The time period I focused on is the 17 th -18 th century, which saw the emergence of a kind of a social welfare model in the British Empire and the American colonies during that time period. It was one of the first centralized and government-sponsored models of welfare, which laid the foundation for further practice (Segal, 2010). Since people cannot live for several centuries, I had to rely on the text to study and describe the chosen laws and the period itself. The most important policies developed under the blanket of Elizabethan Poor Laws were the distinctions between the types of poor, the differentiation of types of assistance offered to the poor, and the means of reimbursement for individuals helping them. During the 17 th -18 th century, the poor were classified as either worthy or unworthy (Segal, 2010). The worthy ones were widows, orphans, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities that prevented them from working – they were considered worthy because of circumstances outside of their control (Segal, 2010). The poor that could work were considered lazy and unworthy of assistance. The types of assistance given included housing, work, food, and medicine. The former three usually were placed on people put in charge of the poor, effectively turning them into indentured servants. Reimbursements were given to individuals who either housed, fed, or doctored the poor, usually from community treasuries under the government provision (Segal, 2010). All of the programs, including housing, feeding, work, and medicine, under Elizabethan laws, were strictly residual. They were not created out of humanitarian ideals, as the ideas of unilateral support from the government to improve the living conditions of people in-masse was contradicting the dominant moral paradigms of the time. The situation was that cities and towns could not sustain the number of individuals coming for work, being already poor. It was beyond the capacity of the communities and lords to provide for, thus requiring assistance (Segal, 2010). The alternative was to leave the poor to their own devices, which would have resulted in rioting, violence, and increased crime rates, among other things. The objective of the Poor Laws was to help those in the direst situations and deemed of solid moral character to be just a little bit above the poverty line (Segal, 2010). These programs were not institutional, as it was not provided to everyone in the society, and acted as a last resort safety net. The values and morals during the time period of the Elizabethan poor laws were much different from ours. Back then, the awareness of social inadequacies, inequalities, and racism was completely absent. The driving force behind moral excellence, framed by the Protestant church, was industrialism, hard work, and individualism (Segal, 2010). People were expected to rely on family for help, and ask the government for assistance only when there is absolutely no other place to go. Nowadays were know better. We are aware that generations of inequality, oppression, and abuse has left a lasting effect on the poor, to the point that many working poor, who, by Elizabethan’s definitions, are not worthy of receiving aid, are the ones who should be assisted the