Poverty vs. Equality
There are many ways to view poverty and equality, and it’s easy for someone who never has suffer of hunger or lack of education to assume that the poor can improve by their own, but can they really? People with high income work hard to earn money, they spend who knows how many time studying and working, it would not be fair to take away what they clearly deserved. “What Is Poverty” by Jo Godwin Parker shows a very detailed view of poverty, meanwhile Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara in “The Poverty of Equality” describe what equality is and the issues it has. Both articles express their opinion about social safety nets, their completely different views of equality and the value of work.
Parker clearly says that the social safety nets, the help she gets is not even nearly enough to support her small family, she has 3 kids, one of which is a toddler –and people know how expensive those are- and the amount Parker gets is seventy eight dollars a month. Pretty sure no one can live with that little, but amazingly, they do. They have to. In contrast Moore and Ferrara state that if the taxes, which can help the poor, for the higher …show more content…
She compare her own children with the ones with parents that have a better lifestyle, not in a cruel way, but just stating the true to her reality. How her two boys will end up in jail or enslaved to alcohol, and her little girl, at best, would have a life like hers. Parker indirectly state how unfair is for her children to live that life just because they were born poor. On the contrary, “The Poverty of Equality” believe that it is not right to take away the chances one has, either because people were born with privileges or along their life. Moore and Peter use the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. to explain a world where everyone is equal. It is a funny way to describe the consequences of what a lot of people is asking for, equality all the
There are many ways to view poverty and equality, and it’s easy for someone who never has suffer of hunger or lack of education to assume that the poor can improve by their own, but can they really? People with high income work hard to earn money, they spend who knows how many time studying and working, it would not be fair to take away what they clearly deserved. “What Is Poverty” by Jo Godwin Parker shows a very detailed view of poverty, meanwhile Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara in “The Poverty of Equality” describe what equality is and the issues it has. Both articles express their opinion about social safety nets, their completely different views of equality and the value of work.
Parker clearly says that the social safety nets, the help she gets is not even nearly enough to support her small family, she has 3 kids, one of which is a toddler –and people know how expensive those are- and the amount Parker gets is seventy eight dollars a month. Pretty sure no one can live with that little, but amazingly, they do. They have to. In contrast Moore and Ferrara state that if the taxes, which can help the poor, for the higher …show more content…
She compare her own children with the ones with parents that have a better lifestyle, not in a cruel way, but just stating the true to her reality. How her two boys will end up in jail or enslaved to alcohol, and her little girl, at best, would have a life like hers. Parker indirectly state how unfair is for her children to live that life just because they were born poor. On the contrary, “The Poverty of Equality” believe that it is not right to take away the chances one has, either because people were born with privileges or along their life. Moore and Peter use the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. to explain a world where everyone is equal. It is a funny way to describe the consequences of what a lot of people is asking for, equality all the