The public’s image of people living in poverty didn’t just change overnight. There were certain things that happened over the past several decades that evolved the “poor people” stigma over time. The presidents’ viewpoints were one strong contributing factor to the change. When Johnson gave his State of the Union Address in 1964 with such a strong mindset to overcome the issue of poverty, everyone seemed to agree with his idea. The public wanted poverty to decrease and for the government to step in to aid people that were already living in poverty and set up safety nets to protect people from slipping below the poverty line. Noel King, who is a reporter on wealth and poverty for a national broadcast radio program in Los Angeles called, “Marketplace” points out in his article, “American …show more content…
King does offer an explanation to this in his article saying, “Because of the stigma attached to poverty, elected officials throughout US history have seen risk in aligning themselves with the poor.” So the way the media portrays poverty and the way the public reacts to the portrayal, people of power (including the president) will not align themselves with the poor due to that image. In Max Rose and Frank R. Baumgartner’s article, “Framing the Poor: Media Coverage and U.S. Poverty Policy, 1960-2008.”, people can read about the research done on 5 different credited newspapers from across the country between the years of 1960 to 2007, and it shows that stories on poverty peaked in 1960 and declined from there. The highest popularity of poverty stories was during the time that Johnson declared a war on poverty and most of the nation was ready to do something about it. Noel King points out that since then, most presidents haven't shown initiative regarding poverty therefore public interest has declined with
His Vice President, Lyndon Johnson, was sworn in as the new President and carried an equal, if not higher motivation to fight for and followed the same anti-poverty agenda that Kennedy aspired. Like Kennedy, Johnson’s ambitions as President took him on the path of a more liberal position in domestic matters. At the end of his presidency, Johnson had pushed through many domestic policy bills. It is said that he even outdid Roosevelt’s “New Deal” from the 1930s. (Roark, p. 935) Johnson’s “Great Society” was his outline to reduce poverty, it eventually created laws that helped and supported Civil Rights, Medicare, Medicaid, desegregation in schools, and more.
Poor population is still in existence today, and we still retain some public assistance programs for the poor. While no strongly structured programs used back then still exist today, we have created newer and even better ones. (I.E. Food
Horatio Alger is described as “the classic American hero, a writer of mediocre fiction with a formula for commercial success.” (Dalton) He found success by writing fictional stories that seemed to inspire children living in poverty to rise above all that was holing them down through hard work and determination. What Alger did not write was that this is a very unlikely feat to be accomplished by just any poverty stricken child. In reality it takes more than just hard work and determination to enable financial security, you need money to start with.
In Smiley and West’s interview they heavily criticize both candidates for their deprioritization of poverty in their platforms and policies. They argue that poverty is a critical issue in any federal election because a largely impoverished population threatens America’s national security and democracy. The last time that the federal government put forth any large effort to fight poverty was President LBJ’s War on Poverty. Since that policy, no president has used their executive power to establish a commission entirely dedicated to eradicating poverty. Smiley and West believe that this is not because the government does not have the knowledge or capability to do so, but because it is not a political priority for those in
Poverty can be fixed with the help of everyone, but why should the rest of the population be forced to help the poor. President Johnson wants America to fight the war on poverty. With one of every fifth person in America in poverty real change needed to take place. There needed to be
Once the “War on Poverty” was launched, society started to break into havoc because of the sudden interest towards the impoverished. However the impoverished began to protest. The Poor People's Campaign (PPC) was created on December 4, 1967, by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), addressing the issues of unemployment, housing shortages for the poor, and the impact of poverty on the lives of millions of Americans (“Poor People’s Campaign”). President Johnson finally heard their concerns and created more legislations that would benefit everyone. Although most of the Americans who were apart of the higher class still envisioned the impoverished as invisible, some of the them (mainly women) had their perspective changed (Harrington
All human beings will have dignity and every worker has a job (Schultz,2014). President Johnson wanted to make America a place where no person would be in poverty, while we are the wealthiest nation in the world. In January 1964, a report from the Council of Economic Advisers estimated that 22 percent of the nation’s population lived in poverty. As a result of this report he persuaded Congress to pass the Economic Opportunity Act (EOA), which was designed to attack poverty.
Always has it been, and always shall it be, and it is for this exact reason that King sees wars “as an enemy of the poor” and he “attacks it as such.” From what King has told, a few years prior to Vietnam, the promise of a poverty program gave hope to myriads of Americans for the first time in a long time. However, everything changed when the Fire Nation, America, attacked Vietnam. King “watched this program broken and eviscerated, as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war. " King compares the poverty program to a toy because he feels that his government treats it as such; the poverty program is not being taken seriously enough.
In order for America to afford the tax cuts and increase in defense spending, Regan reduced spending on important welfare and social programs, which only increased poverty in America and widened the gap between the rich and the poor. An example of a welfare program which Reagan reduced support towards, was food-stamps. In 1983, Reagan cut down the outlay on food stamps from $11.8 million to $9.6 billion, and the cuts would continue to be about $2-3 billion yearly for the rest of his presidency (Danziger, n.d). Bill Moyers, a former press secretary of the White House said that the cuts in food stamps are “putting people into a 1981 version of the bread line (Hayward, 2010).”
In the article “How I Discovered the Truth about Poverty” Barbara Ehrenreich gives her view in poverty and explains why she think Michael Harington’s book “The Other American” gives a wrong view on poverty. She explained that Harrington believes that the poor thought and felt differently and what divides the poor was their different “culture of poverty.” Ehrenreich goes on to explain on how the book that became a best seller caused so many bad stereotypes on the poor that by the Reagan era poverty was seen as “bad attitudes” and “faulty lifestyles” and not by the lack of jobs or low paying jobs. And they also viewed the poor as “Dissolute, promiscuous, prone to addiction and crime, unable to “defer gratification,” or possibly even set an alarm clock.”
To this day there is a stigma in America that the poor just do not try hard enough, and sadly much of the poor are black because of racist policies from the
In a speech by Corretta Scott King he gives statistics on the matters of low income households. He states, “Despite repeated denials from the president himself, [Reagan] administration cuts have been targeted to families of moderate and low income. . . . Half of American families—those with incomes of less than $20,000 a year—have suffered 70 percent of President Reagan's budget cuts. . . . many Americans are no better off today than they were four years ago because Reagan's “unfair policies” have curtailed their freedom” (Scott King 1985).
The book The American Way of Poverty: How the Other Half Still Lives enhanced my understanding by reading on Abramsky explore poverty in the United States over a fifty year period. His detailed perspective on how poverty, social attitudes, and public policy have changed over the years. It was also helpful that Abramsky studied all over the United States and didn’t only research a few states. He looked at inner cities to rural areas, as well as, families suffering from intergenerational poverty. All in all, this is a good read if you are concerned about the current state of our
The economic situation was repaired but still many Americans were still struggling due to poverty. It 's sad for anyone to struggle with poverty in such a great Country that has so much opportunity. In 1964 when civil rights act was passed, it prohibits racial, sexual, or ethnic discrimination of people for employment. With LBJ as our president, he believed big changes could be made for Americans still struggling with poverty. "LBJ believed that poverty could be eradicated not just reduced"(50years).
Even though around $35 billion was put into the country from 2002-2009. Even the nuber one cause of death is poverty. There was a movie titled “The pursuit of Happyness” made in 2006 which explores the idea of extreme poverty in the states. The movie is about a man named Chris Gardner ( played by Will smith) and his son Christopher ( Played by Jaden Smith) who becomes extremely poor as well as homeless so he has to try to get back on top of things. Although, the movie never says why he is poor we can infer.