O’Brien, Rourke L ; Pedulla, David S (Stanford, Voluume 8, Page 30-35). What Stanford Social…
O’Brien, Rourke L;Pedulla, David S (Stanford, Voluume 8, Page 30-35).
WhatStanford Social Innovation Review says about poverty in New York. TheStanford Social Innovation Review;. Retrievedfrom:roquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/751532624
This article provides a full idea about how they calculate the range of poverty in New York city.
For decades critics complained about the limits of the Orshansky measure (Mollie Orshansky, an economist who worked at the US Social Security Administration), which helps us determine the income of a Family using pre – or post-tax pay? Do we include food stamps and other transfers? What about the cost of other necessities such as shelter, utilities and transportation? Why has a poverty line alone for the whole country when the cost of living varies widely across the nation?
In July 2008, New York City’s poverty rate was 18%. Twenty-four hours later, it rose to 23%. How have more than 400,000 New Yorkers depleted overnight? The answer is that Mayor Michael Bloomberg has adopted a newer, more complex – and, more precisely, a measure of poverty that the federal government uses. His action revived a debate in Washington, DC, and beyond how America determines who is poor – a debate that many hope will be settled by the US Congress this year. Most people who care about measuring poverty – academics, policy makers, nonprofit leaders, and so on. – agree that the way the federal government currently determines who is poor and who is not does not work. The “poverty line” was determined in the mid-1960s by calculating the amount of money it takes to buy a basket of staples, then multiplying that by three. Each year, the fine is updated to reflect inflation.
S.Kmal Hayder Kazmi, (California 8, Page 30-35).
. TheStanford Social Innovation Review;. Retrievedfrom:roquest.com.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/docview/75153262
Poverty is a serious problem of answering the needs of the first necessity. It grows rapidly with an exponential rate and offsets the economic gains that are a big dilemma. For now, the circumstances of some states of the United States, such as California, contribute substantially and more and the growing influence to poverty. There are more factors that are responsible for the exponential poverty in this US city, such as injustice, crime, inaccurate distribution of wealth, unemployment, feudalism, social order and especially Sense of deprivation among regional and social groups. Most people who care about measuring poverty – academics, policy makers, nonprofit leaders, and so on. – agree that the way the federal government currently determines who is poor and who is not does not work. The “poverty line” was determined in the mid-1960s by calculating the amount of money it takes to buy a basket of staples, then multiplying that by three. Each year, the fine is updated to reflect inflation. The current poverty line is $ 10,830 for a single person and $ 22,050 for a family of four.) If a person lives in a household, the income is less than that amount, it is considered poor. If the household income is of this amount or more, it is not poor. The measure does not take into account the other costs of living outside the food and the federal limit is the same and a person lives outside of California.
Manning Steave ( p 8-9), Jan 23,2006
Junior Scholastic;New York, volume 108, page 8-9
The number of working poor in the US is growing as families see their wages frozen or cut and their health-care benefits eliminated. At the same time, millions of high-paying jobs have been moved overseas. Manning discusses the struggles of the working poor and what teens are doing to help.
Today, 28 million Americans make less than $8.70 an hour, the official U.S. poverty level for a family of four. (Most experts estimate that it takes at least double that amount for a family to meet its basic needs.) The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington, D.C., research institute, reported recently that the number of people living in poverty has risen for four straight years. In 2004, 37 million people lived in poverty. That means that one in eight Americans-12.7 percent-was poor last year.According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 38.2 million Americans were “food insecure,” or facing hunger and inadequate food supplies.Another reason is global competition. Foreign companies often pay lower wages and distort their products less than the United States. This causes US companies to cut workers’ wages to cut spending. The increase in immigration to the United States also means that workers are competing for jobs. This has also resulted in lower wages.
USA today (newspaper) Marisol Bello and Paul Overberg, USA today Newspaper, published 9:13 AM ET Sept.22, 2012.
States see more poor among children and unemployed.
