Social Welfare, Human Dignity, And the Puzzle of What We Owe Each Other. Social Welfare, Human Dignity, And the Puzzle of What We Owe Each Other.

Social Welfare, Human Dignity, And the Puzzle of What We Owe Each Other‪.‬

Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 2003, Fall, 27, 1

    • £2.99
    • £2.99

Publisher Description

In a recent book about the American anti-poverty movement, Joel Schwartz argues that the moral improvement of the poor was a central goal of anti-poverty reformers in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Although moral reform was considered intrinsically valuable, it was also thought to be instrumental. The emphasis on the character and personal conduct of the poor during this period was directed primarily at "reduc[ing] ... dependence on either charity or government relief." (1) The vices these reformers decried--"indolence, intemperance, improvidence--were attacked because of their role in fostering or exacerbating dependence," and good behavior "was. largely synonymous with behavior furthering self-reliance." (2) The twin aims of reducing dependence and fostering self-reliance account for many features of the early anti-poverty movement in this country. Those goals shaped the moral outlook of reformers, informed their recommendations, and determined which efforts were endorsed to help the less fortunate. Anti-poverty policy has come a long way in the past century, in some ways returning full circle to its moralistic roots but in others departing from them never to return. There has been increased willingness recently, at least in some quarters, to decry "dependence" on the government in the form of reliance on cash entitlement programs or handouts. That willingness has found concrete expression in the reforms enacted in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act in 1996, which imposes strict time limits and work participation requirements on recipients of public aid. But a century of theory and politics has transformed the call for reduced dependence--at least in its public guise--into one that is less moralistic and more pragmatic. That transformation reflects a deep ambivalence about public moralism generally and moral prescription specifically. (3) It is also rooted in a growing conceptual uncertainty about the roles of dependence and self-reliance in a modern, market-driven society.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
2003
22 September
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
24
Pages
PUBLISHER
Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.
SIZE
276.2
KB

More Books Like This

Welfare State and Welfare Society Welfare State and Welfare Society
2018
Work and Welfare Work and Welfare
2009
Rugged Individualism and the Misunderstanding of American Inequality Rugged Individualism and the Misunderstanding of American Inequality
2020
Social Policy and Public Policy Social Policy and Public Policy
2017
APPS (THE ACTIVE-PASSIVE PERSONALITY SYNDROME) APPS (THE ACTIVE-PASSIVE PERSONALITY SYNDROME)
2018
The Minimum Wage The Moral and Economic Argument For A Living Minimum Wage In 15 Minutes or Less: Making The Argument For A Fair Minimum Wage The Minimum Wage The Moral and Economic Argument For A Living Minimum Wage In 15 Minutes or Less: Making The Argument For A Fair Minimum Wage
2018

More Books by Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy

Private Property Rights, Economic Freedom, And Professor Coase: A Critique of Friedman, Mccloskey, Medema, And Zorn (Ronald Coase, David Friedman, Deirdre Mccloskey, Steven Medema, David Zorn) Private Property Rights, Economic Freedom, And Professor Coase: A Critique of Friedman, Mccloskey, Medema, And Zorn (Ronald Coase, David Friedman, Deirdre Mccloskey, Steven Medema, David Zorn)
2003
Smith Versus Keynes: Economics and Political Economy in the Post-Crisis Era. Smith Versus Keynes: Economics and Political Economy in the Post-Crisis Era.
2010
Pope John Paul II and the Dignity of the Human Being. Pope John Paul II and the Dignity of the Human Being.
2003
The Rule of International Law (International Rule of Law) The Rule of International Law (International Rule of Law)
2006
Before Roe V. Wade: Judge Friendly's Draft Abortion Opinion. Before Roe V. Wade: Judge Friendly's Draft Abortion Opinion.
2006
Natural Law. Natural Law.
2008