Social Security Reform were made for the Economic Security of a nation or a country. The traditional sources of Economic Security includes assets, labor, families and charity but as time goes by, economic security develops into another level, thus, new sources were added and laws were made to support the Economic Security (DeWitt, n. pag. ). In 1601, England developed what was called “Poor Laws”. The development of these laws rooted in the realization of the government that they should take responsibility of the economic security of their country.
These laws as stated in their name were made to help the poor people while the taxes or taxation was used to support the fund needed in the relief activities. The government tries to distinguish between those who deserve the help and to those who doesn’t need it. They also provided alm houses so that there will be a place where the needy could stay (DeWitt, n. pag. ). When they start to colonize the new world, the colonists brought with them the ideas and the customs they had back in England. These poor laws were adapted but with much differences.
Although they also use the taxes for fund and strongly distinguish the beneficiaries, they did not establish public institutions which will organize the law and will choose who were deserving. There were no criterias and the decision on who is worthy of the help depends on the local town elders (DeWitt, n. pag. ). The idea of Economic Support and Social Security evolved over time and changes as new orders and reforms were given to either strengthen it or demoralize the idea of Social Security (DeWitt, n.
pag. ). In present, there is a debate regarding the Social Security and Reform is being raised to further make things easier. The current president of the United States of America is eyeing for a reform in a way that it will be more desirable and better for the rest of the Americans. He mentioned that the current Social Security is good for the retirees and those who would retire but will not be sufficient to the rest of the americans especially for the future generations (The Whit House, n.
pag. ). His argument is that if the Social Security will not be fixed as early as now, it would mean of higher taxes or even cuts in the Social Security benefits. His proposal for a reform is actualy a call to strengthen the Social Security of the next generation wherein there will be more benefits and that the beneficiaries will be satisfies as ever (The Whit House, n. pag. ). It was really a big question why the reform did not happen.
Although he was strongly campaigning it and thinks of the future of the children of America rather than the political partisans, the reform did not take any action. Even the advocates of Social Reform were not in favor of the proposal and asked the president to call it off because it was indeed reisky at the moment to pursue with such kind of legislation (Business Week, n. pag. ). Hence, the opposing teams and parties won and the reform did not happen.
The development of the Social Security was not favored by the people of America as influenced by the opposing parties. Multi-Party System in United States of America Multi-Party System is common in other countries but not in the United States of America. In the United States of America, there are only two opposing parties which runs every election but what we don’t know about this one is that these parties are not just a group but a government. A government in the sense that they have different ways of ruling the entire America, depending on who will win the election.
The propasal of Multi-party systems in America would definitely be a huge debate and a surprising change. Going back to history, the party sustem was already there but as the traditional number, tehre are only two opposing teams who runs for office and the people from each state will vote who among the candidates they will run the whole country. It is possible to ompose the multi-party system in America but it will stil depend upon the people who will wun and run the country.
What was really amazing in the parties was the rivalry going inside and not the competition or the actual election.
DeWitt, Larry. “Historical Background and Development of Social Security”. SSA Historian’s Office. 2003. http://www. ssa. gov/history/briefhistory3. html “Social Security: O. K. , Gang, Back To The Table”. Business Week. 2006. http://www. businessweek. com/magazine/content/06_02/b3966140. htm “Strengthening the Social Security for Future”. The White House. 2005. HYPERLINK “http://www. whitehouse. gov/infocus/social-