While the overall percentage of people living in poverty nationwide did not change significantly between 2010 and 2011, individual states saw increases in overall poverty and poverty among children and the unemployed. Seventeen states saw poverty group, while 14 saw increases in child poverty and more than half, 27 states, hard increases in the number of unemployed people living in poverty last year. The latest census figures show that 17 states had increases in the number of people living in poverty from 2010 to 2011.While the national poverty rate has remained steady at 15.9%, the latest data show pockets of increase by geography and among various demographic groups. The data are also a reflection of the economy’s slow recovery and anemic job growth, policy analyst and advocate for the poor. Fourteen states, including Arizona, California, Georgia, Oregon and Texas, had significant increases in the number of children living in poverty and the number of people living in deep poverty.
The census defines people in deep poverty when they make 50% below the poverty line. According to the tax policy center, most of the people who do not pay income taxes are poor or seniors. Since 2007, 5.5 million People exhausted their unemployment benefits. The long term unemployed are the legacy of the recession. Children are casualties when their parents are not working leading, to a higher poverty among children.
Mark R. Rank is a professor of social welfare at Washington University and a co-author of the forthcoming book” Chasing the American Dream: Understanding What Shapes our Fortunes”.
While poverty strikes much of the population, the average time most people spends in poverty is relatively short. The standard image of the poor has been that of an entrenched underclass, impoverished for years at a time. While this captures a small and important slice of poverty, it is also a highly misleading picture of its more widespread and dynamic nature. Most of us have been poor, at least for a while. Events like losing a job, having work hours cut back, experiencing a family split or developing a serious medical problem or have the potential to throw households into poverty.
We currently expend among the fewest resources within the industrialized countries in terms of pulling families out of poverty and protecting them from falling into it. And the United States is one of the few developed nations that does not provide universal health care, affordable child care, or reasonably priced low-income housing. As a result, our poverty rate is approximately twice the European average.
Finally, the common explanation for poverty has emphasized a lack of motivation, the failure to work hard enough and poor decision making in life.
The solutions to poverty are to be found in what is important for the health of any family-having a job that pays a decent wage, having the support of good health and child care and having access to a first-rate education. Yet these policies will become a reality only when we began to truly understand that poverty is an issue of us, rather than the issue of them.
Manning Steven. Junior Scholastic, New york 108.11 (jan 23, 2006)
The number of working poor in America is growing as families see their wages frozen and their health care benefits eliminated. At the same time, millions of high paying jobs have been moved overseas. Today, 28 million Americans make less than $8.70 an hour. The center on budget and policy priorities, a reported recently that the number of people living in poverty has risen for four years’ straight years. In 2004, 37 million people lived in poverty. According to the U.S department of agriculture, 38.2 million Americans were food insecure, or facing hunger and inadequate food supplies, in 2004. Families with children struggled even more. Economists say, the value of workers’ wages has not kept up with inflation. The value of today`s minimum wage is 24 percent lower than the minimum wage in 1979. Another reason is global competition, foreign companies often pay lower wages and charge less for their products than Americans ones; that causes American companies to cut workers’ wages in order to lower expenses.
Case 3.3 Poverty in America. Justice and economic distribution, Chapter three.
The socio-economic condition is not unjust merely because the poverty exists. There are numerous factors which contribute to poverty such as mental status of person, willingness to be productive, disparity in the skill set and opportunity to earn wealth. A society or system will remain as good as its application and the individual must make effort to remain competitive and earn wealth through his / her endeavors and skill set at the expense of other citizen in that society or system. The system or the society can at best create an equal opportunity for all the individuals to earn wealth through their skills and efforts and it depends entirely upon the individuals how they utilize this equal opportunity to earn wealth. The desire for more money by all the individuals in the society is very common and hence the richer employs more efforts and skills to accumulate more wealth and the poor due to their limited skill set and constraints must blame themselves for becoming poorer and living life of poverty.
The concentration of the poverty in certain groups is mainly due disparity of skill set, problem with learning of new skill sets required to advance in life, education and mental block. Those who think that they can make it big have risen from the poorer group and status despite all odds by acquiring either newer skill sets or by their extra efforts. Those with mental setback have become poorer over the years or they do not have the conviction to try and suffer from fear of failure. Off course issues like education, illness, employment and upbringing environment have bearings on the sub groups but still those who have tried are in much better position than those who did not. So, poverty in certain groups does not make it more unjust than it would be otherwise.
O’Brien, Rourke L ; Pedulla, David S (Stanford, Voluume 8, Page 30-35). What Stanford Social…