Urban poverty: causes, effects, and policy approaches

Urban Poverty Readings Summary/Critique

These readings examine the relationship between race and poverty, especially in urban settings that present a setting of de fact segregation. Mincy and others note the social reinforcement of certain poverty-perpetuating attitudes and behaviors in urban poor communities, which still have a predominantly African-American population (Mincy 1994; Massey, 1990; Jargowsky & Sawhill 2006). Specifically, the jobless rate among males living in ethnically segregated urban is noted by these authors as a major contributing factor -- if not the primary factor -- in continued poverty along dramatically racialized lines. Mincy (1994) also notes that this naturally results in higher rates of federal assistance and criminality as a primary means of subsistence in these families, and this state of affairs is self-perpetuating in the way it isolates members of such communities from mainstream society and provides inadequate role models for future generations, even insofar as actively discouraging traditional employment.

Other explanations for the "hypersegregation" of African-Americans in inner-city communities are proffered by others, including either conscious or unconscious white avoidance of African-Americans and even outright racism (Massey 1990). This in turn has led to the development of a "black English vernacular" that has also contributed to joblessness and increased social and cultural isolation. This vernacular speech is also another method of encouraging and perpetuating isolation from mainstream society, and reinforces the cultural onus against mainstream employment and overall integration. Massey goes on to note that the current official and unofficial "color-blindness" of cultural and socio-economic policy is simply another form of institutionalized racism, as it ignores the fact hat urban poverty is predominantly a racial problem (Massey 1990).

Wilson (1996) examines how the phenomenon of de facto segregation is repeated on both macro and micro levels of society, in turn trickling down to affect individual psychology and social determinations in a perpetuation of the African-American and urban poor underclass. Wilson (1996) traces the development of this underclass to the transition into a post-industrial society, which led to a dramatic decrease in the availability of low-skilled employment that had a hugely disproportionate effect on the African-American community. Low income housing efforts by the federal government have only exacerbated social stigmas regarding moving out of segregated urban poor neighborhoods. Schiller (2008) disagrees in part with such assessments, claiming that external and peripheral forces are more responsible for the observed segregation than intracultural phenomena. Finally, Jargowski and Sawhill (2006) find evidence that leads them to believe that the issues are not perpetuated at all, but are rather being effectively combated through social and economic programs, leading to a reduction of the underclass.

Critique

It is quite clear from the data presented in these disparate articles that race is still very much central to the issue of poverty, especially in urban settings. Furthermore, the self-perpetuation of such conditions -- through forces such as lack of education, lack of examples from parental generations, and even cultural stigmas against mainstreaming -- is fairly well established. The reasons behind the unofficial segregation that occurs in urban communities can never be fully and certainly known, but it is quite clear that such segregation exists and is detrimental.

Jargowski and Sawhill's (2006) findings that the problems of poverty and racially segregated urban poor communities are actually reversing are misguided at best, and deliberately misleading at worst. First, there is the claim these authors make that real wages increased for low-income workers during the rampant economic growth of the 1990s. As mentioned by several authors in these readings, however, the main issue at hand is not the wage level, but rather the employment level of the urban poor that was endemic to the situation. That is, both the availability of jobs and the desire to work in legitimate enterprises is severely limited in racially segregated urban communities, and an increase in wages does absolutely nothing to alter this pattern.

As a partial (and implicit) answer to this, Jargowski and Sawhill (2006) also contend that the massive reductions in welfare benefits promoted an increased drive to join the legitimate workforce. Though this was certainly true to some degree, it is unlikely that it had effects of the magnitude suggested by the authors. Furthermore, the "color neutrality" of welfare policy recommended by Wilson is, as Massey eloquently argued, merely a less conspicuous form of racism, and is more insidious for its lack of obviousness. Ignoring the fact that levels of employment show a high negative correlation with being African-American moves past politically correct naivete and into tacit approval of discriminatory hiring practices. The problem is not as simple as plans like affirmative action tried to make it seem, however; the low availability of jobs ensures that without a proper education viable employment is an unrealistic dream for many urban poor.

Mincy (1994) also notes the low quality of schools in his evaluation of the issue, but this detail becomes lost in the myriad of other social influences to which he attributes partial credit. It seems clear that, given the focus of both Mincy and others such as Massey, Schiller, and even Wilson note the unavailability of legitimate employment, the ability to earn higher-skilled positions is essential to stop the perpetuation of the segregation and poverty cycle. Jargowski and Sawhill (2006) also touch on this in their article, noting the higher incidence of high-school dropouts amongst those defined as the underclass. This is especially noticeable in high-poverty areas (where 40% or more of the population in a given geographical neighborhood is living below the poverty line). It is for this reason that Jargowski and Sawhill (2006) champion the destruction of high-rise low income housing and the decentralization of housing programs -- breaking up these neighborhoods, their logic goes, will limit the potential for self-perpetuation within the segregated community by scattering the community itself.