backgrounds of two dominant theories of the past century, Keynesianism and Neo-liberalism. Our social economic order is product of the two theories and has evolved through many stages to come to where it is today. The two ideologies rely on different foundations for their economic outcomes but both encourage capitalism and claim it to be the superior form of economic organization. Within the last quarter of the 20th century, neo-liberalism has become the dominant ideology driving political and economic decisions of most developed nations. This dominant ideology creates disparities in wealth and creates inequality through the promotion of competitive markets free from regulation. Neo-liberal’s ability to reduce national government’s size limits the powers and capabilities of elected representatives and allows corporations to become much larger and exert far greater force on national and provincial governments to act in their favour. Hence, it is extremely important at this time to learn about the underlying power relations in our economy and how the two ideologies compare on important aspects of political economy. In comparing the two theories with respect to managing the level of unemployment, funding the welfare sates, and pursuing national or international objectives, I will argue that Keynesianism provides far greater stability, equ...
...hose that need them it is impossible. If the government is going to provide things it needs money to do so, and where does that money come from, taxes. Therefore the medication, housing, food and other benefits allotted to those on the welfare system are paid for by masses who actually do work and make something of themselves. Those receiving those benefits either don’t see or don’t care about the cost it puts on the rest of society, and fall into the hole of letting life come to you on the silver platter at the cost of someone else. Hard work is something considered antique, a thing of our grandparents with too many willing to forsake it for a life that isn’t of the highest quality but is of the lowest effort. The rise of the welfare state spells the end of America as we know it, the end of the “land of opportunity” and the beginning of the land of poverty.