Poverty

Theories of Poverty

Ted Bradshaw has outlined what he believes are the five competing theories that drive antipoverty strategies:

• 1.
  Individual deficiencies
• 2.
  Cultural belief systems that support subcultures of poverty
• 3.
  Political–economic distortions
• 4.
  Geographical disparities
• 5.
  Cumulative and circumstantial origins

In the individual deficiencies framework, adherents suggest that poverty results primarily from a person's personal attributes (e.g., intelligence and diligence) or from poor choices (e.g., dropping out of school). In the individual deficiencies theoretical framework, [Page 805]poverty is the nexus between individual deficiencies that have been passed down from previous generations and inherent/genetic individual deficits. A suggestion by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray that the nexus between race and intelligence are tied to economic well-being has generated significant controversy and has been generally discredited. This set of theories, however, has a long history.

The Virginia Legislature in 1619 ordered any idle able-bodied person be bound over for compulsory labor, and early conceptualizations of poor persons categorized them into two groups: the “deserving” and “undeserving” poor. The undeserving poor were those who were deemed able to work but not currently working. They were believed to be poor as a result of their lack of initiative, intelligence, or some other personal deficit. Deserving poor were those who were poor through circumstances beyond their control; for example, orphans and the elderly.

The second theory, often referred to as the “culture of poverty,” suggests that over generations, belief systems, values, and skills have been transmitted to successive generations that perpetuate their poverty. Perhaps the most famous expression of this ideology was given by Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan in his report from the U.S. Department of Labor titled, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action,” or more popularly known as the “Moynihan Report.” The report's main tenet being that the “crumbling” of the “negro” family had substantially contributed to the “cycle of poverty.” The report met with scathing criticism from civil rights groups of the time for ignoring the social realities of African Americans at that time.

...