In her article, “Sustainable Social Policy: Fighting Poverty Without Poverty Programs,” Theda Skocpol argues that universal programs that benefit all citizens address poverty more effectively than targeted ones. Skocpol argues from a theoretical basis, implying that the political success of assistance programs is of paramount importance. She posits that such programs are “politically sustainable,” because they almost exclusively target low-income families. The arbitrary measures used to determine who benefits and who doesn’t may lead social unrest. Skocpol provides a basic example; struggling families who fall short of becoming beneficiaries are angered by the fact that they must pay for someone else’s benefits. Consequently, those who are …show more content…
I couldn’t disagree more. I believe that targeted programs are beneficial, because they do what many other policies don’t; address the issue at it’s very core. Although, I do agree that stigma is a very real phenomenon associated with the consumption of benefits; I believe that it is rather irrelevant to the goals that such programs are trying to accomplish. Furthermore, I believe that targeted policies are actually more efficient, because the state allocates resources to those who need it most while cutting benefits to those that don’t. The second part of Skocpol’s argument is that the sustainability of a policy is more important than the outcome(s) it is trying to achieve. I believe that political support should not be the standard to which we draft policy. If history has taught anything, it is that social policies can better our society regardless of the support it receives. The best example of this can be seen with human rights legislation like the Civil Rights Act. Although, the Civil Rights Act would spell the end of the Democratic Party’s southern wing, Lyndon Johnson signed it in the pursuit of ending …show more content…
Universal programs tend to receive greater funding, because taxpayers are incentivized to do so in exchange for future benefits. However, Skocpol fails to entertain the idea that if states increase their revenues, they may be able to provide more services via targeted programs. Lane Kenworthy cites Denmark as an ideal example of a state that can redistribute effectively through targeting. Targeted programs like TANF, SNAP and CHIP are underfunded, but I argue that the US may not be doing its utmost unlike nations such as Denmark. Social welfare programs like TANF and CHIP, are usually funded by either the federal government, the state government or a mixture of both. The amount of money the government can spend on transfers depends on the size of the government’s budget which depends on its tax revenues. In Denmark the top tax rate is 60.4% and its tax revenue(s) is approximately 49% of its GDP. In the US, the top tax rate is 39.6% while its tax revenue(s) is only 25.4% of its GDP. As a result, Denmark can, proportionally, provide more services than the US, but combined with the fact it has a smaller welfare pool than the US, it’s evident where the US is
O?Beirne, Kate. ?The State of Welfare: An old and tricky question resurfaces.? National Review 54.2 (February 11, 2002): 1--2. Online. Information Access Expanded
Kenworthy, L. (1999). Do social-welfare policies reduce poverty? A cross-national assessment. Social Forces, 77(3), 1119-1139.
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.
Since poverty affects a wide array of people, poverty has evolved into a very complex issue. And even though the government has passed legislature to try to ameliorate the situation, many of these means-tested measures like food stamps, have only been able to help the surface of poverty and fails to rip out the long roots poverty has grown throughout history. Poverty’s deep effects are seen especially in minorities as they struggle much more to leave a current situation that has been created by historical process. Even though government assistance like food stamps do help alleviate some of poverty’s burden, these measures fail to recognize the reality that many of the impoverished minority have undervalued homes or no homes at all and even if they can rent, that rent can be high enough to take up more than fifty-percent of their paychecks. Overall, poverty in America is a vastly complicated issue rooted throughout history. And even though the government has attempted to pass legislature to help provide relief from poverty, America still has yet to provide measures that target the roots of poverty and until then, the government assistance it does provide will only be superficial and fail to provide long-term solutions to a complicated
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.
Fraser, D. (2003) 3rd Ed. The Evolution of the British Welfare State. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Stitt, S. (1994) Poverty and Poor Relief: Concepts and Reality.
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.
