(I tried posting as a comment but the format gets all fucked up)
Rector, Robert, and Rachel Sheffield. “The War on Poverty After 50 Years.” The Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation, 15 Sep. 2014. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield’s article features the background of The War on Poverty, reveals statistics about living conditions of those living in poverty, and how single parent households are affected by poverty. I chose this article because it summarizes what The War was and is all about and it shares statistics that I’ve never read before. A graph featured reads that poverty has decreased since The War started. But LBJ meant for The War to cure poverty and not just temporarily decrease it.
This article is useful because it changes perspective on how we view and interpret poverty. For example, “96% of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry at any time during the year because they could not afford food”, “more than half of poor families with children have a video game system”, and “only 4% of poor persons become temporarily homeless”. I find it hard for this article to be more biased than others because Rector is a leading authority on poverty, welfare programs, and immigration in America for thirty years while Sheffield focuses on welfare, marriage and family, and education as a policy analyst. These authors should be trying to persuade why people in poverty need our help but instead they are making it seem like the poor life isn’t as bad as we think it to be. I find that interesting.
I feel like this is an analysis of the article. I think that it was cool to see your point of view on what the authors should be doing. I agree with you that it was very different to see where they were coming from when they began implying that the "poor lifestyle" is nothing to be afraid of and that it is not a big deal if you are poor. I feel like that term carries such a heavy weight but i also don't think i could make it if i was poor. I feel like with all of the assets that were explained in Dylan Matthews article “Everything You Need to Know About the War On Poverty,” it was easy to see that with he correct budgeting and saving, that there was policies put into place so that money was never an issue for Americans. For example, the Social Security Amendments, Food Stamp Acts, and The Economic
ReplyDeleteOpportunity Act were put into place by LBJ so that American's could pull their selves out of poverty and we would never all have to be stuck in a social class that we didn't want to be in for the rest of our lives. Another idea that I found interesting was that government programs increased poverty rates over the spread of time. I don't know I really think that poverty is brought upon someone by their own actions and different peoples circumstances.
hell yea, i was like "woah"... this dude literally just made me think "screw the poor" lol.
ReplyDeleteI think the way you interpreted the article was awesome! You're completely right about how the authors are making life in poverty seem so easy. People in those living situations need our help, not our criticism.
ReplyDeleteLBJ saw the help that those in poverty needed, and he took action. As Netalie says above my comment, The Social Security Amendments, Food Stamp Acts, and the Economic Opportunity Act were LBJ's efforts to cure poverty once and for all. Although he did not succeed in curing poverty as a whole, he decreased the rate of poverty over time.
Most of the time, people who are in a state of poverty did not "ask for it". I believe that they want help and out of their situations, but they don't know how to get back on their feet again. And that's where we as a country need to help those in need. As Dylan Matthews says in his article "Everything You Need to Know About The War on Poverty", we can help those in poverty by "We could expand existing working anti-poverty programs like Social Security, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the child tax credit and food stamps, or at least reverse recent cuts to the latter."