Poverty in America: A Handbook

I enjoyed this book quite a bit, depressing as it was. The author did a great job of presenting the relevant information about poverty in this country. It was well-written, so even though it was a required text for a class I didn't mind reading the entire thing. Buy it if you're interested in the subject matter at all.

John Iceland defines poverty through the use of methods used to measure it. He explains its causes, offers an explanation as to who suffers from it and why, as well as what can be done to reduce or eliminate poverty. Poverty is economic, or income, deprivation resulting in one's inability to sustain oneself. Poverty has two primary measurements resulting in much controversy as to which is to be used by governmental institutions. Absolute poverty is measured by using a subsistence level of income as a line that when crossed under results in deprivation of the bare necessities to sustain life. Relative poverty is much more difficult to understand in that it is measured subjectively over time but also geographically. This form of poverty uses as it line of income a point at which one is required to meet if one is to be socially acceptable into one's group or community. There is a certain living standard one is expected to uphold depending on one's status group. I would call this "keeping up with the Jones". If one lives in a prominent community in which the norm is to have two BMW automobiles, a vacation home in the Hamptons, as well as hired workers to do the family's housework but one has only one car, a Chevrolet, no vacation home, and does one's own housework, then one would be viewed as economically deprived or poor. This is an extreme example but if one is viewing the community mentioned in the context of a very large community such as what we call the United States of America, then those who are without the many conveniences that the upper class are accustomed to are considered living in poverty. This is the case mainly as a result of consumerism and its extreme marketing campaign to motivate individuals to consume, consume, consume. Iceland makes the point that to effectively measure poverty one must combine these forms of measurement to account for the behavior of those suffering from absolute poverty but continue to use their very limited income to attempt to close this relative gap between the haves and have-nots. The time and money to education the absolute poor to reduce or eliminate this behavior would be better applied to eliminating the actual causes for increases in absolute poverty. Iceland offers poverty as a common feature of most economic systems and that eradication is most unlikely. The same can be said of unemployment, our economic system will always consist of a certain level of unemployment, even if only short-term. The same applies to poverty; communities are constantly in transition so that one can be employed with high status one day and the next day unemployed and penniless. However, Iceland clearly points out that the primary causes for such high rates of poverty are man made rather than intrinsic to any economic system. These man made causes primarily affect relative poverty through inequality. Inequality is in its very nature a man made phenomenon. These inequalities are born of social stratification in the ar

Today in our nation's Capitol at least between 5,000 and 10,000 poor are living, dying, and going hungry in the streets each day. This is appalling for supposedly the richest and most powerful nation on earth. Obviously some people believe it is all the fault of the poor that they are poor in America. This is only true if a person is mentally and bodily able to work. Poverty in America has many causes and I believe John Iceland begins to address the problems. Sad that someone may find this book too academic. What do they want, a Christian fundamentalist emotional approach to the subject? Fine. But if you want a more objective approach, this is where to start. Iceland advances several arguments through the course of this book. "First, views of poverty vary over time and place. What it meant to be poor in the early twentieth century is not the same today. Nor is the standard of what constitutes poverty in the United States the same as that in the developing world. Second, the persistence of poverty in the United States reflects more than just an aggregation of individual failings. Structural factors, such as the way we understand and define poverty, the inherent features of our economic system that produce income inequality, social inequities, and our policy responses to these problems shape current trends. Third, contrary to conventional wisdom, shifts in family structure have not been the most important factor explaining trends in American poverty rates in recent decades, though they were related to increasing child poverty rates in the 1970s and 1980s. Economic changes--such as economic growth and income inequality--have had the strongest association with trends in overall rates, regardless of how we measure poverty. Fourth, anti-poverty policies constitute a relatively small part of the federal budget and have only a moderate impact on poverty. The effect of policy on poverty is limited by the role of government in society the public supports. Public sentiment is in turn affected by trust in government, the development of communal institutions, and a belief in a common good. Racial conflict, confusion about the causes of poverty, and parochial concerns all stand in the way of efforts to reduce poverty and inequality." Also: "As far back as 1776, Adam Smith noted the importance of social perceptions in determining what constitutes economic hardship. In the Wealth of Nations, he defined the lack of "necessaries" as the experience of being unable to consume "not only the commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life, but whatever the custom of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even of the lowest order, to be without." More recently, Peter Townsend observed that people are social beings who assume many roles in a community--worker, citizen, parent, friend, and so on. He maintained that poverty should be defined as the lack of sufficient income for people to "play the roles, participate in the