blank
  Review:  Stratification
blank
Link
 Chapter 9:  Poverty & the Political Economy of Welfare
blank
Link
 Review Questions
blank
blank
 The UVaWise Webpage
Link
blank Dr. W's Webpage
Link
blank
 Course Information Webpage
Link
blank
 Stratification Syllabus, Fall 2001
Link
blank
 Stratification Course Resource List
Link
blank
 Stratification Review List
Link
blank
Sociological Stratification
Chapter 9:  Poverty & the Political Economy of Welfare
blank
Link
 The Lower Class  
Link
 Poverty  
Link
       Cross National Comparisons of Poverty  
Link
 Social Mobility  
Link
 The Causes of Poverty  
Link
      Merton's theory of anomie  
Link
 Welfare  
Link
         Criticisms of the Welfare System  
Link
        Welfare as Conflict Management  
blank
  Top
Outline on
The Lower Class
 
blank Review of Stratification  
blank Review of Class Analysis  
  Table of Nine Classes in the Modern Industrialized Nations ( Primarily the US )
  The Convergence of Occupation, Bureaucratic & Property Divisions of Five Class Categories
  Families in the Lower Class generally have FIVE characteristics
       1.  A low level occupation ( i.e. around the minimum wage )
            The Lower Class is at the bottom of the occupation scale
       2.  No property ownership:  do not generally own their own home, but may own a small one.
                            Their car is not worth much
       3.  No authority:  work in a job that gives them no authority; 
      4.   Unemployed more than other classes
      5.   They generally receive enough $$ to stay in a home through their job, family, welfare,
                  disability, crime..
  The Lower Class ( including the Destitute ) is about 15 to 20 % of the population or 57 mm in 2000
  People in this group have incomes around the poverty live, above or below it
  There are Five factors that impact Lower Class peoples' ability just to make it
       1.  Employment: 
       2.  Wage Level: 
       3.  Marital Status: 
       4.  Health & Healthcare: 
       5.  Luck / life's problems:
  Finding adequate food, shelter clothing, medical care & transportation ranges from difficult to impossible
  Many in this group do not have a high school education
    although their children have a better chance of completing high school than they did
  The majority rent their home,
      live in the central city, rural areas, & small towns rather than suburbs
  Divorce & separation rates are high
High number of single parent families
Divorce & single parenthood are often pathways to poverty
  Some of the very poor turn to crime just to survive.
In 1980, the rate of incarceration in the US was  139 per 100 k 
1994:  373 / 100 k:  US has over 1 mm people in prison:  more than China: 
       more than any nation except Russia
  The Near Poor are those who are above the Poverty Line 
      but who cannot get through a financial crisis 
  The Visible Poor are comprised of that stereotyped image of the poor 
       based on TV images & those we see on the street
  The Destitute are chronically poor & unemployed
Sometimes called the Underclass or the Homeless
Their children rarely know anyone who has a steady job, a decent education or any opportunity
This socializes the children to be the next generation of the poor & near-poor
  The Underclass is comprised of those who are detached from the formal labor force 
        & live in social conditions that perpetuate this condition		 Link
  Homelessness:  1990 Census:  1 mm+ even though we were in the middle of an economic boom
1993:  15 % of Am people live in poverty:  40 mm people
           30 % of these live below half the poverty line
           48 % of female headed homes live in poverty
           22 % of children, i.e. 12 mm children & 8 mm adults are malnourished  or up to 20 mm total
blank
       See Also:  Poverty Link
Link
 Figure 9 - 3    The Labor-Force Status of Poor People, 15 yrs. & over in 1989
blank
  An analysis of the Labor-Force Status of Poor People, 15 yrs. & over in 1989 shows that 
   about half the poor people did not work in 1989, while half did work
   Nearly two-thirds were ill, disabled, retired or attending school, which are legitimate excuses
   About one-fifth were keeping house & half of these were in female headed homes
   About 5 % were looking for work
blank
Top
Figure 9 - 3    The Labor-Force Status of Poor People, 15 yrs. & over in 1989
Farley0209
In the Labor Force,blank 
Part of the Year
44 % of Total		 The Labor Force is defined as eveyone who works part or full-time or who is looking for working.  All others are out of the LaborForce:  students, prisoners, mental patients, etc.  blank
blank Work part of the year
& out of labor force part of the year
13 %
blank Unemployed less than half of year
9 
blank Worked all year full-time
9
blank Unemployed all year
5
blank Work all year part time
4
blank Unemployed more than half of year, but not all year
4
Out of the Labor Force,
All Year
55 % of Total		 blank blank
blank Keeping house:  half are female homes w/ children
Most of rest are nonemployed wives w/ children
  19 %
blank Ill or diabled
13
blank Retired
11
blank Attending School or College
10
blank Armed Forces
  5
blank All other
  2
blank
  Top
Outline on
Poverty
Link
  There are TWO basic ways to measure poverty & thus there are several definitions of poverty
       1.  Absolute poverty: measures poverty based on absolute number or monetary level
           This is the method used by the US govt
       2.  Relative poverty:  Poverty considered in relationship 
          to the socio-economic context of a particular society
  Counting the poor is very difficult to do
The US usually uses an economic definition of poverty:  absolute poverty
The last time the US tried was in 1990--it was a failure
Link
 Figure 9 - 1.1  Percent of Population Living in Poverty:    1959 - 1997
  An analysis of the Percentage of Population Living in Poverty from 1959 - 1997 shows that 
     there are TWO recent political factors that have affected the poor
     1.  Poverty rate fell in the 60s & 70s due to steady expansion of LBJ's War on Poverty
     2.  Poverty rates steadily increased in 1980's due to conservative shift of Reaganomics
Link
 Table 3.7  A Comparison of the Official Poverty Line w/ the Median Income
  An analysis of the Official Poverty Line & Median Income shows that 
     when the "War on Poverty" first was launched in the 1960, 
     President Johnson ( LBJ ) developed a comprehensive program 
     w/ childcare, job training, education, parenting skills, etc. 
