Ian Berg
Soc 205 Online
2. What do you think Gans main point is? What do you think of it?

Gan seemed to feel that the whole notion of the undeserving poor was a false stereotype created consciously or sub consciously by affluent or at least middle class white citizens. The poor are stereotyped as being lazy and jobless, dangerous criminals, Morales’s, permiscuis, economic threats as long term welfare recipients and a long list of other stereotypes. Gan stated that most affluent Americans see this as a direct result of the moral shortcomings of the poor. He on the other hand argues the behaviors that cause the stereo types are actually a result of poverty and the part of the poor population that behave in these ways is grossly exaggerated. He seems to think that affluent society likes having a poor population so that they can use them to scapegoat, and exploit. He also thinks that programs set up to help the poor actually cause them to become even more helpless and dependent. Personally at the start of the reading I found his views to be fresh and insightful. However once I had finished the article I felt that he had gone a little overboard with his theory. Yes poor are often unfairly stereotyped and yes they are sometimes used as a scapegoat, and exploited but some of these allegations do have some merit. In his writing Gan leaves no accountability for the idea of higher attainment, he just blames society for keeping the poor poor, when in fact through hard work higher attainment can still be achieved in this country. Probably Gans best point was in his conclusion when he said “Although people have the right to judge each other, that right does not extend to judging large numbers of peoples as a single group, with one common moral fault, or to stereotyping them without evidence about their behavior their values.”

3.Assuming that Gan is right, what must be done to eradicate poverty?

Gan seemed to think that the main thing that was in the way of the poor achieving higher attainment was the agencies that are set up to help them do this. These agencies are run like bureaucracies, they routinize the work, put staff needs in front of the clients and encourage stability and growth of the agency. Because if they do a good job and decrease the dependent poor population then they might be out of a job. So in order to eradicate poverty these agencies and programs must be overhauled and reshaped, their whole methods and core practices rethink., so that instead of supporting this idea of the undeserving poor they encourage and help them achieve.

5.How does Gans implicit portrayal of the poor, conflict with popular images of the poor? How, if at all, has his account changed your view of the poor?

I feel that Gan had some very good points in his argument, and some provided me with some food for thought. Overall his account hasn't’t changed my thoughts on the poor, but I did have many of the same ideas on the subject before reading this article. I have always thought that the ways that federal sustenance programs are set up is wrong and encourages the same undesirable behaviors. Just because someone is poor doesn't’t mean that they are without morals, or will deviate towards crime, drugs, or permiscus sex. Basically I liked how his article was aimed at pointing out and disproving stereotypes.