Poverty in U.S - Research Paper Example

?Introduction Poverty is everyone’s problem. It cuts across any line you can age, race, social, geographic or religious. Whether you are black or white; rich, middle-class or poor, we are ALL touched by poverty Kathleen Blanco (quoted in Brunot, 2011, p.2) Poverty has become one of the major economic concerns in the United States recently. Indeed, by a considerable margin, the country has the highest poverty rate among all other developed economies1 (See Figure 1). Particularly disturbing are the poverty rates for children: 3-4 times bigger than in most European countries (Wright & Rogers, p. 2). Officially, 46.2 million Americans were fixed by the Census Bureau to have lived in poverty back in 2010 (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, and Smith, 2011, [online])2. Based on the data provided by the National Poverty Center, in 2010 the United States had the highest poverty rate since 1993, which was 15.1 per cent (National Poverty Center, 2010, [online]). This number is the largest one in the period of 52 years for which estimates of poverty have been officially pub­lished (See Figure 2) (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, and Smith, 2011, [online]). The official definition of poverty in the United States was accepted back in 1964 by the Social Security Organization. At that time, as Seccombe (2000) explains, the poverty line was officially calculated from the annual costs of a minimal budget on food according to the design of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It was then multiplied by three since the survey data at the beginning of the 1960s showed that U.S. families spent around one third of income on food (Seccombe, 2000, p. 1096). This poverty line is still used today despite a flood of criticism (Atkinson, 1987, p.749) and parallel efforts to measure poverty by other variables (e.g. in the research the following indicators of poverty are common: deep poverty, relative poverty, economic vulnerability, income loss, occupational status, deprivation) (Seccombe, 2000, 1097). This paper seeks to examine the issue of poverty in the United States through synthesis of the recent discussions of poverty aspects in the academic research and official up-to-date poverty statistics. To achieve the goal, the author has divided it in a few sections each dealing with a specific aspect of poverty issue. Figures and tables have been extensively used to support the poverty arguments. Poverty and Health While the research findings suggest there exist a correlation between poor health and poverty in the meaning that individuals with health problems or disabilities are more likely to enter the state of poverty, this process seems to be double-sided. In other words, just as ill health may be a cause of poverty, the poverty itself may be a cause of bad health. In this section of the paper both aspects of poverty relation to health will be explored through the analysis of the recent pertinent sources. Households with an adult who has a health problem or is disabled in some way are at a heightened risk of entering the economically insecure position, as found by Rynell (Rynell, 2008, p.15). In particular, in her recent work “Causes of Poverty: Findings from Recent Research”, Rynell arrives at the following conclusions: Just as health problems limit work opportunities for individuals, they account for their low income and, respectively, poverty. The situation is exacerbated by the fact many people have disabilities that are not qualified as such, which means they neither have access to the government programs, nor do they compete in the labor market. This increases the risk of poverty. To support, statistically the disabled are more than twice as unlikely to be provided with employment as people without any health problems (Wittenburg & Favreault, 2003, [online]); when the family head becomes disabled, 6.4 per cent of families become poor (McKernan & Ratcliffe, 2002, [online]); because people with disabilities need special conditions at work, they are hired less willingly. People with disabilities are likely to drop out of high school and be inadequaltely prepared for workforce. This means the higher risk of poverty for them. Just as other members of the family have to take care of a disabled person and can’t go to work, they lose the source of income and may become poor(Rynell, 2008, p. 15). At the same time, poverty triggers a number of health problems. In a 2006 research “The Role of Race and Poverty in Access to Foods That Enable Individuals to Adhere to Dietary Guidelines”, Baker, Shootman, Barnidge, and Kelly state that obesity and chronic diseases related to obesity are more frequent among the individuals that live below the poverty level established by the federal government (Baker, Shootman, Barnidge, and Kelly, 