Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

THBT it should be mandatory for countries to have an official poverty

line. (OPP)

1 Opposition Material:
st

Counter-policy:
status quo, where resources are allocated to people who need them through a basket of measures.
-number of dependents
-health (medical expenses)
-stability of job (part time jobs, commissions)
-[poverty line would miss everything out] most people in poverty are not captured in this statistics,
people might earn above the poverty line, but there are other unforeseen circumstances that the line
does not consider
+take a basket of measures into account:
-no one size fits all policy
Case Division:
1. real nature of poverty
2. Obstructs long term poverty alleviation

1 Substantive: Real nature of poverty


Poverty is a multi-faceted problem, cannot be captured by an arbitrary line.
st

Does not address the spectrum of problems embedded in poverty. (Insert direct breakdown + whack
of prop policy)
The federal poverty line has not been updated for almost 50 years. As a result, low-income Americans
who need social services but fall slightly above the current line are not factored into federal poverty
statistics, making it difficult to justify poverty alleviation programs to the voting public.
The only politician with jurisdiction to update the poverty line is the President.
Current guidelines set the poverty line at $22,050 for a family of four. This extraordinarily low figure
doesn't take into account the costs of healthcare, transportation, clothing, childcare, or even housing.
Instead, it relies solely on an antiquated food budget from 1964 to determine an average household's
cost of living, even though food costs make up a much smaller percentage of living expenses now
than they did in the 1960s.
need a multitude of measures to effectively target the problem.
an over simplified measure to gauge poverty leads to over complications. the flaws with poverty line
many people would fall through the cracks. poverty line does not take into account the expenditure
of the household eg medical expenses, no. of dependents, stability of jobs, unemployment protection,
etc. People that are marginally above the PL can still be in P because of medical costs / dependents.
PL does not address these ppl. PL restricts the no of ppl it addresses. leaves out other ppl in need.

2nd Substantive: Hinder long term poverty alleviation.


1st tier:

Low-income Americans who need social services but fall slightly above the current line are not
factored into federal poverty statistics, making it difficult to justify poverty alleviation programs to the
voting public.

A line will only cause government work towards meeting the targets
-a poverty line is an absolute point and when one is about it it means that when one is above the line
it means that they will not receive aid of any sort anymore.
-govt will always have a pressure to improve the poverty line why?
- less tax dollars spent on poor, make it seem like they are doing something to improve the poverty
situation
-govt will only work towards the target not bothering about the method to improve the situation (only
care about statistical improvement not on the ground improvement). 2 outcomes. 1) work to reduce
the poverty line less ppl fall under it not bothering about the other criterias of what defines poverty
like above and 2)push people above the poverty line temporary jobs/ reducing dependents. ST
measures that does not address the larger picture of unemployment trends.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen