The question inquired for my essay is: "Is poverty a result of individual failings or the social structure of society?" This question will attempt to pry into whether it is truly one's own lack of self-motivation, education, and industry skills attribute to the poor being poor, or if the poor are poor because society is structured in a way in which the poor consistently lack the resources to rise from such poverty. This has been a debate that many whom study social work have argued upon for generations, and because of this, it can be said that the scope of information pertaining to this matter is rather widespread. 

Why this subjects interests me is purely just simple curiosity about poverty; I too would like to know how poverty arises in our society. This subject does not affect my values at all as there is no particular swaying of moral values to be had upon researching this topic, nor do I have any personal experience with poverty other than a few community outreaches with a church. Nothing particularly qualifies me to write upon this subject, though I feel my lack of knowledge towards this subject will allow for a more factual, informative analysis due to the lack of bias I hold.

In an article titled "American Poverty as a Structural Failing: Evidence and Arguments", the main claim supported here, as the title suggests is that, although there is a factor of individualism that contributes to poverty -- in some places more than others -- there is the structure of America's Labor Market which has an inability to support all families. Not only this but there is the "Life Course Risk" which contributes to poverty within America. Along with these claims is tons of supporting evidence ranging from quotes and facts from surveys and research provided by others to charts which properly convey the article's message. While there is no set "value", this article provides an intellectual look into not just the individual side of poverty, but rather the structural side as well. There is however, major interest is presented towards the structural side of poverty as opposed to the individual side. With the numerous amount of references and source abound within this article, there is no doubt definitely some creditability to be had within this source. Though the article lists the individual side of poverty, most of the information presented deals with the structural side of poverty which in turn sets a tone of bias in favor of the structural side poverty being the bigger issue, but even then the evidence presented is factual with an abundance of evidence to support it.

In an article entitled "Family, Race, and Poverty in the Eighties", like the previous mentioned article it defines two sets of differences in poverty: the cultural and structural sides. From a cultural standpoint, the article claims that culture, family, and welfare all are to blame for most accounts of poverty in the eighties. On the other hand, the article claims things such employment and community affect those in poverty from a structural standpoint. Essentially, the views presented in the article essentially value those specific causes of poverty to be the main reasons for why poverty was as such in the 1980s. There does, however, tend to be a focus in the African American and Hispanic communities. I would assume it is because these were the people whom poverty affected the most in the eighties, as stated within the article. As such, the bias presented within the passage focuses primarily on the minority races, which creates a tone of bias for those not of the minority or even those in the minority. However, this article dates back to poverty in the eighties, or poverty from thirty years ago. As such, applying this source to more modern articles about poverty will be rather challenging. As for credibility however, this article utilizes many sources in order to reach its point across. 

Finally, the third source discovered while searching for articles related to poverty lead to an article named "Poverty". This article is more so a glossary which "addresses the complex nature of poverty and raises some conceptual and measurement issues related to poverty in the public health literature, with an emphasis on poor countries." (Mowafi, Khawaja 260) As the quote previously mentioned explains, this article is meant to address and define poverty as factually as possible. The values brought forth, then, are simply educational values in regards to poverty; the authors mean to do nothing more than provide the reader with knowledge on the subject at hand. This article is only interested in the nature of poverty, as well as the various types and definitions associated with it. The credibility of this articles is clearly demonstrated when you take into account the authors. The authors both happen to be doctors whom are discussing the topic, thus appealing to the ethos of the passage. Besides this, like the previous two sources there is a lot of research information poured into the article, making bias non-existent within the article. After all, with sixty nine references utilized in a factual article, it is hard to provide a biased opinion.

The research question is arguable mainly because there are only two sides a person can take when addressing the question at hand, the sides being whether or not the individual's fault that they suffer from poverty or rather that it's the structure of society which causes their downfall. There's nothing necessarily disagreeable about the sources listed as they are adequately filled with research and facts that cannot be disputed easily. Coming from a neutral perspective, each of the sources each have their own persuasive segment of information to analyze for potential use. Though, these sources all do not exactly pertain to the thesis question poised earlier, and as such the search terms used to find these sources should likely be refined to more specific terms, such as "individual poverty" or "structural poverty". Something that will yield a certain spectrum of thesis, for maximum efficiency in the eventual argumentative essay.