2006, [online]). Having conducted audits of supermarkets and fast-food facilities, the researchers found that individuals living in high-poverty areas hardly have any access to healthy food, which means they are virtually unable to make healthy choices as to what to eat. This badly affects their health increasing the risk of being obese and the risk of chronic diseases related to obesity. Besides, lack of healthy food on offer restricts individuals in poor areas in their chances of adopt healthy eating behaviors and promote health. These findings have been consistent with the ones provided by Larson, Story, and Nelson (2008), who found that people that live in poor areas are more exposed to chronic disease due to poor dietary patterns and risk of obesity caused by lack of access to healthy food (Larson, Story, and Nelson, 2008, [online]). To make the matters worse, poverty has been found accountable for higher levels of mortality among white and non-white populations due to greater exposure to biological and behavioral risk factors. Specifically, in the longitudinal study by Hahn, Eaker, Barker, Teutsch, Sosniak, and Krieger “Poverty and Death in the United States – 1973-1991”, it has been established that the proportion of poverty-attributable mortality among white and Afro-American adults in the United States has increased. While in 1973, 16.1 % of total mortality among the U.S. population was attributed to poverty, in 1991 this figure was fixed to have reached 17.7% (Hahn et al, 1995, p.490). To sum up, poverty has been found to lead to higher health risks exposure and trigger mortality. At the same time, heath problems and disabilities have been found to be the causes of poverty due to a number of factors. Poverty and Race The association between poverty and race in the United States has long been a subject of economic concern. The disparities between the economic statuses of white and non-white populations are evident given the simplest statistics. To illustrate, the data on each of the major racial groups display the recent increase in poverty among all members of the American society. At the same time, the proportion of white people living in poverty is lower than that of people of Afro-American, Hispanic or Asian origin (while the very number of whites living in poverty is generally higher). For example, the 2010 Census Bureau data state that in 2010 an increase in poverty in comparison with 2009 was fixed: among the white population it was from 9.4 to 9.9 per cent (or from 18.5 to 19.6 million people), among Blacks it rose from 25.8 to 26.4 (or from 9.9 to 10.7 million people), among Asians it was 12.1 per cent in 2010 as well as in 2009, and among Hispanics it rose from 25.3 to 26.6 per cent (or from 12.4 to 13.2 million people) (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, and Smith, 2011, [online]) Poverty among the population of Asian Americans has been the subject of research of Takei and Sakamoto, authors of “Poverty of Asian Americans in the 21st century” (Takei & Sakamoto, 2011). The results of the study based on the data from the American Community Surveys conducted in 2005-2007 state that poverty rates among Asian Americans are higher than those among the white individuals, with nativity status playing a crucial role in economic status. Interestingly, poverty rates have been fond lower among foreign-born Asians than foreign-born whites (Takei & Sakamoto, 2011, p. 251). Parrado and Kandel in “Hispanic Population Growth and Rural Income Inequality” state that while the recent growth of Hispanic population in the United States has been deemed accountable for growing income inequality and increasing poverty levels, it is not the changing Hispanic composition but the overall population growth that accounts for the mentioned effects (Parrado & Kandel, 2010, p. 1421). These findings are, however, at odds with some previous results stating that rapidly increasing Hispanic population, which is generally low-skilled, contributes to income inequality due to low levels of earning power (Borjas, Freeman, and Lawrence, 1997, [online]). The strong association between race and ethnicity and poverty level has been recognized. Specifically, in a study conducted by Costello, Keeler, and Angold (2001, [online]) it was found that “the Black families bore a much greater burden of poverty than did the White families.” (Costello, Keeler, and Angold, 2001, [online]). Specifically, the mean income of the African-American households was found to be less than two thirds the one of the White households (62%). Also, Levernier, Partridge, and Rickman (2000) have found that the estimated percentage of minorities other than African-Americans is positively related to the rates of poverty across the country. Similarly, the study by Rupasingha and Goetz (2007) found that non-black minorities in some areas of the United