This reading is discussing the impact of conservatism on the social class system. The time period begins in the 1980s and onward. One quote that stuck out to me was by Charles Murray. He said, "We tried to provide more for the poor and produced more poor instead. We tried to remove the barriers to escape from poverty, and inadvertently built a trap". Murray criticized liberal welfare programs and said they "demoralized"urban poor. Murray became the most influential commentator for poverty. He was influential during the LA riots in the early 1990s. He advocated for the diminishing of aid to inner-city communities.
In general, whites find it easy to blame those of lower social class. As in our class activity, people in the upper class often blame those on welfare, EBT, disability, and other government programs. Many upper class people do not think they deserve to live in the same areas as those on these programs. On the other hand, many people on these programs often feel so comfortable with their accommodations that they do not work harder to get out of government assistance. This causes tension between the two social groups.
Do these welfare programs demoralize the urban poor as Murray suggested? Demoralize is defined as to "Cause someone to lose confidence or hope". In a sense, those on the programs that do not strive to better themselves are in fact losing spirit and confidence. It can be embarrassing to those on the program, although there is nothing to be ashamed of. As long as the person tries each day to better their situation, they should feel no shame and should not feel like they are being demoralized.
-Danielle Shapiro
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI believe that you are right, “there is no shame in poverty,” there should be no embarrassment in asking for help to improve one’s way of life and conditions.
ReplyDeleteI believe Murray’s wants to be academically and politically correct by using general facts from welfare programs. Murray does not give any indications of how many people were on these programs because of bad decision that were made by the government officials and their representatives; some in local, some in state, and in the federal level. To be able to hold on their positions, it is important for the individuals that are part of the governing work force, to show that they are helping their constituents, voters, citizens, and residents that they are doing their jobs to their fullest. They control what kinds of jobs are needed for their state, and how much revenue they need for the state to grow and advance. In addition, they have to show that they have programs that are created to keep people out of homelessness.
Murray looks in to facts, and does not give any indication to what causes the poverty. As the old saying goes, "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem", and I believe that Murray is part of the problem. It is easy to use facts for your advantage and makes yourself publicly known, it is hard to live and try to help and resolve problems that take long and hard work.
The welfare program was not made to demoralize the urban poor as Murray suggested. It was created to be a stepping-stone for people that lost their jobs because of layoffs, major health problems, disabilities, and issues such as refuges from war-torn nations that come legally to U.S.A. and have to start from zero.
There is no doubt that some individuals will use these opportunities to live a carefree life, by abusing the welfare program to their advantages. They work and get cash instead of paychecks and do not pay tax on their incomes. They buy cars and apartments under their family members names who reside elsewhere, so no one would be able to track their status records.
Since I am among individuals who have immigrated and become naturalized citizens, I come across some individuals that used the welfare program, and worked their way out of the program because they did not want to be marginalized, and downgraded in society. They strived for, and looked for a better future than living their entire life on handouts, and reporting every month to Social Services what they did in last month.
What we see on statistics, does not justify the reality. According to the United States Census Bureau, State & County Quick Facts, 14.4% of people in California are below poverty level, 2007-2011.
There should be no shame in poverty but I believe that many people on welfare have naturalized it. I believe that the majority of them have grown accustomed to having things handed to them without working for them and they do not want to go out and search for jobs because they know that the government is footing their bills. I'm not saying that some don't need it, but I have seen instances where there is a women having an iPhone 5 with a Michael koors watch using ebt and food stamps. I personally do not think that it's fair.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree with what Murray said. Trying to help the poor has created more poverty. And Artin, I see what you are saying. I also know people who have been able to get out of welfare because they wanted to and because they did not want to have to rely on that for the rest of their lives.
ReplyDelete