|
美国的贫穷谁来负责 Poverty In America Whos Responsible 这里有一些原因，为什么贫穷在美国一直是一个关键的问题，首先，长期的贫穷对个人的心理和身体健康是有负面影响的。大量的调查显示，在贫困家庭抚养出来的孩子在认知发展、情感幸福和成就感等与贫困家庭的关系上更不健康、更糟糕。例如，贫穷的年轻人，更可能有点自尊，成为不法分子表达反社会行为。贫穷的人更可能有健康问题，并在年轻时就去世了。贫困造成的恶劣后果是由低收入造成的，同时来自其他家庭条件的影响也往往会导致贫困，如家庭的启蒙和不稳定等。贫穷往往会引起更多的贫困；由于这个原因，那些在贫困家庭中长大并且更有可能变得贫穷的成年人认为，仍有相当数量的美国人民还在继续遭遇穷困在道德上是令人不安的。其次，贫困具有更广泛的经济影响。 There are some causes why poverty goes on to be a critical question in the USA. First, the difficulty that frequently attends poverty has negative influences on personals' psychological and physical well-being. A quantity of inquiries have displayed that kids reared in needy families are more unhealthy and worse off in duration of their relating to cognition development, emotional well-being and achievement in school. Poor young people, for instance, are more probably to have little self-respect, become lawbreaker and express antisocial behaviors. Poor persons are as well more probably to have problems with health and pass away at younger ages. Several of the bad results of poverty are caused by little income, at the same time some consequence from other family conditions that frequently attend poverty, such as low level of enlightenment and instability in a family. Poverty frequently causes more poverty; in the way that those who become adult in needy families are more probably to be poor would likely assent that the continuous suffering of a considerable number of American people in the midst of plenty is morally disturbing. Second, poverty has wider economic results. Economies prosper in the societies where a vibrant middle class exists. A lot of the powerful economic growth in the America in the 20th century was thanks to expansion of consumer markets. As the request for recently made products soared, productivity, do technology innovation, and benefits and wages. Decreasing poverty levels give support to a strong economy by enlarging the quantity of individuals who can buy goods and use services that grow, by turn encourages economic increase and gives rise of average criterions of living. Third, high levels of poverty have grave political and social results. Underprivileged people frequently sense alienated from mainstream society. Poverty as well prompts crime and social disorder, and it lowers public faith in institutions of democracy if individuals don't feel their necessities are being spoken by the predominant system. In 1960 the ghetto riots, for instance, showed the political social and economic marginalization of Afro-Americans in U.S. towns and cities. The unequal dispensing of resources has furthered to the parting of society we experience today, both globally and nationally. Myths about Poverty. What is Poverty?--关于贫穷的神话。什么是贫穷？ Myths about poverty exist in abundance. For instance, a general misperception is that the most of the needy are Afro-American locals of internal cities. Even if Afro-Americans are overrepresented in the group of the poor people, they form merely about one-quarter of poverty population. One more general misperception is that the needy people don't work; in reality almost half of the needy people of working age labour at the minimum part-time. There are three some common misperceptions. First is the general supposition that poverty denotes a fixed measure of economic deprivation. Still the historic document shows that people's opinion of what it signifies to be needy have differed appreciably over both place and time. Not merely are poverty criterions lower in undeveloped country than in the USA, but American criterions of poverty were much less in the in the beginning of the 20th century than they were only in previous decades. A second general misperception is the opinion that the increase in the amount of female-headed families was considerably answerable for standing still poverty levels in the last several decades of the 20th century. Nevertheless, tendencies in poverty weren't most heavily referred to changes in economic over this portion of time. In spite of the fact that changes in family construction had a powerful connection with child poverty levels, specifically in the 1980s and 1970s, this interrelation vanished by the 1990s, chiefly on account of slowing of changes in family construction during that period of time. A conclusive misperception is that current discussions about welfare reform show clearly new social issues. Completely the opposite, discussions about the influence of government transfers on markets, personal guidance, and poverty come go back to the earliest days of nation. From the start, American people have debated about the comparative significance of alleviating difficulty, on the one part restricting socially and discouraging unsuitable behaviors, on the other hand. The difficulty with these discussions is that they have frequently been founded on merely an incomplete comprehending of the reasons of poverty and individuals as well have dissimilar priorities and goals when looking for to address them. Poverty, as applied and defined in this work, substantially relates to deprivation, economic or income. Two base kinds of poverty measures are absolute measures and relative measures. Absolute measures, a similar kind of the running U.S. authoritative measure, it is typical to try to distinguish a truly fundamental - absolute - necessities criterion and consequently stay permanent over time. Relative measures, which are more generally used by policy makes and researchers in Europe and less so in the America, explicitly characterize as a condition of relative disadvantage, to be assessed against some shifting, relative, or evolving criterion of living. The main difference between the measures is not in the special monetary value of the conformable poverty thresholds but sooner how these thresholds are modernized over time. Absolute poverty lines stay permanent, in spite of the fact that relative poverty lines ascend as criterions of living ascend. In the 1990s, a U.S. National Academy of Sciences research panel devised a quasi-relative measure, which unites components of relative and absolute measures. The quasi-relative measure has fixed features which make it practically and conceptually the most useful and viable kind of common poverty measure in the USA, even though every kind of measure is able to be informative when attempting to comprehend special economic and social phenomena. Absolute poverty measures have poverty lines or thresholds that stay permanent over time. These measures are gone down from the work