States experience higher levels of poverty. The Table 1 below illustrates the disparities in poverty rate for children from different racial and ethnic background, with Black and Hispanic population being affected the most. Table 1 Children Under 18 Living in Poverty, 2010 Category Number (in thousands) Per cent All children under 18 16, 401 22.0 White only, non-Hispanic 5,002 12.4 Black 4,817 38.2 Hispanic 6,110 35.0 Asian 547 13.6 (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, and Smith, 2011, [online]) Scholars tend to interpret racial disparities that are evident in the demographics of poverty and race as historically conditioned. It is believed that as Whites were enjoying a privilege in the American society in the past, they still do better economically and are “ significantly underrepresented on the welfare roles” (Schneider, 1999, p. 767). In particular, black population is known to be three times the possibly expected proportion to be on public assistance. People of Hispanic origin are actually double than the possibly expected number. It is Asians whose poverty levels are proportionate to the population percentage. In relation to this, a number of both conservative and liberal scholars agree that race and class form a combination that exacerbates poverty. For example, Mead contends that poor people are poor since they have hardly ever learned the work ethic (Mead, 1993). This is exacerbated by segregation since people are known to absorb the bad values of the representatives of their communities. According to Ignatiev and Garvey (1996) inequality in the United States is maintained by the racist structures found in the U.S. society. Similarly, race and gender are named to be the markers of segregation in a global economic system, leaving opportunities for low wage jobs (D’Amico, 1996). In brief, the increase of poverty rates in the United States has not been produced by the growth of non-white communities. At the same time, the representatives of other than white races/ethnicities have been found to be generally poorer in comparison with Whites. In particularly, Blacks and Hispanics have been found to bear the biggest burden of poverty. This can be explained by the fact members of certain non-white minorities are low-skilled and do lower-paid jobs, which means they are more likely to be affected by poverty. At the same time, these disparities are referred to historic conditioned white privilege. Poverty and Migration While increased immigration to the United States has been generally thought to produce a negative effect on its economy, chances in the labor market and poverty, the recent research has found that the rise in immigration observed of late has a minor effect on rates of poverty (Chapman & Bernstein, 2003, [online]). Instead, macroeconomic changes are to blame for families plunging into poverty in 1969-1999 since altering trends in the American economy in the second half of the 20th century made it harder for families to earn for a living (Van Hook, Brown, and Kwenda, 2004, p. 649). Brunot in his study “Causes of Poverty at the U.S. Metro Level” observes that migration rates are tied to poverty (Brunot, 2011, p.8). However, he states that the scientists have not arrived at unanimous answer regarding whether migration increases or decreases rates of poverty. While one group of researchers support the theory that the increase in migration leads to the increase in poverty, the other group contends that thanks to migration poverty rates are decreased. The first group say that as people move, they find themselves without social ties. Hence, if the unfortunate events take place, the lack of safety net may lead to increased rates of poverty. This seems especially true about undocumented immigrants, though to a quite insignificant extent (Espenshade, 1995, p.195). The second group explain that migration is a way for the skilled workforce to find jobs that best match their training, which theoretically leads to better efficiency and higher incomes (Madden, 1996, p.1581). In this context, it is no wonder that the recent trend has been that the likelihood of immigrants’ poverty has fallen dramatically (See Figure 3). Therefore, the relation of migration to poverty has been two-sided. On the one hand, migration has been deemed as a factor that contributes to the increase of poverty rates. On other hand, scholars think that the impact of migration on poverty rates is zero or minimal. Figure 3. Poverty Rates for All Persons, 1994-2000. Poverty and Age: Childhood Poverty The issue of childhood poverty seems to be in the heart of public concern in the United States today. The study by Rupasingah and Goetz (2007, p.650) provides evidence that children under 18 along with young people between 18 and 24 were exposed to higher risks of poverty in metro areas. The longitudinal study by Rank and