Introduction
The essay compares the era of George Orwell United States today based on “Down and Out in Paris and London” in terms of poverty. Poverty in Orwell’s day and now shares many similarities, such as a significant class split between rich and poor, persons being treated inhumanely only because of their socio-economic standing, and ridiculously expensive living costs. These three concerns are why poverty exists now and was widespread during Orwell’s day.
George Orwell on Poverty
Poverty is a cycle in which individuals are separated from society, making them feel alone. When people are cut off from the community, they experience a cold of dread and exhaust all of their vitality. The cycle continues, sustaining poverty and making it impossible for the person to leave. Orwell (2001, p. 19) describes the condition that a person experiences in poverty: “You discover the boredom which is inseparable from poverty; the times when you have nothing to do and, being underfed, can interest yourself in nothing.” Hence, poverty liberates individuals from ordinary rules of behavior like money frees them from labor (Orwell, 2001). In 2020, thirty-seven million individuals in the United States remained poor, with a poverty rate of 11.4 percent (Poverty USA, n.d.). According to experts, the government must do considerably more to alleviate poverty, such as increasing unemployment benefits, raising the minimum wage, ensuring paid leave for parents, and instituting free public education (Mader, 2021). Additionally, other broader elements should be reformed to break the poverty cycle in the United States, such as systematic racism.
Regarding class separation, the upper class tries to aid ‘the poor.’ Nevertheless, the government is establishing a system where services are insufficient to give impoverished people a comfortable existence. The upper class gets the impression that, despite their efforts to assist the poor, the poor do not work hard enough to be helped. Thus, wealthy people are not doing sufficient since today’s policies are designed to maintain class division. As a result, the poor can no longer afford to own a home, although working hard, “kept at work, ultimately, because of a vague feeling that he would be dangerous if he had leisure” (Orwell, 2001, p. 144). Orwell (2021) also emphasizes that most of the affluent and poor are distinguished solely by their earnings; the typical millionaire is simply the ordinary dishwasher dressed up in a new outfit. Class inequalities and racial and gender barriers prevent the United States from demonstrating its full potential (Class Action, n.d.). Democracy suffers from the disproportionate influence of affluent individuals, and underprivileged groups are not heard.
Workplace circumstances in Orwell’s day are exceedingly dehumanizing, with dreadful filth and sickness. An example is when Orwell spends time in the housing facilities where men are harassed and verbally insulted when they only need a place to sleep and a little food to get them through the day (Orwell, 2001). “It is fatal to look hungry,” Orwell (2001) claims, because “it makes people want to kick you” (p. 58). This scenario is quite similar to how many people now believe that it is normal to mistreat homeless and disadvantaged people. Few, if any, people nowadays would argue that they respect homeless people as if they were neighbors. In 2021, more than fifty million individuals sought assistance from food banks and community programs (Feeding America, n. d.). In the United States, more than thirty-eight million people, including twelve million children, are vulnerable to food insecurity (Feeding America, n.d.). Many disadvantaged people are forced to choose between purchasing food and paying medical expenses, rent, and transportation.
Houses prices are too high, even when there are too many employments available but not enough housing. It is a system designed to keep people homeless since there is no way for them to work in these open occupations unless they sleep on a bench. Orwell (2001) claims that it is hard to find a bed at any non-charitable facility in London for less than seven pence per night, and “you got to be on your bench by eight o’clock, because dere ain’t too many benches and sometimes dey’re all taken” (p. 247). The housing situation was reasonably frequent in Orwell’s day, and it is even more common now, with many accessible job opportunities; nonetheless, a housing crisis in which the cost of living does not correlate to earning a minimum wage job. McGahey (2022) argues that the housing crisis in the United States persists owing to a shortage of residential supply and persistently low earnings. Therefore, because of growing costs and insufficient incomes, millions of low-wage employees and low-income families cannot afford a rental residence.
Conclusion
To conclude, George Orwell’s goal is to dispel myths about the poor and demonstrate poverty’s impact on the collective unconscious. The author’s focus on socio-economic injustice and the causes that lead to homelessness is reflected in the novel. Poverty in Orwell’s day and now exhibits many commonalities, such as a substantial class divide, people being treated unethically, and outrageously high living costs. Many impoverished people in the United States are forced to choose between buying food and paying medical bills, housing, and transportation.
References
Class Action. (n.d.). Why does class matter? Web.
Feeding America. (n.d.). Hunger in America. Web.
Mader, J. (2021). ‘Two-generation’ programs aim to break the cycle of poverty. The pandemic was a big test. Web.
McGahey, R. (2022). Inflation, soaring rents, and the housing crisis. Web.
Orwell, G. (2001). Down and out in Paris and London. Penguin.
Poverty USA. (n.d.). The population of poverty USA. Web.