A single divorcee’ mother of two is working a minimum waged job that doesn’t pay life’s cost of survival. Not only does this mother have to take care of herself, she has children that need shelter, nourishment, and stability. In order for that to be possible, help is needed. Most people, majority is fathers, have too much pride to ask for help because of the image. Being on social welfare promotes the ego dropping image that one cannot provide for themselves or their family. But is image more important than the life itself? Children are dying of hunger or dehydration because their parents cannot afford decent meals or purified water. Children are dying from sickness because their parents cannot afford a home that protects them from the cold. Some of these parents are working forty hours a week or more for minimum wage and still cannot afford the necessities to live healthy. Some parents cannot find a job due to lack of qualification. The government has provided resources for people who are disadvantaged; however, there are still problems that need to be addressed. Social welfare isn’t a discouragement, it is a helping hand. There is no reason why lives should be shortened because of the inability to access governmental assistance. Social welfare benefits America as a whole because it serves as a crutch for the financially handicapped and provides motivation to work harder for a better lifestyle.
"Social Welfare Policymaking Chapter Summary." Government in America People, Politics, and Policy. Pearson Longman, n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014. .
The article “As American As Apple Pie” is about, poverty and welfare and how they are looked down upon and treated with suspicion or outright antagonism, and how many associate those in poverty with negative stereotypes often seen as deviant such as homeless, lazy, and criminals. Mark R. Rank points out how poverty across the world is a lot more normal than we think it might be. Some people are at greater risk than others, depending on age, race, gender, family structure, community of residence, education, work skills, and physical disabilities. This article provides the readers with data and analysis of American poverty and welfare over the course of the past 25 years. Rank also talks about how we have framed the poverty issue, and how we should frame it.
...th what little they have, however; why is it left to the poor to have to suffer the consequences of these political choices. The persistence of extreme poverty and social ills speak to a situation that bears for a different approach. It is clear that capitalism and free market solutions cannot spread wealth as advocated. American governments have shown their reluctance to admit this discrepancy through the strategic creations of welfare policies and welfare reform coupled with placing blame upon the citizens who possess little power to change market decisions that govern and effect their lives.
People are poor because there’s something lacking in them, and changing them is therefore the only effective remedy. From this he suggests doing away with public solutions such as affirmative action, welfare, and income support systems, including “AFDC, Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment insurance, and the rest. It would leave the working-aged person with no recourse whatsoever except the job market, family members, friends, and public or private locally funded services.” The result, he believes, would “make it possible to get as far as one can go on one’s merit.” With the 1996 welfare reform act, the United States took a giant step in Murray’s direction by reaffirming its long-standing cultural commitment to individualistic thinking and the mass of confusion around alternatives to
Project Proposal on Poverty Reduction "Poverty reduction through pro-active, participatory, income- generating involvement of Rural youth in goat rearing" 1. Name of the project: Income generation through goat rearing. 2. Implementing organisation: Lemon grass 3.
Poverty is a major problem in the United States today. Social, economical, political, and cultural factors all contribute to poverty. Education and economic development are two major issues that will help prevent poverty. The United States Census Bureau defines poverty as an "economic condition in which people lack sufficient income to obtain basic needs for food, housing, clothing, health services and education." In other words, poverty is powerlessness, a lack of representation and freedom. Poverty is an issue that the world faces everyday.
Social issues are problems in the society today that are described as wrong, widespread and changeable. A category of conditions that people believe need to be changed. Poverty is a serious social issue in the society today. According to Peilin (2012), poverty brings hardships to families and individuals as well as political thereby negatively affecting the social stability and social development and posing a severe threat to human security (p. 243). This paper focuses on poverty as a social issue in today’s society. First, it gives a succinct introduction of the social issue, and then describes how it fits into the field of sociology. It also evaluates the sociological theories and terminology that relate to the social issue. The section that follows evaluates what is known and unknown about the particular social issue. This is followed by a discussion regarding the value of sociological research into the issue determining the available or possible practical implications of the sociological inquiry. The information presented here is strongly supported by the concepts and theories derived from reliable sources.