President Nixon "reformed" the program in the 1970's eliminating all of these features, 
     leaving a system that provided subsistence living only
A breakdown of the 1993 poverty rate demonstrates the number of children & elderly affect
      In 1993 the Poverty Line was set at   $ 14,763 
      This is 15.1 % of population
      Which means there are 39.3 million people living in poverty
     15.7 million of those are children
       4    million of those are elderly
  There are FOUR economic conditions that affect the poor
       1.  falling real wages
       2.   higher accepted unemployment
       3.  deindustrialization
       4.  expansion of service economy
  Official statistics report that about 13 % of the US population of 285 mm in 2000
        lives at or below the poverty line for a total of 37 mm people
  Homelessness:  1990 Census:  1 mm+ even though we were in the middle of an economic boom
1993:  15 % of Am people live in poverty:  40 mm people
           30 % of these live below half the poverty line
           48 % of female headed homes live in poverty
           22 % of children, i.e. 12 mm children & 8 mm adults are malnourished  or up to 20 mm total
  The situation of the poor steadily worsened w/ America's conservative shift in the 1980's
Under Reagan, the welfare roles were reduced by 400 K & another 300 K had their benefits reduced 
Link
 Table 9 - 1.3    Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
  An analysis of the Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
     shows that the overall US poverty rate is over twice ( 2.2 ) that of other industrialized nations
     & the child poverty rate is 2 1/2 times that of other industrialized nations		  
blank
         See also:  Cross National Comparisons of Poverty  
  The Income Gap, aka the socio-economic gap,
       is the amount of difference in income btwn two or more groups
The Income Gap between the UC, MC & the LC
       is a more accurate predictor of crime & violence than is absolute income levels
  The concept of the Poverty Line was developed in 1965 by Mollie Orshansky, 
      The Poverty Line is an Absolute Measure of Poverty
      She based her conception of the Poverty Line on two studies from the 1950's
      One study demonstrated that the Poor, spent 1/3 of their income on food
      The second study demonstrated the amount of $$ spent on an "economy food plan"
          which since 1974 has been called the Thrifty Food Plan
The combination of these two yield the concept of the Poverty Line
Since 1969 the USDA has adjusted the Poverty Line for inflation:
       this process is called indexing
The official poverty measure establishes the set of dollar amounts--calledthresholds
     --which vary by family size. 
There are SEVEN Criticisms of the Poverty Line as implemented by the USDA in the US 
1.  The Thrifty Food Plan  is inadequate in the long run
2.  The Thrifty Food Plan is inadequate for children in short run
3.  The Thrifty Food Plan has the poverty line based on pretax income, 
      but the % rate of taxes have gone up
4.  The indexing of the Poverty Line is flawed because the index is based on the general costs of living, 
      but food inflation is higher than general inflation
5.  The Poverty Line inaccurately estimates the ratio of food to non-food expenses as 1 to 3, 
      when it should be 1 to 5 
6.  Official measures of poverty using the standard poverty line tend to underestimate the number of poor
7.  The absolute measure of poverty misses qualitative differences: 
     the poor in the US are living in the midst of wealth
Link
 Table 9 - 2   Trends in the Rate of Poverty with three Definitions of Poverty:  1965 - 1997
  An analysis of the Trends in the Rate of Poverty with three Definitions of Poverty:  1965 - 1997
       shows that the Poverty Rate remains high 
       even when we take into account all money & benefits going to the poor
  There are FIVE reasons that it is inaccurate to gauge assistance to the poor 
      simply based on the $$ spent by the govt
      1.  Govt cash & benefits spent on the poor is not equal to what they actually receive less
      2.  Many of the poor receive little or nothing
      3.  Much of the money is spent on administration of welfare & benefits
      4. Much of the money goes to the Middle Class & the Upper Class ( e.g. Social Security )
      5.  Much of the money goes to the aged who do have a high rate of poverty,
           but all of the aged receive Social Security & Medicare
Link
