


Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
The history and philosophy of welfare systems in america, focusing on the debate between libertarian and egalitarian perspectives. The introduction of welfare programs, critiques of their effectiveness, and discussions on distributive justice and individual rights. Key topics include the replacement of afdc with tanf, the arguments for and against welfare, and the role of government in providing for the needs of its citizens.
Typology: Study notes
1 / 4
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Chapter Nine: Welfare and Social Justice 11-13- INTRO: Welfare is actually Aid to Families and Dependent Children (AFDC) Clinton set out to “end welfare as we know it.” He wanted, instead, to provide job training for welfare recipients and to set a two year limit on the time they could spend on welfare. If after two years there weren’t any new options, one would have to accept a community service from the government or be left on their own. In August of 1996, Clinton abolished the AFDC and replaced it with Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). TRANSFER PAYMENTS involves the transfer of wealth from one segment of the population to another through taxation and dispersal poverty level increased with TANF, not decreased DOES WELFARE WORK? In Another America “pockets of poverty” Losing Ground “argued anti-poverty programs actually encourage poverty” WHY HAVE WELFARE? DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE? Distributive Justice: how do we fairly allocate resources in America Entitlement Conception of Justice: o John Locke’s idea that we have natural rights of life liberty and property, but also a natural right to protect those three rights. o Robert Nozick: Welfare is beyond the rightful powers of the government. Because no one is forced to give money to charity, how do we get people to donate? “Taxation is legalized plunder.” Entitlement : having the right to own what he earned ARGUMENT: if we take away from people who have been successful, it disencourages them to do well anymore. o Rawls: Welfare capitalism COUNTER ARGUMENT: From Rawls, difference principle is defined as financial inequalities are acceptable if they benefit society as a whole. Million dollar example. Financial inequalities are natural in society. How do most rich people come about money? Inheritance, back stabbing (Bill Gates) and actual good work ethics Primary goods: We need to make sure everyone in society has access to primary good. A primary good is anything someone needs for a god life. Nutrition, Education, Health Care and Safe Housing EQUALITY, NEED, AND MERIT Equality: everyone should get an equal share o Communist, socialist
o Problems: some people may not deserve it, or someone may deserve more o Good Need o Who needs this money? o Some need it more than others o If you are born in poverty, you need it more than other people who have better living environments Merit o If you worked really hard for what you have, then you deserve to have it and keep it. LIBERTARIANISM By: John Hospers A) Definition of libertarianism: the doctrine that every person is the owner of his own life
Elitism : some are better than others (We talk about meritism. Ex: Some people are better at some things others and we want the best to do what they are good at. Libertarians are here.) Egalitarianism : everyone is equal (Ex: Everyone does the same job, no matter if they are good at it or not.) *Rawls is somewhere in between, and Neilsen is way below egalitarianism. CHOOSING A FUTURE By: Charles Murray (argues that we kill all welfare, free market system) The idea that welfare is taken away will take away comfort from free loaders but everyone else will search harder and try harder to be successful and won’t fall behind because there won’t be anything there to take care of you. He says let’s take away the net underneath the tight rope Groups effected by this The first category is really rich people, who are actually not affected by this at all. The second group is the middle class in which they may lose a little bit of change Third group is the (upper) lower class that will have to make arrangements to survive: work! They will be mad but this is good because these people would be forced to work and grow up. People will become more responsible. Ex: dead beat dads and welfare moms. The fourth group consists of the people who have no alternative. Ex: teenage mother, people who have been kicked out, handicapped. But there are charities for these types of people to take care of them. Communities will help their neighbors. But what happens when they don’t? The very last group consists of Emmetts and he gets to die. These people are a waste of space and should not be taken care of even by charities. They are not worth educating.