Hirschl (1999, p.1058) “The Economic Risk of Childhood in America: Estimating the Probability of Poverty Across the Formative Years” estimated the likely proportion of U.S. children that will face poverty at some moment while being a child. Specifically, during the given 17 years of childhood, 69% of Afro-American children, 81% of kids in single-parent households, as well as 63% of kids whose family head had the education of fewer than 12 years will be affected by poverty (Rank and Hirschl, 1999, p.1058) According to Lichter, by modern standards, children are affected by poverty in two major ways: materially and psychoemotionally (Lichter, 1997, p.121). Specifically, kids living in poverty are more prone to depression, difficulties in peer relationship, social withdrawal, having low self-esteem, and they oftener display behavioral disorders than children in affluent households Other effects include academic difficulties, inability to stick to positive self-images, and fewer educational opportunities after school (Seccombe, 2000, p. 1103). Poverty and Family Structure The risk of poverty is particularly high in single-parent families. This is generally attributed to the fact that in these families one may find only one wage-earner. To make the matters worse, the risk of being impoverished is especially high in families with a single mother (Seccombe, 2000, p. 1104). Indeed, the statistical data reveal that poverty rates in single-mother families are 3 or even 4 times as high as the ones for the overall U.S. population (Rynell, 2008, p. 12). There may be found a few reasons for this. First of all, women are generally paid lower wages than men, which is especially true of minority women. To illustrate, back in 1997 women aged 25 who worked full time earned $462 per week while men aged 25 earned $615 (Seccombe, 2000, p.1101). Secondly, there are a number of single-mother families that do not receive child support, which increases their poverty levels. For instance, only 18% of never-married mothers received child support back in 1997. The percentage among divorced women was about 42% (Seccombe, 2000, p.1101). At the same time, the estimates provide enough evidence that “if child support laws were perfectly enforced, this could improve the lives of impoverished children considerably, if not lift them from poverty altogether” (Brien & Willis, 1997, p. 65). In addition, teenage and post-teenage births out of marriage account for living in poverty. Single mothers who had post-adolescent births were found to have a nearly double median income in comparison with girls who had teenage births (Rynell, 2008, p.13). In relation to this, the attributes of single-mother families which have been associated with poverty are having kids under age 6, being younger, being unmarried, being either Hispanic or black, and not being a part of labor force (Snyder, A., & McLaughlin, 2004, p.149) Conclusion To conclude, this paper summarized the research findings in a range of issues related to poverty in the United States. It has been established that there exists a strong link between poverty rates and certain demographical characteristics. Namely, the dependence of poverty level on health, age, race, status (immigrants vs non-immigrants), and family structure has been explored. As for other demographic characteristics such as education, gender, and rural/metro residence, the limitations of the paper did not allow discussing them in detail, although they have been mentioned in relation to other issues of poverty. Based on the research analysis a few conclusions can be made: More attention should be paid to poverty among children since kids living in poverty are potential poor adults. For this, more sensitive measures need to be developed to define childhood poverty, adequate social policies need to be implemented, as well as the root of the problem – the breakdown of family structure – needs to be dealt with. In addition, law enforcement measures should be enhanced in relation to child support opportunities for single mothers. More sensitive attitude to immigrants should be developed in terms of their settlement, job opportunities, etc in order for the rates of poverty to be reduced The interrelation between poverty and rate suggests more effective policies should be developed to increase the self-sufficiency of the disabled through possible employment/education opportunities, as well as to improve the quality of medical care among impoverished members of the American society. References 1. Atkinson, A. (1987) “On the Measurement of Poverty” Econometrica. Vol. 55, No. 4 (July, 1987), pp. 749-764. 2. Baker, E., Shootman, M., Barhidge, A. and Cheryl Kelly (2006)”The Role of Race and Poverty in Access to Foods That Enable Individuals to Adhere to Dietary Guidelines” Prev. Chronic Dis. 2006 July: A 76. 