 Table 9 - 3  Extent of Poverty for Select Categories of the Population in 1992 & 1997
An analysis of the Poverty for Select Categories of the Population in 1992 & 1997 shows:
      The Poor improved their position in the 1990's
      Whites have the lowest rates of Poverty
      Female headed households have high rates of poverty
      Central Cities have high rates of poverty
      The South has the highest rate of poverty of any region in the US
Link Table  9 - 4    The Comparative Impact of Welfare Benefits & Tax Policies on Reducing Poverty
  An analysis of the Comparative Impact of Welfare Benefits & Tax Policies on Reducing Poverty
    shows that
    the US has only a slightly higher "raw poverty rate" than the other industrialized nations,
      but the US does less to support the poor than other industrialized nations
      & therefore the US has the highest poverty rate
Link
 Table  9 - 5  Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality 
                    & Govt Involvement in the Economy to Reduce Inequality
  An analysis of the Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality & Govt Involvement
           in the Economy  to Reduce Inequality shows that 
           America values do not support assistance for the poor
           as much as do other industrialized nations' values
Link
 Table 9 - 6  General Subject & Funding of Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals
                    1965 to 1975   and    1984 to 1994
  An analysis of General Subject & Funding of Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals
                    from 1965 to 1975   and    1984 to 1994 shows that 
       just as the Conservative shift of the 1980's inherent in the Reagan Revolution 
       negatively impacted the poor,
       this this also cut funds to study the poor & the causes of poverty		  
Figure 9 - 1.1  Percent of Population Living in Poverty
    1959 - 1997
Kerbo0409
Year
Percentage at or below Poverty Line
as defined by the US Census
1959
    23 %
1960
22
1965
17
1970
13
1975
12
1980
17
1985
15
1990
12
1995
16
1997
14
Top
Table 3.7  A Comparison of the Official Poverty Line w/ the Median Income
SP0403
Year
Poverty Line
Median Income of 
a Family of Four
Poverty Line as a
% of Median Income
1960
$ 3,022 
$ 6,295 
   48 %
1970
3,968
11,167
36
1980
8,385
24,410
34
1987
11,600
NA
NA
1988
12,000
NA
NA
1991
13,924
NA
NA
1993
14,763
NA
NA
1994
14,800
44,392 ( 1992 )
33
Top
Table 9 - 1.3    Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
Kerbo0309
blank
Total Adults & Children
Children
US
   13 %
   20 %
Canada
7
9
Australia
7
9
UK
5
7
Fr
5
7
Netherlands
3
4
GDR
3
3
Sweden
4
4
Average
5.9
7.9
Top
Table 9 - 2   Trends in the Rate of Poverty with three Definitions of Poverty:  1965 - 1997
Kerbo0409
blank
Pre-transfer Income
Census Income
Adjusted Income
Year
Only private-sector cash:
income, investments, etc.
Private-sector cash,
plus Govt Transfer Pmts: 
eg, Soc Sec & Welfare
Private-sector cash, Govt Transfer Pmts, plus
other in-kind govt transfers:
eg Medicare
1965
     21.3 %
    17.3 %
   16.8 %
1970
18.8
12.6
-
1975
22.0
12.3
-
1980
21.9
13.0
10.4
1983
24.2
15.2
13.0
1990
20.5
13.5
11.0
1992
22.6
14.5
11.7
Top
Table 9 - 3  Extent of Poverty for Select Categories of the Population in 1992 & 1997
Kerbo0409
blank
Percentage of group at or below the poverty level
blank
1992
1997
Total US Population
    14.5 %
    13.3 %
        Whites
11.6
11.0
        Blacks
33.3
26.5
        Hispanic origin
29.3
27.1
       Aged ( 65 + )
12.9
10.5
Female-headed households w/ children
48.3
31.6
        White
40.3
27.7
        Black
60.4
39.8
        Hispanic Origin
58.5
47.6
Residence  blank  blank
       Inside Metropolitan areas
13.9
12.6
       In Central cities
20.5
18.8
       Outside central cities
9.7
9.0
       Outside  metropolitan areas
16.8
15.9
       Rural blank blank
Region  blank  blank
        Northeast
12.3
12.6
        Midwest
13.1
10.4
        South
16.9
14.6
       West
14.4
14.6
Top
Table  9 - 4    The Comparative Impact of Welfare Benefits & Tax Policies on Reducing Poverty
Kerbo0409
Country
"Raw" Poverty Rate
( Before Welfare Payments )
Poverty Rate
After Welfare Payments
% Reduction
US
    27 %
   19 %
29 %
GDR
22
8
66
FR
22
8
65
Italy
18
7
65
UK
29
15
50
Canada
23
12
50
Australia
23
13
50
Belgium
28
6
81
Denmark
27
8
72
Netherlands
23
7
71
Spain
28
10
63
Sweden
34
7
80
Top
Table  9 - 5  Comparative Attitudes Toward Inequality & Govt Involvement in the Economy to Reduce Inequality
Question 
Hungary
Austria
  Italy 
W. Ger
 Switz.
