1、How to Get the Poor off Our Conscience,Group Members: Jane Liu Emily Ni Lucia Liu Elsie Qian Sunny Mao Mandy Meng,Question:,Describe the five contemporary designs of getting the poor off our conscience. How does the author challenge each of these arguments?,The first design: (Para. 12) To take away

2、the responsibility to aid the poor from the government and to put an end to the social welfare policies since the New Deal.,The authors argument is: Most of the assistance to the poor has to be undertaken by the government, but the government is in essence incompetent and ineffective and will make a

3、 mess of the job. Therefore, the government should not be asked to aid the poor.,The second design: (Para. 1415) Any form of public help to the poor will hurt the poor themselves. Such help will destroy poor peoples motivation, make them lazy and break up their marriages. This is another typical arg

4、ument put forward today by the conservatives in the U.S. in the discussion of social welfare reform.,The author thinks: The accusations are groundless. He further points out that those who support the design have no way to prove that the damage of the aid to the poor is greater than the damage to th

5、em caused by a loss of public assistance.,The third design: (Para. 16) When you give public assistance to the poor, you take money away (through taxes) from the rich and give it ( in the form of public assistance) to the poor. The result is the rich become less willing to work hard and create wealth

6、 and the poor are encouraged to remain idle.,Authors argument: The author uses two rhetorical questions to counter the argument. He implies that it is not the case that most poor people would prefer welfare to paying job. As for corporate executives, they are working very hard, showing no sign of la

7、ck of incentive. To say they are being lazy because they are not paid enough is an insult to the business executives.,The fourth design: (Para. 1718) Transferring money from the rich to the poor through the government has bad effect on freedom. By freedom, the designers mean spending as much money a

8、s one sees fit and giving the government as little as possible.,Authors argument: The author is being ironical when he uses the word “transparent”. He means it is the most obvious that when these people talk about freedom they only have in mind the freedom of the rich.,The fifth design: (Para.19) Psychological denial is a psychic tendency that in various manifestations is common to us all.,Authors argument: We all have th