3. Borjas, George J., Richard B. Freennan and Lawrence F. Katz. 1997. 1997. "Hov/ Much do Immigration and Trade Affect Labor Market Outcomes?" Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1997:1 Macroeconomics. 4. Brien, M. and Willis, R. (1997) “The Partners of Welfare Mothers: Potential Earnings and Child Support.” The Future of Children, 7, pp. 65-73. 5. Brunot, J. (2011) “Causes of Poverty at the U.S. Metro Level.” Retrieved from www.ERIEdata.org. 6. Seccombe, K. (2000) “Families in Poverty in the 1990s: Trends, Causes, Consequences, and Lessons Learned”, Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 62, No. 4 (Nov., 2000), pp. 1094-1113. 7. Chapman, J., & Bernstein, J. (2003, April) “Immigration and poverty: How are they linked?” Monthly Labor Review. Washington D.C: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 8. Costello, J., Keeler, G., Angold, A. “Poverty, Race/Ethnicity, and Psychiatric Disorder: A Study of Rural Children.” American Journal of Public Health, 2001 September; 91 (9), pp. 1494-1498. 9. D’Amico, D. (1996) “The Emperor’s New Jobs: Welfare Reform, Unemployment, and Education Policy.” Urban Anthropology, 25 (2): pp. 165-194. 10. DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, B., and Jessica Smith, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports. (2011) “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2010”, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 11. DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, B., and Jessica Smith, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports. (2009) “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008”, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 12. Espenshade, T. (1995) “Unauthorized Immigration to the United States.” Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 21 (1995), pp. 195-216. 13. Hahn, R., Eaker, E., Barker, N., Teutsch, S., Sosniak, W., and Nancy Krieger (1995) “Poverty and Death in the United States – 1973-1991.” Epidemiology, Vol. 6, No. 5, pp. 490-497. 14. Ignatiev, N., Garvey, J. (1996) Race Traitor. New York: Routledge. 15. Larson, N., Story, M., and Nelson, M. (2009) “Neighborhood environments: disparities in access to healthy foods in the U.S.” Am J Prev Med. 2009 Jan, 36(1): 74-81. 16. Levernier, W., Partridge, M., and Dan Rickman (2000) “The Causes of Regional Variations in U.S. Poverty: A Cross-County Analysis.” Journal of Regional Science, 40 (3): 473-497. 17. Lichter, D. (1997) “Poverty and Inequality Among Children.” Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1997 (23), pp. 121-145. 18. Madden, J. (1996) Changes in the Distribution of Poverty across and within the U.S. Metropolitan Areas, 1979-89.” Urban Studies, 33 (9), pp. 1581-1600. 19. McKernan, S. M., & Ratcliffe, C. (2002, December). Events that trigger poverty entries and exits. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org. 20. Parrado, E., Kandel, W. (2010) “Hispanic Population Growth and Rural Income Inequality.” Social Forces, 88 (3), pp. 1421-1449. 21. Rank, M. & Hirschl, M. (1999) “The Economic Risk of Childhood in America: Estimating the Probability of Poverty across the Formative Years.” Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 61, No. 4 (Nov., 1999), pp. 1058-1067. 22. Rupasinghah, A. & Goetz, S. (2007) “Social and Political Forces as determinants of Poverty: A Spatial Analysis.” The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36 (2007), pp. 650-671. 23. Rynell, A. (2008) “Causes of Poverty: Findings from Recent Research.” Retrieved from www.heartlandalliance.org/maip/. 24. Schneider, A. (1999) “And How Are We Supposed to Pay for Health Care? Views of the Poor and the Near Poor on the Welfare Reform.” American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 101, Vol. 4 (Dec., 1999), pp. 761-782. 25. Snyder, A., & McLaughlin, D. (2004). “Female-headed families and poverty in rural America.” Rural Sociology, 69(1), 127-149. 26. Strait, J. (2001) “The Disparate Impact of Metropolitan Economic Change: the Growth of Extreme Poverty Neighborhoods, 1970-1990.” Economic Geography, Vol. 77, No. 3 (Jul., 2001), pp. 272-305. 27. Takei, I., Sakamoto, A. (2011) “Poverty Among Asian Americans in the 21st Century”, Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 54, No.2 (Summer 2011), pp. 251-276. 28. Van Hook, J., Brown, S., & Kwenda, M. (2004) “A decomposition of trends in poverty among children of immigrants.” Demography, 41(4), pp. 649-670. 29. Washington D.C: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 30. Wittenburg, D., & Favreault, D. (2003, November). “Safety net or tangled web: An overview of programs and services for adults with disabilities.” Occasional Paper #68. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org. 31. Wright & Rogers (2009) “Persistent Poverty and Rising Inequality” Retrieved from Appendixes Figure 1 Figure 2 Read More