Netherlands
  UK 
Australia
  US 
1. Govt should provide a guaranteed income
78 %
54
67
50
42
48
59
38
18
2. Govt should provide job for all who want one
90
77
82
74
48
74
58
40
44
3. Govt should send poor children to college
72
78
90
85
81
84
83
74
75
4. Govt should reduce the income gap
77
77
81
56
41
64
63
44
28
5. People have equal opportunity to get ahead
18
na
na
55
na
na
42
na
66
6. Upper limits should be placed on incomes
58
na
na
32
na
na
39
na
17
7. Hard work brings a better life
na
na
na
43
na
na
38
na
60
Top
Table 9 - 6  General Subject & Funding of Poverty Research in Major Sociology Journals
                    1965 to 1975   and    1984 to 1994
Kerbo0409
Subject of Research Article
Total by Category
% of all Poverty Articles
Total by category receiving 
govt or foundation funding
% of total funding 
going to category
ccccccccccccc
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1965-1975
1984-1994
1. Amount
    of poverty
1
4
2
19
0
1
0
8
2. Characteristics
    of the Poor
39
5
58
24
18
5
55
42
3. Political or economic
    causes of  poverty
7
4
10
19
2
1
6
8
4. Poverty Programs
19
5
28
23
13
5
39
42
5. General or 
    Theoretical discussion
1
3
2
14
0
0
0
0
Totals
67
21
100
99
33
12
100
100
blank
Outline on
Cross-National Comparisons of Poverty
Link
  Cross-national comparisons of poverty put the problem of poverty in a global perspective
    & allow one to see how various societies succeed & fail at alleviating & eliminating poverty
Link
 Table 9 - 1.3    Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
  An analysis of the Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
     shows that the overall US poverty rate is over twice ( 2.2 ) that of other industrialized nations
     & the child poverty rate is 2 1/2 times that of other industrialized nations
  Comparing the US & a 3rd world country, the US poverty line equals an average income in the 3rd world
     Low-income economies:      below $ 500 per yr
     Lower-middle-income:                        500   to   2,400 per yr
     Upper-middle:                                  2,400   to   5,500 per yr
     High:                                    above    5,500 per yr
  Welfare benefits are greater in Europe than US for SIX reasons
       1.  Europe has a longer history of more intense class conflict
       2.  The Lower Class in Europe has more political organization
       3.  The Lower Class in Europe is more likely to participate in elections because their
             multiparty, parliamentary system give more power to weaker groups
       4.  Social Services in Europe are institutionalized & therefore easier to defend than customs
       5.  The greater the democracy, the greater the welfare
       6.  Socialist, capitalist, authoritarian political-economic systems
              show structured differences in welfare benefits: 
              nations have varying mandates to redistribute wealth
  Welfare benefits are greater in US than in the 3rd World for FIVE reasons
       1.  The Lower Class in the US has more political organization
       2.  The Lower Class in the US is more likely to participate in elections because 
             the US is more democratic than most 3rd world countries
       3.  Social Services in 3rd are not institutionalized & are based on tradition & customs
       4.  There is less money for welfare in 3rd world countries
       5.  In general the culture of non-western nations supports the ideology 
            that there is & should be poor people
Top
Table 9 - 1.3    Poverty Rates in Industrial Nations 1984 - 1987
Kerbo0309
blank
Total Adults & Children
Children
US
   13 %
   20 %
Canada
7
9
Australia
7
9
UK
5
7
Fr
5
7
Netherlands
3
4
GDR
3
3
Sweden
4
4
Average
5.9
7.9
blank
  Top
Outline on
Social Mobility
Link
  Social Mobility:  the frequency w/ which people move up or down in the society's economic hierarchy
  Open stratification systems have a high level of social mobility
      Achieved status has substantial influence
      Ascribed status has little influence
  Closed stratification systems have a low level of social mobility
      Achieved status has little influence
      Ascribed status has substantial influence
  Kerbo points out that the US class structure is very stable: 
Percent of Income Earned by Lowest & Highest Quintile
                             1947         1970            1992
Lowest fifth:             5  %          5 %              4 %
Highest fifth:            43 %         41 %           45 %
NOTE:  the 70s were the best years for the LC & the worst for the UC/CC
  Exchange Mobility, aka Churning, denotes a type of social mobility 
      where there is little societal social mobility, 
     but high levels of individual social mobility
  Exchange Mobility denotes that
       There are many people moving up the socio-economic scale 
       & just as many moving down the socio-economic ladder
       therefore it appears as if many people are moving up the socio-economic ladder 
People fall in and out of each class ( churning ) because of continuing economic competition
Once a person is poor, the chances are good that they will get out of poverty, but not very far
  While the US has a poverty rate of 15 %, 
       in a ten year period, 25 % will be in poverty at least once
  Intergenerational mobility:  Attainment by people of a socio-economic status 
     that is higher or lower than their parents
W/ Intergenerational mobility, there is a changing proportion of higher & lower status families
  Each type of economic system creates a particular level of social mobility
  The Caste System has a  legally or formally defined stratification system 
      based on groupings assigned by birth that are unchangeable
Examples:  Ancient & modern India
  In the Estate or Feudal system, status & class is determined 
      on the basis of land ownership & / or formal title
Examples:  Europe in the Middle Ages
                  Russia in the late 1800's
                  Rural Mexico today
  In the Class System, status is influenced mostly by achieved status, i.e. the merit system
Examples:  Industrialized countries today
  Structural Mobility:  a type of mobility where classes of people improve their socio-economic position
In the industrialized modern, Structural Mobility occurs because of an increasing proportion of jobs in the higher-status, white collar categories changing proportion of higher status jobs
Structural Mobility is the opposite of Exchange Mobility
  The US has a strong value that there is a high level of Social Mobility,
       but in reality there is a high level of exchange mobility
       & little Structural Mobility
Mobility in the US is slightly above average for industrialized country, 
      but it is less than most people assume 
  Historically, the US experienced positive Structural Mobility,
    but there have also been periods of negative Structural Mobility
       "The land grab" in the mid 1800s
       After the Industrial Revolution & the legalization of Unions
       In the 1930's--the Great Depression
       After WW2 
       After the Vietnam War
       The Reagan Era 1980s & early 1990's
       From the early 1990's to 2001
       Today?
