22SP_SO205A-Sociology of the Family

In the book it discusses the different ways to define poverty, and how its definition can impact policy responses and public resources provided to those below the poverty line.

For example, the book explains how the definition of poverty can either be absolute or relative. Absolute is the example Michael provided in his post about the $1.25 a day, basically meaning that people are not able to meet the basic requirements for their well-being. Relative poverty is what most sociological research is focused on. The book defines relative poverty as "Understanding that poverty is about not having enough to meet what are socially determined standards of living" (Wiley 134)

So, to answer your question about how the government would combat this, I think I would depend on which definition they were going off of. The book explains one good way to determine poverty is, "To measure material goods and resources available to households which can lead to polices directed at providing more public resources." (Wiley 134) I like this approach because it focuses on what policies can be created to help people below the poverty line.

I think with the cost of living becoming higher and higher especially in the US more and more people are falling below the poverty line but often get overlooked because they may seem "put together". I am honestly unsure what could lower the poverty rate in the US, but I do think an emphasis should be placed on helping children living in poverty because of how it can affect their health and development both mentally and physically.

How we measure the impoverished in America is fundamentally wrong and outdated. For one, the ways which we measure poverty are not up to date. Long ago, families used to spend most of their income on food every month. What is it now? you guessed it, housing! Our poverty measurements are based off of a break-down that does not exist anymore. Wages are not increasing with cost of living and inflation. If it was, minimum wage would be over $24 today. Shoot. We praise Costco for an $16 minimum wage. Give me a break! AOC said it best "In a developed nation, no one should be too poor to live". I firmly believe this. $1.25 a day is not even enough to buy a side of fries from McDonalds, this is not the 1930's. In my opinion, someone is in poverty if they do not have disposable income at the end of every month for emergencies, or to invest. If someone cannot afford food, water, HEALTH INSURANCE, or shelter, they are living in poverty in my book. If ANY basic need cannot be monetarily met: poverty.

Trickle down economics is bull shit. If you want to fix poverty, start from the middle out, not the top. Make the top 1% pay their fair share. The most prosperous economic time in our nation was when the top 1% were taxed 99% under JFK! Even with hight taxation, the top 1% can live lifetimes and never work another day. The government could also stop being greedy and completely end world hunger. yep. only 3% of our military budget could completely end world hunger. but THANK GOD we have million dollar planes in hangers that will never even see the light of day. Really worth Americans going hungry (sarcasm).

The bottom line is, we are sold a lie that we do not have the money to end poverty in our government. Then, once that is debunked, people will say that if poverty was demolished, no one would work because there are not incentives. These are both lies. In many surveys, most Americans said they would work even in a society to which there was no monetary reward. No one should go hungry, homeless, or be denied medical attention because they lack money. No matter what decisions you think they did or did not make to get there. If there will not be any shift of funds to help end poverty, I would cut all in-kind transfers (food-stamps, bus vouchers, etc,) and just give those in poverty cash. There is a stigma that if you give poor people cash they will go spend it on irresponsible things that got them to that point. Research suggests that this is bull shit. Those in poverty spend their cash in much more meaningful ways than they can with food stamps or vouchers.

Poverty is not having enough money to meet basic needs including food, clothing, and shelter. However, it is also more than just not having enough money. In an article posted by The World Bank Organization, they describe poverty as, “Poverty is hunger. Poverty is lack of shelter. Poverty is being sick and not being able to see a doctor. Poverty is not having access to school and not knowing how to read. Poverty is not having a job, is fear for the future, living one day at a time."
I do not think there is a certain amount people can make to "live in poverty." As Gracie previously stated, today a $1.25 isn't even enough to buy a side at a fast food place.
I also think yes, the government should assist people under certain circumstances, if they meet certain qualifications. For example, if they are working and showing effort to provide, and should also pass drug test.
I think we can lower poverty in the United States by bringing our jobs back home to America and not being so dependent on other countries. And I think that most of the other countries in the world that have high poverty, have a lot of corruption in them, and that corruption would have to be addressed correctly in order to help the poverty issues.

Poverty is one of those things that is difficult to define because people measure it in so many different ways. I don't think there is a certain dollar amount that would make someone be considered impoverished. My definition of poverty is when people are unable to meet their most basic needs (food, clean water, shelter, clothing) or are only able to meet their most basic needs and nothing else. For the health aspect, healthcare in the United States is a luxury that not everyone can afford. Even with insurance, copays can be extremely expensive. People in poverty cannot afford to pay out of pocket for a doctor's visit, much less a procedure and medicine on top of that. By making healthcare more affordable it could definitely help improve those statistics. Honestly, I think the government should just help all households/people in need. Enough taxes are paid and money is invested in the government to end probably every issue that the U.S. has regarding poverty. I think the government just does not care enough to put that funding in the right places.

I believe that people making $1.25 or below are definitely falling under the poverty line, but I do believe you can be making above that and still be poor. Being poor is not having enough money to provide the bare necessities for you and/or you family. I am unsure where I would place the amount to define poverty, because I think depending on your area and size of you family or dependents the number could be different.

I think the government could do a better job of combatting disease, infections, or nutritional deficiencies. The price of health care can be overwhelming especially if you already fall under the poverty line. This makes it extremely difficult for people falling under the poverty line to know/fight off diseases and infections. Nutritional deficiency’s are being combatted at schools, but most schools only offer one meal a day. Also long weekends and school breaks are other ways that the school solution doesn’t necessarily work. Having cheap and healthier food options in poor areas would be a good step.

Poverty is one of the things to see them. Even if they have money, the environment and situation around them make their poverty, such as cost of living, war, and climate not only the person who use $1.25 a day is in poverty. according to the book, it is hard to put the measure for it. For the government, it is also difficult to set the amount of budget to support them because they cannot find how many people are suffering from it. ut the problem from the poverty is getting bigger as we can to ignore about it like food disease and starvation, and people who lose the job and place they stay in. Undictionalized person is also one of the reason for the hardness to grab the number of them for the government. I think in a country that accepts many immigrants like the US, it is harder than an island country like Japan. To understand how many people and how they are suffering from is the first things for the governments to save them as soon as possible.