- Position‹2 of 2
- The American working class should vote for Biden
- Argument‹3 of 3
Biden is proposing tax cuts and benefits for low income households
Biden will invest in poorer communities across the country. His plans include increasing spending to provide more affordable housing, helping to bridge the racial wealth gap and implementing a child tax benefit to support low income families.
The argument
Biden, if elected, is vowing to invest $640 billion over the next 10 years to ensure more Americans have affordable and safe housing. These funds will go towards investigating and ending discriminatory practices in the housing market, providing financial assistance to those looking to rent or buy, and increasing the supply of affordable housing. Estimates suggest that only around one in five households who meet the eligibility criteria receives the funding they need. The waiting lists to receive this aid are also long, reaching up to two years waiting period. Biden wants to ensure that all households have a safe and affordable option for housing and is expanding funding and eligibility accordingly. Biden has also pledged to reinstate the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule originally implemented by Obama. This rule requires communities to identify discriminatory or unfair practices and search for ways to end them. Trump’s administration recently terminated the AFFH on the grounds that it imposed needless regulation on communities. All these measures demonstrate that Biden is looking out for working class families. They are designed to improve the standard of living of low income households, end discrimination and promote fair housing policies.
Context
When we think of the term working class, what do we picture? To many, it evokes the picture of a white man working in the manufacturing sector. Yet this stereotype is misleading. Ethnic minorities and women make up a large proportion of working class people and most are employed in sectors other than manufacturing. As such, to represent their interests, the candidates need to identify all their concerns, not merely focus on one segment of the demographic.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Biden’s proposals are notably lacking in concrete policy proposals to permanently improve living standards for low income households. Many of his suggestions offer tax breaks or funding, but will not solve the long term effects of lacking affordable housing. Furthermore, many of the policies Biden plans to expand on are inefficient. As such, through bureaucracy and technicalities, a lot of funds may not reach the very people they are designed to help.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] The criterion is reasonable but narrow. Working-class voters weigh employment, wages, trade and immigration alongside transfers, and the premise restricts the standard to the single area in which the argument has material. [Rejecting P2] These are proposals requiring appropriation by Congress. A ten-year spending figure announced during a campaign is a statement of ambition, and the premise presents it as a described policy with known effects. [Rejecting P3] 'Directly benefit' assumes delivery, and the argument's own evidence cuts against it: only a fraction of eligible households currently receive housing assistance and waiting lists run for years, which points to an administrative bottleneck that additional funding alone may not clear. [Rejecting C] The case is also one-sided. A voting recommendation requires the alternative to be assessed, and the premises describe a single housing agenda — notable given that the title promises tax cuts and benefits, which the body never addresses.