Government assistance, the Middle Class, and the Poor

The Welfare State and Its Impact on African-Americans

The essay includes a perspective on the situation of the American economy, the welfare state, and public assistance initiatives. Katznelson said that the welfare state had two foundations, one of which stigmatized communities while the other did not. Notably, the social insurance program, the first of the two government program categories, made up the majority of the welfare state. Despite the program's implementation, African-American children in America are more likely than their white peers to live in poverty. The number of families subscribed to the insurance programs reduced by day and racial discrimination in offering employment to Americans resulted in lack of many black Americans from benefiting from the initiative. Notably, many African-American in the working class had menial jobs and they could not secure formal employment. Therefore, failure to be in the official workforce, most of them were locked out from benefiting from the social welfare programs since many of their payments were off the books or in the form of cash. As a result, they were not eligible to enroll in the programs and they subsequently missed the accrued benefits.<\/p>

The Structure of Social Insurance Programs

The structure of the social insurance programs offered by the state required member contributions through the payroll taxes from both the employees and the employers, and thus many African-American were locked out. The second social welfare program was named the public assistance program, and it used to transfer money to the more deserving American citizens in the effort of assisting them to obtain decent standards of living and in the end become more self-sufficient. The program was structured to give childcare and education subsidies, utilities and energy subsidies, food assistance, medical and healthcare provisions, and cash assistance to the American people to provide them with a boost to carry on with a decent living. However, many of the members who subscribed to the program were the African-American, and they faced the consequences in their working environments which included disparity in levels of payments as compared to their white counterparts. The state and federal protections that were fostered by the various legislations to tame discrimination were not followed, and many blacks continued to suffer despite the efforts by the government to reduce poverty levels.<\/p>

The Notable Distinction in the Welfare State

The notable distinction in the welfare state remains relevant today in the way the government supports the programs that are purposed to helping the poor. However, the rates of poverty are still high, and the initial intentions of having the welfare programs to reduce the levels of want are still not met. The welfare state was provided in a way to cover the neediest in the society and to the broader extent, all the Americans. The aspect of citizenship was crucial in determining those that benefited from the welfare programs. Therefore, immigrants were not eligible to be enrolled and thus they ended up being left out. Most of the African-American citizens did not benefit from the programs since many of them were not highly educated to know the existence of the programs. The distinction in the welfare state matters since it demonstrates the difference in the standards of living between the blacks and the white. In America, the African-American community has lived to assert themselves in a culture that has always rejected their origin and existence. However, the welfare state has changed from the New Deal area in the sense that most of the Americans have benefited from the government funds but in a way, it has remained the same with a considerable number of the African-American community yet to benefit from the welfare state.<\/p>

The Stereotype of the Urban Poor

The urban poor is stereotyped to be dependent on public aid, and yet they are young men and women in the working class who can look for jobs to depend on themselves. The welfare state tasks the government to keep on providing healthcare and social security to the members of the public on the effort to avoid extreme poverty levels. However, most of the so-named poor citizens do little to change their circumstances since they overly depend on the funds provided by the federal government. Remarkably, the government safety net was created to keep Americans from abject poverty, but presently, the poorest of the households no longer receive a majority of the government benefits. The American middle class is still receiving federal aid despite their ability to support themselves. They can take care of their medication, schooling of their children, and help their lives at old age. As a result, most of the deserving Americans end up not receiving the most necessary financial aid in favor of the middle class. Therefore, the government needs to revisit the social welfare state and policy to ensure that, only the deserving Americans benefit from the funding. Outstandingly, in the recent past, the share of benefits flowing from the least affluent households has declined from fifty-four percent in 1979 to thirty-six percent in 2007.<\/p>

The Impact of the Safety Net on the Middle Class

The statistics indicate that those who benefit from the government safety net are citizens in the middle class that does not need the funding. The Gulbransons and other similar communities in the middle class complain of the aid they get from the government, and they feel that the government wastes money by giving it to the people who do not deserve. Also, they are quoted saying that they could be happier if the government could stop meddling in their lives. Therefore, the government benefits that accrue as a result of the safety net such as help to the needy, assistance in caring for the loved ones, especially in the old age, end up benefiting the worm class of people. The safety net should be expanded, but the policies governing the disbursement of funds should be reviewed to ensure that only the deserving benefit. The safety net is known to increase government spending which is unhealthy for the economy. However, poverty rates in America are high, and the gap between the rich and the poor is still high. The difference needs to be bridged and increasing the safety net would go a long way to help. The government should monitor the expenses of the funds it provides through the platform and carries out an assessment of the impact it has on the beneficiaries. Also, the authorities should ensure that they provide other support services and infrastructure that in the run help the less privileged in the society to access to opportunities in the country. Improved healthcare in the federal hospitals, subsidized education services and equitable distribution of income among the working class are some of the issues that can assist in helping the poor. Once given the opportunity, the young, poor generation has the capacity and the ability to rise from average levels to the middle class and even to the wealthy as they can use their skills to amass wealth.<\/p>

Government Spending and the Safety Net

Government programs that have no long-term positive effects on the beneficiaries should be cut short, and those that have potential benefits to the beneficiaries expanded. As a result, waste of government resources would be reduced considerably, and the value of government spending obtained. The government gets it finances through taxing the hard-earned income from the citizens. Therefore, government spending needs to be accounted for and should, in the end, transform the lives of the poor and in the end improve the status of the economy. Increasing taxes is not the most efficient way to keep up with the costs of the safety net. The government should find alternative measures to empower the poor who should equally participate in the effort to eradicate poverty and not leaving the whole ordeal to the state. The working class should not be overtaxed in the name of providing a better life to the poor. In the end, the repercussion of overtaxing will bounce back to the poor as a result of the increase in prices of goods and services in the nation in the effort of curbing overtaxing.<\/p>

Changes in American Lifestyle and the Safety Net

The proposed changes in having the poor taking a more proactive role in fighting poverty and not leaving the fight to the government would have changes in the American lifestyle. The poor urban people would seek to get out of their comfort zones and work hard to change their life for the better. The safety net should be channeled to benefit the neediest in the society and should be monitored to ensure that they use the funds to better their lives. Through creating an enabling environment to work by fighting negative ethnicity and discrimination, the poor urban community which is mostly composed of the African-American could get equal opportunities with their white counterparts to fight poverty. Every citizen of the United States should be given a fair chance to express him or herself irrespective of their gender, religion, or sexual orientation. Consequently, everybody would be on board to ensure that the American dream of opportunity and equality, liberty, rights, and democracy is realized. In the end, the safety net would come in handy to help the extreme cases of poverty that cannot be avoided for example as a result of a recession.<\/p>