"The government should give money to everybody who does not have enough money for day-to-day expenses."Please argue for and against.

Expert Answers
pholland14 eNotes educator| Certified Educator

Today this is still a very sensitive question, as entitlement programs make up a large portion of the federal budget.  On one hand, people see these programs as a way to help the downtrodden and unfortunate.  On the other hand, people see these programs as encouraging people not to work and thus creating generational poverty—generation after generation living off the government dole and thinking that it is acceptable.  Here are the two arguments:

Government assistance often goes to people who work, but work in entry-level or manual labor jobs.  These are hardworking people who do jobs that society needs done.  Many of these people also have families to support and without a little help these people might become desperate enough to commit crimes.  From a strictly economic standpoint, people receiving government benefits, for example, food stamps, put a lot of money into the economy in terms of purchasing power, which puts people to work.  

On the other hand, there are those who argue that government entitlements are bad things.  They claim that the government tends to mismanage agencies, such as Medicare and housing projects.  These libertarians also see taxation for the purpose of giving someone else money an infringement on their freedom to make a living.  They also claim that government entitlements creates an entitled class of people who do not want to work or apply themselves toward a better job.  

While there are other arguments for and against entitlement programs, these are two that you can use.  

readerofbooks eNotes educator| Certified Educator

This is an incredibly difficult and sensitive topic. It is also very relevant in view of our economy that hover around a 10% unemployment rate with little signs of going down.

Here are some arguments in support of this position. First, if the government is not able to stimulate the economy and create jobs for its citizens, then they should provide the basic necessities of life. There is a responsibility of the state to provide for its citizens. Second, if the government does not take care of its citizens, there will be social unrest and this will be far worse. History teaches us at least this much. One only needs to look at what has happened in the last year in the Middle East.

Some people will disagree with the above two points. They may counter by saying that social welfare only produces people who are entitled and do not want to work. In other words, they may say that it does not incentivize people to look for a job. Second, they may say that to give handouts is not fair for the rest of the citizens who are working and paying their taxes to support a welfare system.

In the end, both sides have a point. What is needed is a compromise.

Access hundreds of thousands of answers with a free trial.

Start Free Trial
Ask a Question