|
|
Post by colegillespie on Jan 15, 2016 5:38:42 GMT
According to our textbook, the government has several times exerted authority over workers protesting against wage cuts. These workers were simply trying to defend themselves from poverty; however, the wealthy corporation owners, for the most part, refused to listen to their worker's complaints and used force to subdue them. Historically, the government has sided with these wealthy business men and quieted the workers. Do you think that workers should have power to combat against unfair treatment and low wages? Perhaps, this way, wealth would be distributed more equally and owners would not be allowed to be so greedy.
|
|
|
|
Post by anapark on Jan 15, 2016 5:47:45 GMT
We should not get rid of capitalism and start anew. America was founded with a capitalist incentive. However, while maintaining capitalism, I agree that the government does need to take part in solving this issue by raising taxes for the wealthy and creating reforms. Although it will not be easy for the government to do so, only the government can achieve these things. There are some things that only the government can do such as build national highways, provide the army, and others from the past that people have mentioned. Thus, the presence of the government is important in this process of alleviating poverty. Regarding the idea of simply giving money to the poor, I do not believe that they would put that money to a cause related to social reform. Although they might be given the opportunity to push for social reform, they will most likely use that money to cover their basic costs as that is their main priority. If we are to go about the issue of poverty in this way, what is needed is a way for the poor to ban together such as unions or their own political party to take collective action.
|
|
|
|
Post by brianli on Jan 15, 2016 20:22:47 GMT
I agree that government intervention would definitely help. But the steps to make that change are near impossible. The US government, already a "House divided", would not be able to pass a bill that would help alleviate the problem of poverty. Also, if the government took active steps to redistribute wealth, which would involve taking money away from wealthy people, many would surely rebel and call such acts unconstitutional. Ultimately, America needs a much bigger change to even begin to address poverty.
|
|
