Trade-off is a keyword when it comes to fighting poverty in United States and globally.
In the United States, programs such as welfare and food stamps definitely provide the basis of living to a certain standard, I don't think it can be regulated enough or at all. There are people always looking to take advantage of the situation and due to that, they ruin it for others.
-People easily sell food-stamps for cash to buy items for their vice. (Alcohol, drugs etc.)
-People easily abuse welfare programs such as adoption schemes, having more children, while using the state's money for their own pleasures.
Throughout this process, they do not realize they are hurting the children or the other people using the same programs for good. Due to the selfishness of these people, it creates an opposition towards federally funded programs using tax dollars to support their vices. This is the trade-off we have when it comes to fighting poverty.
In the NPR poverty survey, (http://www.npr.org/programs/specials/poll/poverty/poll.html), one of the questions asked was, "Would you be willing to pay more in taxes to pay for more of such government spending to help the poor?" and if so would I be willing to give $200 annually towards it. My answer was a firm NO on this. The reason I would not pay a single cent on this is because the government already has enough funds to cover the expenses, its just the matter of how the government is allocating these resources today. I will not elaborate on this as it will jump to another subject, but just use your imagination.
While I think there is a certain hope in these programs, the United States government does not do enough to regulate them.
Another example for a trade-off on a global scale is Canada. In Canada where health-care is socialized through public funding which enables low income families to affordable health-care, there are major downsides to it as well.
1) The waiting period to have a surgery is substantial. My aunt who lives in Ottawa, Canada had a surgery recently, but was on the wait list for almost 6 months. This is totally unacceptable when it comes to human health.
2) The doctors take huge pay cuts in their salary due to socialized health care. In a capitalistic society, you should get paid and rewarded on your merit, education and skills, but in Canada, you are getting punished for this. If a country wants to be Capitalistic, they cannot punish a deserving individual to reward a less deserving one.
As for my solution to eradicating poverty, I have none. I do think things can be improved in certain ways as I stated before. Honestly, poverty is a problem which I do not think about much. In my mind there are more serious issues at hand (not saying poverty is not a serious issue, but comparably its a less serious one in which the world stands today from my perspective).
You have made some very good points here. A trade-off definitely exists when it comes to the amount of good a government funded program does versus the amount of waste and corruption that exists in the program. Unfortunately greed is often a very strong motivator for unscrupulous people who are experts at "working the system" and live off of the misery of others, often times very well. My thoughts are that a safety net needs to exist in our society. We should be compelled to look after and provide for the basic needs of our fellow man. Most government agencies unfortunately do a horrible job at allocating the monies that they receive to ensure that they are not wasted.
ReplyDeleteI think that when we are not directly confronted with poverty, or any other problem for that matter, on a daily basis we tend to forget that they exist. I believe that many of the problems that we face in the world today have their roots in poverty.
"People easily abuse welfare programs such as adoption schemes, having more children, while using the state's money for their own pleasures"
ReplyDeleteOverall we share similar views on poverty and the current state of our failing welfare system, but I was wondering how you came to the above opinion? What adoption schemes would you be talking about do you maybe mean foster care system shemes? I have heard of several families that will take in foster children just to collect a check. Another point I have some questions about was you idea that people will continue to have children just to remain on welfare where does this fact come from? I have heard of people selling their food stamps to make money and people not getting full time jobs to continue to receive welfare benefits, but I have never seen or heard of people having multiple children this is interesting to me. Any fact based information would be greatly appreciated.
Danielle
I concur that there are several problems exacerbated by the current recession. But many poor are left behind in fat economic times. We need to find a way to ensure that more are lifted by robust economic circumstances. A closer analysis of why those are left behind many reveal more clues to why many stay in the cycle of poverty.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments.
ReplyDeleteDanielle, I am under the assumption that there are benefits in place for each children for families on welfare, therefore for an extra child, you get extra money. Although I could be totally wrong, but that is my impression as of yet. Also about the adoption schemes...I did mean the foster care scheme.
Like I stated, I have not done much research in topics like poverty, but I will research more and start citing sources as this blog evolves.
Similar to the other commenters, I agree on your views about the abuse of welfare programs. We all hear on the news about women having children just for the sake of getting a check in the mail. Regulations definitely need to be tightened so that the money can be given to deserving individuals.
ReplyDeletePS: I also saw your more recent post and the link on poverty. I found a similar article on the Washington Post. Comment back!