The prospect of the welfare state in America appears to be bleak and almost useless for many citizens living below the poverty line. Katz's description of the welfare state as a system that is “part public, part private, part mixed; incomplete and still not universal; defeating its own goals” while demonstrating how it came to be by outlining the history of the welfare state showing how it was produced in layers. The recent achievement that Katz writes about is the 1996 Clinton reform, in which benefits are limited to a two-year period and no one is allowed to collect them for more than five years in their life unless they are exempt. A person may only receive a hardship exemption where states are limited to granting a maximum of 20% of the eligible population. The rationale behind this drastic measure was to ensure that beneficiaries did not become dependent on the relief and to encourage them to seek any form of work as quickly as possible. State officials have touted this innovation as a strategy that would “save millions of children from poverty.” However, state officials predict the opposite, such as an increase in homelessness, a surge of low-wage workers into the job market and a decrease in purchasing power, which means less revenue from tax collection. The outcomes of this reform appear to be bleak for many Americans who reside below the poverty line. How does a rich country like America have such a weak welfare system? Drawing on Katz, I argue that the development of the semi-welfare state is the result of the state taking measures to ensure that people do not perceive care as a right and to avoid exploiting the shortcomings of capitalism. . paper middle……what little they have though; why is it up to the poor to suffer the consequences of these political choices? The persistence of extreme poverty and social ills testifies to a situation that requires a different approach. It is clear that capitalism and free market solutions cannot spread wealth as claimed. American governments have shown their reluctance to admit this discrepancy through the strategic creation of welfare policies and welfare reforms, as well as placing blame on citizens who possess little power to change the market decisions that govern and influence their lives. Works Cited Katz: ixKatz: 331Katz: 331Katz: 331Katz: xiKatz: 246Katz: 246Katz: 226,227Katz: 227Katz: 232Katz: 234Katz: 214Katz: 18Katz: xivKatz: 220Katz: 262Katz: 263Katz: 278Katz: 330Katz: 334