AP English Language & Literature
Sample Responses to Questions on “Needs” by Thomas Sowell
In this essay the economist Thomas Sowell challenges readers to rethink their idea of the word needs. His point is that much of what some people claim they “need” from government is not needed at all but simply wanted. By asserting “rights” and “entitlements” based on supposed need, people— particularly politicians — ignore the inevitable trade-offs and jeopardize the economy and society as a whole. Sowell’s underlying argument is that free markets in the private sector are more efficient than government at supplying what the citizenry can afford.
You might consider these two questions: What is the bare minimum required for people to exist? To what extent are these requirements the responsibility of government?
QUESTIONS ON MEANING
1. Sowell defines needs in paragraph 7: “simply things we want— or that some of us want.” The definition is distinctive in implying that the concept underlying the customary use of the word does not exist. Very little of what we claim we need is actually a need at all.
2. Essentially Sowell’s underlying purpose is to convince readers that smaller government and reduced government spending on social programs benefit the economy and ultimately all citizens. This purpose is evident in paragraphs 12 and 16–20.
3. By “trade-offs” Sowell refers to the fact that we can never have everything we want and so we must forgo some things altogether or have less of our ideal. He believes that too many politicians, unwilling to face this reality, put certain services “on a pedestal,” allowing constituents to see these services as “entitlements” (par. 8) even though funding them is notfeasible (6).
QUESTIONS ON WRITING STRATEGY
1. With the opening anecdote, Sowell establishes that economists do not use the word need lightly and take issue with those who do. The anecdote supports his point that political discourse invokes “needs” far too often. Economists have a better grasp of the concept than politicians do,
he implies.
2. The quotation marks highlight the misuse of the word. Sowell does not accept this use.
3. Sowell must concede that humans genuinely require food, but defining it as a “need” produces “[h]uge agricultural surpluses” and dangerous overconsumption. His old car provides a clear example of trade-offs and an opportunity to poke fun at government entitlements.
4. Fulfilling one “need” causes some other real need not to be met. Government wastefulness based on misconceived “needs” causes the economy and society to suffer.
QUESTIONS ON LANGUAGE
1. Humbug has the double meaning of “deception” and “nonsense,” so the word well suits Sowell’s purpose. The phrase “the higher humbug of politics” also has a nice ring.
2. Entitlement, a right or claim, has in government and politics become an adjective to describe programs, such as Social Security, that guarantee benefits.
3. Rigid emphasizes that needs and similar words used by politicians undermine flexible trade-offs and impede our thinking, creating “havoc in our policies.”
4. Examples of informal language include “poor Mike” (par. 4), “good clean fun” (5), “keep body and soul together” (10), “knock you dead” (14), “old jalopy . . . messing up my life” (16), and “mushy” (18). “Trade-off” (12–15) is fairly informal as well. The effect is to appeal to average readers; Sowell presents himself as a regular guy rather than as a stuffy academic.