  70 % of Americans agree that 
      "America is the land of opportunity where everyone who works hard can get ahead"
80 % agree that 
      "people who grew up in rich families have an average or better-than-average chance of getting ahead"
50 % believe that blacks, women, & working class families have an 
       "average or better-than-average chance of getting ahead"
But these groups have a poorer-than-average chance of getting ahead
  The Horatio Alger Myth is the belief that anyone, no matter how poor, can succeed on a grand scale
blank
Outline on the
Causes of Poverty
Link
  There are FIVE theories that explain Poverty
  1.  The Common View holds that the poor are lazy, promiscuous & would rather "go on the dole"
         The Common View today generally encompasses THREE  factors 
         a.  Poor people are simply lazy
         b.  Poor people have loose morals causing too many children & out-of wedlock pregnancy,
              both of which cause poverty
         c.  Welfare dependency:  Poor people would rather "go on the dole" than work
  2.  The Dominant or Popular View holds that individual characteristics create poverty
       Strongest argument is that the poor are biologically or genetically inferior
  In the early 1900's  social scientists developed the school of though 
      that came to be called Social Darwinism
Social Darwinism held that the poor were not as evolutionarily developed as successful people
The poor are unfit to survive the competition 
The rich are the fittest
We should have no govt programs to assist the poor 
       because they will degrade the gene poor by breeding like insects
Link
  Contemporary writers such as George Gilder & Charles Murray
     wrote that the poor had a number of genetic inferiorities
Bell Curve:  Hernstein:  the poor have low ave. IQs
This school of thought supported Reaganomics ( trickle-down economics ) 
      as the only way to assist the poor 
      because they need the rich to direct them. 
Assistance to poor is unfair to the rich, & a waste of time
Harvard panel determined that their work was shoddy & even decitful: 
     “They have bamboozled everybody.” 
The poor may indeed have a lower IQ, but this is because they are poor, not the other way around
  3.  The Culture of Poverty View holds that poverty directly influences individual characteristics
          through the process of socialization, 
         and also that political-economic forces indirectly influence poverty
  Poverty creates FOUR situations which create the Culture of Poverty
      1.  Poverty presents unique problems in living
      2.  Solving or dealing w/ these problems requires "unique" lifestyles
      3.  Poverty creates social interaction among the Poor & social isolation from other classes, 
           ie the unique lifestyle 
      4.  This interaction & isolation embodies a (sub)culture of poverty: 
           common values, attitudes & behavior
  Oscar Lewis, a social anthropologist, is considered to be the father of the Cultue of Poverty thesis
  Lewis has FIVE major points to his Culture of Poverty Theory
  a.  Because of the conditions of poverty, 
     the poor are presented w/ unique problems in living ( compared to the nonpoor )
  b.  In order to cope w/ these problems, the poor follow a unique lifestyle
  c.  Through collective interaction & in relative isolation from the nonpoor
       this poor lifestyle becomes a common lifestyle
       which produces common values, attitudes, & behavor
  d.  Once the Culture of Poverty becomes common, i.e. becomes instituitionalized, 
       it becomes independent of the social conditions of poverty that produced it
       because children & adults are socialized into this subculture of poverty
  e.  The Culture of Poverty becomes so powerful that even if opportunities arise,
       the poor will not be able to take advantage of them
  On an individual level, the Culture of Poverty can be seen in NINE factors
     a.  Strong feelings of marginality, of helplessness, of dependence & inferiority
     b.  Weak ego or lack of self-confidence 
     c.  Lack of impulse control
     d.  Present-time orientation
     e.  Little ability to defer gratification 
     f.  Little ability to plan for the future
     g.  Sense of fatalism
     h.  Value of male superiority ( machismo )
     i.  High tolerance for psycholigical pathologies
  On a family level, the Culture of Poverty can be seen in FIVE factors
      a.  The absence of a long childhood
      b.  The early initiation into sex
      c.  Marital unions such as free unions or consensual marriages
      d.  A high incidence of the abandonment of wives & children
      e.  Female headed families
  On a community level, the Culture of Poverty can be seen in FOUR factors
      a.  A lack of participation in the institutions of the wider society
      b.  Low voting rates
      c.  Low participation in politics
      d.  A tendency to be socially conservative
  The Critique of the Culture of Poverty View makes SIX points
 a.  The Situational View critique: ( see below )
 b.  COP assumes an overly uniform view of culture & values: 
 c.  The differences are an effect rather than a cause ( COP says they are interrelated )
 d.  Some studies contradict the COP view that the poor won't work
