Definitions of Poverty Essay Example

how poverty entails more than just measuring income levels.

The amount of gross income a family brings in can mean something very different across different demographics. The cost of living in one place can be dramatically higher than that of another place. Things like insurance, benefits, transportation, and family size are also things that should be taken into account. The simple measure of income ultimately tells us very little about a family’s current condition.

2. Shipler (2004) found that most available jobs had three common traits: They paid low wages, offered no benefits, and led nowhere (p. 40). What do you see as the solution to this dilemma?

There are many different routes we could approach as a solution, but many have already been tried and failed. Inflation and minimum wage standards are not increasing at the same speed. This is a hard obstacle to overcome because deflation would make our money’s purchasing power worth less. Benefits are crucial when it comes to medical costs, dental, etc., and I think this may have a more easily attainable solution to the dilemma. I think one way to overcome the issue with benefits is to implement some sort of law or regulation where a minimum amount of benefits must be offered (excluding self employed individuals).

Personally, my mom works for a hospital and the benefits she receives for our family outweigh her actual salary. Though many individuals are stuck in “dead end jobs” that may not be going anywhere, that is something left up to the individual person. Work is scarce in our economy today, and majority of people who are employed should feel lucky or potentially steer towards a different

career path.

3. Nine out of ten Americans believe the federal government has a responsibility to alleviate poverty. A strong majority believes that government should do more, not less, to help people move from welfare to work by providing skills needed to be self-sufficient. (Lake, Snell, Perry & Associates, January 2002). Do you think the "haves" (i.e. the rich) should be responsible for the "have-nots" or should it solely be the responsibility of the government? What do you think is the cut off point (if there is one at all), and does too much 'taking care of' change the ideals of American culture, or does it incorporate the very essence of what America stands for? It is a very fine line that we are struggling with. What are your thoughts?

I do not believe the “haves” should be responsible for the “have-nots”. Regardless, the “haves” will continue to contribute a large part of the responsibility through their taxes. I think it is important to transition the focus from putting more funding in welfare programs towards the skills themselves needed to be self-sufficient, rather than just providing for them. The need for education or skill training is a major problem for people in poverty. I would not feel right putting a “cap” on the amount of welfare allotted. I think by “taking care of” everyone changes the ideals of American culture for the worse. Yes, America is the land of equal opportunity but I think that can be taken too far if the opportunity is just handed to everyone.