Sociologists explain poverty in a number of different ways. Some sociological explanations of poverty say that the problem is with the attitudes and values of the poor, while other explanations say that the problem is with society and the economy. One explanation of poverty is the culture of poverty, which refers to the attitudes and values that people in poverty have. Poor people think that they can't change their situation and will always be poor, so they tend not to aim high and don’t make sacrifices as they feel that they won't achieve much. They also live for the moment (present gratification).
This leads them to the working life where you work under capitalists and accept orders from superior employers. Therefore they prepare for your working life which benefits the capitalists, however Functionalists view is that the family teaches us the shared norms and values of the society, but not just the norms and values of the ruling class. Although Marxists further argue the family does this through punishments and rewards and being role models. Also Feminists believe that Marxists do not give more attention to the exploitation of women within the family for example, the family produces labour at low cost to the capitalist system as
For example, welfare benefits do it can help subsidy their family. By its very nature, the aspiration of this thesis toward Carol Stack and The Moynihan Report clashes with conflict with how black communities lived in poverty and how the only way to survive was through solidarity and exchange/ swapping within the African American communities (Stack) and how the black family structure was decrepit due to dysfunctional number of "matriarchal" family hierarchy or the diversity within and among black families. The lack of the economic mobility and social mobility of the people/workers are necessary for the upper and middle classes because it keeps the economy going. It helps a lot of policies like for example welfare. Welfare positions the current situations rather than the policies that would probably change the structure of our economics that forces our black urban poor people into the high poverty range.
The 'working poor,' as they are approvingly termed, are in fact the major philanthropists of our society. They neglect their own children so that the children of others will be cared for; they live in substandard housing so that other homes will be shiny and perfect; they endure deprivation so that inflation will be low and stock prices high. To be
The fourth theme could be about how greedy it is for someone to ignore other person's needs or use other people to enrich their life, just like Pelayo and Elisenda; they use the old man to make money. Last but not least, the central idea could be a moral lesson for everyone and especially for children as the subtitle indicates, “A Tale for Children.” The moral lesson is not to mistreat or disrespect the elders because no matter what happens, they are still human beings with dignity. The other moral lesson is that children should not disobey their parents because if they do, they will be changed into a spider. In regards to characterization, the author describes the protagonist, who is an old man, as a very patient person in general; however, the old man also has some rage in him when the
By what she is writing, she is not making excuses for the absent father, just the reasoning behind why he doesn’t or cannot pay. She is pointing out also that just because the father doesn’t pay child support that he is still in his children’s lives because he does truly care about them. analysis The author Rebecca Blank, is saying this in a manner of concern. She truly shows her feelings on this matter by the research that she has clearly
For example, members of black and ethnic minority groups are disproportionately represented in low wage or unemployment statistics, reflecting their low status and position in society. There are key values that underpin anti-discriminatory practice which help to identify ways in which social care practice can challenge discrimination. I will look at
I believe that while Singer develops his argument by claiming that while people in rich states can survive without luxuries; those in poorer ones where most are manufactured could not survive, as their economic base would fall apart. With some adjustment of his analogy to make it a more accurate representation of the global economy, Singer would find his argument overcoming its central inherent weakness. In my own opinion I believe, Singer’s view of our obligation to help relieve the suffering of people in distant nations are mostly right because, if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally, to do
It is a theology that advocates that good and righteous people are blessed with wealth and prosperity, while wickedness leads to poverty. The book of Proverbs has a negative attitude toward the poor; it blames the poor for their poverty. A negative view of the poor is apparent when the text states that “the poor are dislike even by their neighbors, but the rich have many friends”[1] (Proverbs 14:20). This same theme is reiterated in chapter 19: “Wealth brings many friends, but the poor are left friendless” (19:4). Expanded across two verses, it reads: “Many seek the favor of a generous, and everyone is a friend to a giver of gifts.
A standard of living merely is the evaluation of the wealth and employment status of person in a society. Though both are factors to determine quality of life, these are not its sole indicator. A person’s environment, physical and mental health, education, recreation, social well-being, freedom, human rights and happiness also are significant factors p.517 World Bank has defined quality of life in terms of its neo-liberal policies that are supposed to eradicate poverty on a global scale. It defines the term based on the fundamental needs of humans. Based on this, poverty is then defined as having low quality of life.