 e.  Only 1% of people stay below poverty line for nine years in a row
      Only 3 in 10 children raised in poverty set up poor households
 f.  Those long-term welfare recipients are more accurately described as their own class:
       underclass, hard core poor, truly disadvantaged
  4.  The Situational View holds that the poor exhibit a practical reaction to their situation
     The Poor do not possess a culture of poverty; they possess mainstream American values
     Political-economic forces directly influence poverty; i.e. they create the situation
 The poor have a COP because they are reacting realistically to their situation:  ( COP critique # 1. )
  Lewis' theory of the Culture of Poverty is similar to Merton's theory on Anomie
Link
 Table on Merton's Analysis of Anomie:
To avoid Anomie, Societally Sanctioned Goals must match Societally Institutionalized Means 
Link
  The COP is created by society, first, providing no means to achieve sanctioned Middle Class goals.
     thus the "new Poor" frequently feel anomic as would a failed innovator; 
           the poor fail to make it in society
     The Poor then get frustrated & reject the goals, thus becoming a Retreatist, 
            i.e. retreating to the COP
      thus when opportunities arise, the Poor reject opportunties
              as they have rejected Middle Class values
  The difference between the COP View & the Situational View is that 
      the COP believes the culture creates the situation, 
      the Situationists believe the situation creates the culture
  The Situational View views the behavior of the Poor as Rational or Pragmatic
It is a functional adaptation for poor married people to separate.....
 The Poor shun education because they do not expect a college education......
  5. The Structural View holds that political-economic forces directly influence poverty
     The interaction of poverty & political characteristics is overshadowed by the political-economy
Poverty can only be understood, explained, & eliminated 
     by reference to political & economic characteristics of society
This challenges the status quo & demands change of the system & therefore is a threat to other classes
  Weber holds that  the modern occupational structure is characterized
     by conflict & competition in the marketplace
       Our system is created to make winners & losers
       In a grading system, all people can earn an A
       In the employment system, all people cannot earn a fair wage
       Europe supports the Poor, the US does not
  There have been Structural Changes in the US economic system
       that have affected Structural Mobility
  See the history of Structural Mobility 
Link
  Unemployment Rates are deliberately regulated by the govt by TWO major Processes:
        Monetary Policy is set by the Federal Reserve Bank
              who determines the interest rates & amount of $ in the economy
        Fiscal Policy is set by the President & the Congress who determine the amount of govt spending
        Industrial Reserve Army:  Marx:  people in occupational structure 
             who can be laid off to protect profits, & rehired in booms:  keeps wages low
blank
   Top
Outline on
Robert Merton 
1910 - 
Link
  Merton revised Durkheim's concept of anomie
    Society socializes members for certain needs & desires,
           but fails to provide legitimate opportunities to satisfy them, then anomie & crime result
blank
     It is not poverty itself that creates deviance, but poverty surrounded by wealth ( income gap)
            Durkheim
Link
blank
                 Durkheim on the Problem of Social Order, Deviance, & Crime
Link
            Anomie
Link
Link
 Table on Merton's Analysis of Anomie:
To avoid Anomie, Societally Sanctioned Goals must match Societally Institutionalized Means 
       Conformist     accepts means        accepts goals 
       Innovator        rejects means        accepts goals
       Ritualist          accepts means      rejects goals
       Retreatist       rejects means        rejects goals
       Rebel               new means           new goals
Top
Table on Merton's Analysis of Anomie:
To avoid Anomie, Societally Sanctioned Goals must match Societally Institutionalized Means 
  blank
Acceptance of 
Sanctioned Goals
Acceptance of 
Institutionalized Means
Examples
Conformist
accepts
accepts
Norm & Norma Normal
Innovator
accepts
rejects
Entrepreneurs & Criminals
Ritualist
rejects
accepts
Bureaucratic personality
Retreatist
rejects
rejects
Drug User / Seller, Hermit
Rebel
rejects & substitutes
rejects & substitutes
Cult member, Hippie
blank
  Top
Outline on
Welfare
Link
  Welfare:  aka Public Assistance:  government provision to care for the disadvantaged citizens 
       of a country with benefits such as money, medical care, food, housing, & other necessities
blank
 People who receive welfare include children, the aged, the blind, the disabled, & others who cannot adequately provide for themselves & their families ( the Poor )
blank
 Charity is assistance provided by Non-Governmental Organizations ( NGO's ) such as churches, the Salvation Army, & other non-profit & for-profit charitable organizations
  Public Assistance in the US comes primarily from Federal & State Governments
     but it is sometimes administered by local govt. 
