The Poor And White Collar Class

Diana George wrote her article about non-profit organizations that try to convince the public about how there are people that really do need help. The purpose of her article is to convince people that they are hearing about people who the ones that are hearing about people who are the ones that are in need the most. Throughout the years in the media people in poverty are portrayed as either helpless victims or

Poverty on a macro-level seems to be an ongoing issue that continues to catch the attention of the richer countries, celebrities, charity organizations and other organizations. When we see the images of people living in unlivable conditions or a catastrophe hits, empathy and sympathy automatically kicks in. By having compassion, we as tax payers begin to send money to government donors. Some of the money will be disbursed to charity organizations and non-government organizations to provide aid to a nation. The money then should go into completing projects such as building

In “What Should a Billionaire Give?” Peter Singer makes some good points, however, I disagree that “the United States should contribute more than 36 percent of total global donations” (p.588). I agree that the wealthy or those in a position to give or assist the less fortunate should do so. I also believe that it should be their choice, not for the purposes of easing a guilty conscience or for public notoriety. If wealthy Americans were mandated to make contributions to relieve poverty, that should be optional and secondary to eliminating poverty in the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, nearly 565,000 people were homeless in the United States in 2015! I am not suggesting that we shouldn’t assist or contribute to global efforts to end poverty. We can contribute a lower percentage while investing a percentage in improving our economy. A wealthy nation will have a better impact on global efforts as opposed to a few wealthy individuals.

I am only thinking about myself and have been conditioned by society that the poor are beneath me. Just as hooks states in her book, “Society is telling them that poverty and nihilism are one and the same. If they cannot escape poverty, then they have no choice but to drown in the image of a life that is valueless” (hooks, 198), we have been taught by society to believe that poverty and nihilism are synonymous, but this is not true. Just as it takes a village to raise a child, I believe it takes a nation to resolve the issue of poverty. Our society needs to dig deep to reignite the morals that generations in the past taught us; sharing our resources, whether monetarily or charitably, through understanding, kindness and generosity to those less fortunate. We all have to be ready to share liberally and recognize the fact that there are those who struggle and deserve attention paid to their struggles. By helping others who have not, we keep our humanity intact and maintain our ability to empathize and show compassion towards others. Our culture is based on working together and helping our neighbors. We need to stop considering the poor invisible and instead take personal steps to keep our communities thriving via good will towards others, and lending a helping hand. The poor, just as our environment, are our responsibility, and the sharing of resources is crucial to bringing an individual from poverty to a more

We all heard countless solutions on how to solve world poverty. In Peter Singer’s article “Rich and Poor”, he discusses how he thinks this problem can be fixed. Singer claims that we all have a responsibility to support people who are in extreme need and are suffering from absolute poverty. Singer believes that poverty could be fixed if people give up their luxuries and give the money that they spent on unnecessary things to those who are destitute. In Singer 's mind, we all have a duty to give until we are no longer able to, or until the problem with the world poverty will be solved. Singer feels that it is necessary for people who are more wealthy to help those who are less fortunate by donating money right away to organizations that help fight poverty. In his opinion, by not helping those in need we are negatively responsible for their suffering and thus failing to live a moral life.

It is part of a healthy economy to have a small upper class, large middle class, and small lower class. It appears that the United States has a rapidly growing upper and lower class as people shift in and out of the middle class. Growth and movement are not bad things; however, when it becomes the government’s job to take complete care of those in the lower class for a prolonged period of time many issues arise. This fact goes to show that Americans need to step it up in their times of need so that tax payers and the government are not rewarding them with money for choosing to not work. Americans need to be working unless prevented by a health issue or otherwise stated, even if it is not a high salary job. A job of some sort should be required to receive government funding. Social Welfare recipients need to be directed to the church for financial aid, which should come through volunteering or working while receiving money to prevent individuals or families from taking more than truly

Richard Epstein later argues that if the country depends on the tax money of the wealthy, the wealthy will no longer exist. Richard Epstein’s argument will cause the taxing issue to fall on the middle class society, since there is only a small amount of wealthy people compared to the other classes. (262).

It is crazy to hear that the top richest people in this world have the same wealth as the poorest 3 billion people in this world. Even though rich countries are giving aid to poor countries, the huge gap difference between their wealth is due to large corporations form rich countries taking more money from poor countries, and this really explains a lot why poor country never have the chance to actually thrive. The thought that poor people should be able to come up from where they came from, which is a thought in many people's minds, especially those who have money, isn't all that simple.

“That persons with very low incomes may merit our sympathy is accepted, but sympathy leads to charity, rather than to the involuntary exploitation of the better off” (Narveson, 2004). Singer also says that people with a maintainable amount of wealth should give more than the X amount asked for, being that the predicament that some are not able to give or they can give less than the amount asked for. “Another, more serious reason for not giving to famine relief funds is that until there is effective population control, relieving famine merely postpone starvation” (Singer, 1972).

Why shouldn’t the wealthiest of Americans pay a higher percentage of their income for taxes? Certainly, things would get better if the wealthy paid more taxes. This philosophy is why welfare continues to exist today. People worry more about what is right for the other person without looking at themselves and taking responsibility. It is overrun with individuals who prefer to be on welfare than to work hard and contribute to society. This doesn’t mean welfare is not needed, but that it should not be a career. It offers no permanent solution, but only prevents a real solution from being realized. So why should the wealthy pay a higher percentage of taxes just because they can afford it? They work hard, so shouldn’t they be allowed to keep what they earn? This is not an example of scrooge-like behavior, but that hard work should have its rewards. The way to a better life should start with hard work and the desire for independence from government support. This would help people regain personal pride and become productive members of society, rather than a drain on its resources. It is not a crime for the wealthiest to earn high incomes. Shouldn’t hard work pay off? Why be penalized by paying a higher percentage of your income when you worked hard to make that income? Simpler solutions are required.

Everyone should have the right to live a stable life with all the necessary essentials, which include food, shelter, and medical care. Unfortunately, not every individual in our world has access to either one or all of these essential life elements. In Peter Singer’s essay, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”, Singer emphasizes the importance of giving back to those who are less fortunate. Singer in particular claims that those who are affluent individuals should feel morally obligated to donate to humanitarian causes.

According to Cinque McFarlane-Blake in his response to Rhome Balmeo’s inquiry about lessening the gap between the rich and the poor, the rich should try to create job opportunities for the poor. One of these opportunities could be urban farming and teaching the poor to grow food to sell to manufacturing companies or even small companies. I agree with Cinque McFarlane-Blake’s beliefs because in the United States, people who are poor, generally stay poor because of America’s social structure. With the help of the rich, or organizations that help people find jobs, the poor could learn skills that will, in turn, help them provide for their families and perhaps move up the social ladder. Several non-profit organizations such as homeless shelters,

An underclass does not exist in the United States. It is a function of conservative’s imaginations. The relevance of their creating of an underclass serves one large purpose and that is to be an emotional ploy to keep people politically occupied with small issues. This allows corporations to ensure that their competition will be busy fighting other battles while they continue to push policy and laws that will represent the interests of the country’s wealthiest and most powerful. A distraction is necessary because if people knew their rights and wages were threatened chaos would erupt upon large corporations. The facts are that there is no underclass, this myth is being used to politically divide the working class, for the purpose of weakening the advancement of working class interests.

We can help the poor by not turning away from them but by helping them

Now I recognise that almost all of the poor in the UK are still much