on poverty lines and standard budgets. The assumption underlying most absolute measures is that there is a measurable subsistence level of consumption or income below which people should be considered economically deprived or disadvantaged. The absolute centre of poverty is not being able to encounter fundamental necessities, people can't encounter them should be deemed poor, taking no regard of general living standards. Still poverty is comparative in beliefs of that people about the quantity of money required to live inside society increases as general standards of living increase. The best common measure of poverty has the two relative and absolute elements. It became obvious that a standard poverty measure was required to estimate the efficacy of the government programs. The official poverty measure characterizes poverty lines for families of dissimilar composition and sized and compares a reported income of family to that line to resolve if that family is needy. These poverty lines are renewed yearly for inflation. This poverty measure continues to be in use to this day, nevertheless not everyone consents that it portrays the best method to value economic deprivation. The Poverty population. Causes of Poverty.—贫困人口。贫困成因。 In 2003, for instance, 35.9 million were poor (it is about 12.5 percent of the U.S. population) pursuant to the official measure. Poverty lines are meaningly higher if we use a general relative measure. As it is known fully, poverty is more spreading among some demographic subgroups - such as minorities, female-headed families, children and people with less education, - regardless of the poverty measure used. Poor persons are as well; no wonder that, considerably more probably to give a report of physical difficulties, such as from time to time not having enough diet to dine or failing utility paying. Nevertheless, both poor and rich American people report in the same way that they have fundamental consumer items such as refrigerators and TVs. Proofs from researches looking at the dynamics of poverty shows that, most of people who become poorer continue to be in poverty for just a short time. However, a lot of families often fall into poverty and move out of poverty, and an important proportion of the poor as well undergo long-dated poverty spells. Researches display that the huge number of children who grow up needy do not continue to be so when they become adults. However, when they become adults, they are more probably to remain poor than those children who did not grow up poor. Poverty differs extensively through states and has become focused on cities during the last several decades, nevertheless some country regions of poverty continue to exist. Some consent that people which live in high-poverty neighborhoods (and in remote country regions) are not just spatially insulated from mainstream society but frequently socially insulated too. A lot of problems relating to city, such as welfare dependency, drug use, crime and substandard educational outcomes, are more general in high-poverty regions. When collating poverty in the USA with poverty in countries around the world, two things find out. First poverty in undeveloped countries qualitatively varies from that in developed countries and the USA. In poor countries, specifically in Africa and South Asia a lot of people fail to earn even $2 a day. Second, as long as the United States has practically the highest gross national product (GNP) per capita in the world, it has higher rates of both absolute and relative poverty than different rich countries in Western and Northern Europe. It as well has higher rates of relative poverty than just about all countries in Europe. Comprehending the work of economic system and social disparity is necessary for elucidating why poverty subsists and why individuals of some groups are more probably to be poor than others. For instance, aspects that form the racial-ethnic gap in poverty during the last several decades contain not just dissimilarities in educational achievement and the influence of female-headed families but as well disparity, discrimination and residential segregation. Nowadays, economic dislocation, wealth differentials, family instability and past poverty are obstacles at the minimum as significant as discrimination and racism in interpreting poverty rates among minority groups. However, in spite of this advance ethnic and racial inequality continues to be a crucial problem in the United States. While distinction against women in the labor market has as well decreased, gender dissimilarities in poverty and earnings have not vanished. Single-parent families managed by women are more probably to be poor than other types of family on account of the fact that they encounter the problem of providing the necessities of a family on one income. These women have lower levels of education because of their lower earning and they as well do not get sufficient child support from the absent father.#p#分页标题#e# Struggle against poverty. 与贫穷作斗争。 One day in office, President Clinton offered a program to replace welfare, its work, upheld by Congress changed his program to trim down costs. President Clinton signed to the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996. This measure replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with Temporary AID to Needy Families (TANF). States were able to reject some groups (such as disabled adults and parents of children under a year old) from labour demands. Has the welfare reform act of 1996 reached its purpose of changing "the culture of poverty?" Specialists state the consequences have been mixed. While employment has risen, many leave welfare to work in low-wage jobs. Increasingly, jobs have moved to suburbs, making problems of accessibility for urban residents. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina focused new awareness on the problems of the poor living on the margins of society. Hurricane Katrina concentrated new attention on the problems of highly concentrated poverty and racial isolation. Years later, the plight of the poor continues to exist. The 2006 reauthorization of PRWORA demanded states to set stricter work demands. The new rules increased the work-participation levels that states have to meet from 50 percent of families with an adult getting TANF help to 70 percent of such families by 2010. Throughout U.S. history, policy makers have struggled to balance personal responsibility with compassion. That struggle continues. |
 |
|||
| 网站地图 |