blank
 Technically Public Assistance does not include social security 
Unlike welfare, social insurance programs provide benefits to people whether they are poor or not
  The Welfare State does more for the Middle Class, the Corp Class & the Upper Class 
       than for the Lower Class
  There are FIVE basic types of welfare in the US
The Federal & State govts of the US serve the needy through about 60 programs
      1.  Medicaid
      2.  Aid to Families w/ Dependent Children ( AFDC )
      3.  Supplemental Security Income for the Aged, Blind, & Disabled ( SSI )
      4.  The Food Stamp Program  ( administered by the USDA )
      5.  Other small welfare programs
  1.  Medicaid provides free medical care to the needy
     Nearly half of all Medicaid expenses are for the aged & goes primarily to nursing homes
     The vast majority of costs are covered by the Fed govt; the rest is covered by the states
     Patients, Doctors & insurance companies complain 
            that Medicaid does not cover the full cost of medical care
  2.  Aid to Families w/ Dependent Children ( AFDC ) provides cash benefits
      to dependent children & the adults caring for them
    Most families on AFDC have only one parent in the home & 80 % of these are headed by a woman
      A Means Test is the govt's method of determining ones income
  3.  Supplemental Security Income for the Aged, Blind, & Disabled ( SSI ) 
        provides financial aid to the needy over 64 yrs of age or are blind or disabled
Note that regular Social Security provides retirement insurance to all people over 64 yrs old
  4.  The Food Stamp Program ( administered by the USDA ) helps the poor buy more & better food.
  5.  Other small welfare programs:
          Public Housing ( administered by HUD )
           Energy Assistance 
           Women, Infants & Children Assistance ( WICA )
           Earned Income Tax Credit ( EITC )
  General Assistance:  state & local only:  for poor who can't get any of the above
Most recipients are children:  only 1 % able bodied males
Person must be very poor to get welfare
Welfare only brings a person up to 40% of the Poverty Level
Link
 Chart 1:  The Allocation of Federal Entitlements
  An analysis of the Allocation of Federal Entitlements shows 
     that most entitlements do not go to the poor  ( 13 % )
  The Socio-Historical Development of Welfare shows that 
       all welfare began as charity:  private persons giving money, goods & services to the needy
One of the earliest forms was giving to widows w/ children
  The Socio-biological function of charity was to support the tribe
Link
  Sociobiologists have tried to explain altruism 
      by expanding the notion of the survival of the fittest
      from just the individual to the group/society
  Altruism is relatively fixed in small human collectives, 
      but varies widely from society to society, from subculture to subculture, from person to person
This demonstrates that even if it is "innate," social forces do shape altruism dramatically. 
  Sociology explains altruism as it would any norm:
       altruism is part of the normative order that allows society to exist.
  Altruism varies from historical era to era, & from time one to time two: 
      For example:  charities used religious doctrine, tithing, to encourage charity
      Charities today have marketing agents to raise funds
  Charity is believed to have first been institutionalized through religious organizations: Tithing 
    This process predates Judaism & Christianity
  During the Middle Ages tithing, alms for the Poor, & Poor Houses were developed
  After the Civil War in 1865 all Veterans ( both Northern & Southern Vets ) 
      earned Vets Benefits & survivor/widow benefits
  In 1929 the Great Depression creates FDR’s New Deal
  While the issue of aid for the elderly had been debated for decades before, 
      in 1935 FDR signed the Social Security Act: 
Social Security is not technically welfare because it provides benefits for the non-poor: 
The SSA collects $ from wkrs; matched by employer:  goes to retirement & disability
Technically this program is insurance, just like you buy from a company
  In the 1960s:  President Johnson ( LBJ ) made the Great Society & War on Poverty
     the cornerstone of his Presidency 
     ( but his failure in Vietnam is historically seen as just as important )
The War on Poverty worked from a Culture of Poverty model: 
Govt programs provided motivation, ed, training, mothering training
1968:  Nixon eliminated much of Great Society Programs
  Liberals frequently attempt to fund direct govt spending to create jobs
Conservatives frequently attempt something like Reaganomics
  1992, Clinton,  w/ a Republican Congress, passed Welfare reform, 
    called the "Welfare to Work Program"
Welfare to Work had THREE innovative features
       1.  Block grants:  Feds get out of welfare admin & hand $ in one block over to the states
       2.  States also get flexibility to design own programs w/o Fed involvement
       3.  Time limits on how long someone can get welfare
blank
 In 2001, Welfare to Work is still considered to be a success,
      but there has been the worry all along that this program would not provide for the needy
      if the US experienced a recession
  The Cross-National Perspective shows that of 63 top industrialization nations:
       - The US is the only industrialized nation who doesn't have a guaranteed income program
       - The US is only industrialized nation w/o health care for all
Link
 Table 9 - 7  Percent of Central Government Expenditures
                  Spent on Housing, Social Security & Welfare:  1987 - 1989
  An analysis of the Percent of Central Government Expenditures
                  Spent on Housing, Social Security & Welfare
US ranks last in % spent on housing, social security, & welfare
US taxes are also the lowest
US ranks in the middle in the ratio of need & the % spent
Link
 Table 9 - 8   Percent of Population Covered by Public Health Insurance, 1990
  In Canada welfare is provided by the Canada Assistance Plan. 
