My class is having a debate and I'm on the con side. CON: You feel the number of Americans living in poverty is too high. You are against tax cuts for the wealthy and do not see how it is used to help the poor. You support an increase in funding for assistance programs that may mean higher taxes or reducing spending in other ways. That is what con means according to our teacher. If anyone could help it would be greatly appreciated. I just need facts to support the con opinions.
2007-03-21 07:52:45 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
America has the highest rate of poverty of any developed nation (source CIA world fact book). Flow on effects of this are worse health statistics and worse levels of education than most other developed nations. THis reduces the productivity of the country's labour force. Thus poverty impacts business, not just the poor.
One of the justifications of tax cuts (both by Reagan in the 80s and Bush now) is that they drive further investment that creates jobs and helps money "trickle down" to the poor. The problem is it does not work. Growth in the 80s under Reagan and now under Bush have been lower than the growth under Clinton in the 90s. Poverty increased under both Bush and Reagan, while it decreased under Clinton. So not only was CLinton's growth higher, the benefits of it were more equally shared.
2007-03-21 11:04:26 · answer #1 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
-Too much money is given to transportation and not to poverty from taxes
-Too much money is given to war and not to poverty
-Few people in poverty are able to take or understand the social programs that are available, so that money is wasted.
2007-03-21 09:16:24 · answer #2 · answered by Santa Barbara 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