  In Europe most nation provide mainly through national programs that benefit all their citizens  
Top
Chart 1:  The Allocation of Federal Entitlements, 1993
SP0403
NYTimes112094
Entitlement Program
Program Cost
( in billions )
% of Program Cost 
Going to Families 
Earning > $ 20 K
% of Beneficiaries in 
Families Earning > $ 20 K
Social Security Benefits
$ 302
58 %
50 %
Medicare benefits
143
52
47
Medicaid benefits
76
24
21
Deductions for interest paid (mostly mortgages)
49
99
93
Nontaxibility of employer health benefits
47
75
71
Federal Civilian retirement benefits
39
86
69
Deductions for other taxes paid (state and local)
36
99.7
91
Unemployment benefits
35
75
69
Military retirement benefits
26
99.5
99
Food stamps
25
14
14
Tax exemption of Social security benefits
24
70
na
Supplemental Security Income (poor elderly and disabled)
21
18
14
Deductions for contributions to charity
17
99.7
92
Veterans benefits
17
70
60
Welfare and family support
16
25
23
Farm price supports
16
74
na
Deductions for extreme medical costs
3
95
69
Earned income tax credit
1
15
31
Total / Average
892
Table 9 - 7  Percent of Central Government Expenditures
                  Spent on Housing, Social Security & Welfare
                    1987 - 1989
Kerbo0409
Country
Percentage
Sweden
56
Switzerland
51
Germany
49
Austria
48
Belgium
44
France
41
Netherlands
41
Norway
40
Italy
39
Denmark
38
Canada
37
Spain
37
Finland
37
United Kingdom
35
New Zealand
34
Ireland
30
Japan
30
Australia
29
United States
29
Table 9 - 8   Percent of Population 
                     Covered by Public Health Insurance, 1990
Kerbo0409
Country
Percentage
Australia
100
Canada
100
Denmark
100
Finland
100
Ireland
100
Italy
100
Japan
100
New Zealand
100
Netherlands
100
Norway
100
Sweden
100
United Kingdom
100
Austria
99
France
99
Switzerland
99
Spain
98
Belgium
98
Germany
92
United States
21
blank
Outline on
Criticisms of the Welfare System
Link
blank
 There are FIVE Criticisms of the Welfare System
  1.  Welfare programs do not provide enough benefits to eliminate poverty
    Spending on welfare would have to substantially increase to eliminate poverty
  2.  The cost of welfare is too high
  3.  Providing a steady income to the needy encourages idleness
     Actually, most benefits go to elderly, bind & disabled people & mothers w/ dependent children
     Welfare does discourage some from seeking a job,
         especially if they get less from the job than from welfare
     Welfare also discourages work by decreasing benefits incrementally as any amount of earnings increase
  4.  Welfare does not prepare people for work or for middle class society
  5.  Welfare pacifies the people.  It is conflict management at a societal level  
blank
Outline on
Welfare as Conflict Management
Link
blank
 The fact that welfare can be viewed as societal level conflict management 
      is a major criticism of the welfare system		  
  People in society generally assume that:
     1.  Welfare, charity, etc. is motivated by innate human drive to help others:  altruism
      2.  When society is doing well, more resources are given to welfare, charity, etc.
  Elites employ two tactics to manage disruption by the Lower Class. 
    This is often called the Two War Strategy:
     1.  Force, arrest, imprisonment, kill rebels
      2.  Convince the Lower Class that rebellion is counterproductive: 
           the status quo is best, things will get better, offer the carrot of welfare, benefits, reform
  In-Class Activity:  Are these true?
blank
 Piven and Cloward write that there are TWO other Functions of Welfare
        1.  During periods of social stability, 
           the welfare system enforces work norms & maintains a low-wage labor force
             The MC, WC, LC fear poverty as a very real threat
                 It is quite possible for even MC families to fall into poverty if the economy tanks,
                         or if the major breadwinner becomes debilitated
                The only social institution that prevents such a fall is family wealth
                 And the MC generally cannot bequeath enough wealth to ensure MC status for their children
        US attitudes toward the poor reinforce the belief in our system: 
            the poor are poor because of their own behavior:  they are inferior
      2.  During periods of social disruption, the welfare system restores social order
         The poor can be managed, watched over, pacified by welfare ( cutting or expanding benefits )
  This may appear as a conspiracy theory, but it is largely the normal reactions of society:
When times are hard, we see & feel the need to give more
When times are good, we have more difficulty understanding why people can't get ahead: 
      we attack welfare as the cause of these problems
  Top
Review Questions: Stratification:  Chapter
 

The End