What do you think?
Rate this book
America's Struggle Against Poverty in the Twentieth Century
This new edition of Patterson's widely used book carries the story of battles over poverty and social welfare through what the author calls the "amazing 1990s," those years of extraordinary performance of the economy. He explores a range of issues arising from the economic phenomenon--increasing inequality and demands for use of an improved poverty definition. He focuses the story on the impact of the highly controversial welfare reform of 1996, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a Democratic President Clinton, despite the laments of anguished liberals.
360 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 1981
About the author
James T. Patterson
17 books44 followersJames T. Patterson is an American historian, who was the Ford Foundation Professor of History at Brown University for 30 years. He was educated at Harvard University. His research interests include political history, legal history, and social history, as well as the history of medicine, race relations, and education.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
August 16, 2011
A very insightful and even-handed history of anti-poverty programs in the United States. The book's focus is on federal programs, and specifically federal programs since the 1930s, but even in that well-researched field it contains much that is surprising and new.
One fascinating part of the book is its consistent remainder that "poverty" is ultimately an ambiguous term, one which consistently shifts in its meaning. For instance, the "poverty line," the amount of annual income below which a family or individual is regarded as poor, has gradually ratcheted upwards over the last century. Robert Hunter, in his 1904 book "Poverty," stated that 12 percent of the U.S. population was impoverished, or earned the equivalent of under $460 a year for a family of five ($300 for a family in the rural South). He said this was the minimum that allowed people to "obtain those necessaries which will permit them to maintain a state of physical efficiency." A little later Father John Ryan said that a "living wage" (a term which he invented) was $600 to $800 depending on locations for a family of three. A Brookings Institution study of 1934 ("America's Capacity to Consume") said that the basic necessities budget was $2000 (about twice Hunter's line in real dollars), and even in the midst of the Depression fewer families fell under it than back in 1900. In 1962 the Social Security Administration said it was $3000 for a family of four or $1,500 for an individual, and they made no location adjustment. Although that "poverty line" has defined poverty in America ever since, even with inflation adjustments the average person under the line has much greater access to cars, televisions, and housing than a poor person in the 1960s. Today, according to this line, 12% of the population is regarded as living "in poverty," almost the exact same percentage that Hunter believed was impoverished over 100 years earlier. Yet today's poor are infinitely better off than those who inhabited earlier industrial coketowns or sharecropped the Deep South. Despite his concern with continuing privation, Patterson draws attention to our tremendous success in reducing poverty, or at least alleviating it, in the United States.
Patterson also complicates pictures of a unified "culture of poverty." Though such a position has had adherents on both the left and the right at least since Hunter and Joseph Dollard, Patterson reminds us that a large proportion of the poor have always been children, the aged, and the disabled. Also, only a small percentage of "the poor" stay poor for long stretches of time. Any attempt to create a single conception of "poverty" and its culture inevitability ignores such variety. In the early 1900s the dominant image of the poor was of immigrant slums, a la Jacob Riis; in the 1930s it was rural poverty, as presented by Walker Evans; in the 1960s it was black inner cities, as portrayed by writers like James Baldwin. All ignored the poor who continuing to exist and suffer in other climes and environments. Patterson reminds us that the people in poverty are as varied as the nation (though not necessarily representative of the nation).
The main problem with this book is like numerous 20th century histories it is loaded with disjunct facts and figures, often given with little context. Patterson sometimes tries so hard to be balanced that he'll present facts that directly contradict each other and not try to come to any resolution. Still, the history contained here is crucial for anyone concerned with how our nation should continue to direct our vital anti-poverty efforts.
One fascinating part of the book is its consistent remainder that "poverty" is ultimately an ambiguous term, one which consistently shifts in its meaning. For instance, the "poverty line," the amount of annual income below which a family or individual is regarded as poor, has gradually ratcheted upwards over the last century. Robert Hunter, in his 1904 book "Poverty," stated that 12 percent of the U.S. population was impoverished, or earned the equivalent of under $460 a year for a family of five ($300 for a family in the rural South). He said this was the minimum that allowed people to "obtain those necessaries which will permit them to maintain a state of physical efficiency." A little later Father John Ryan said that a "living wage" (a term which he invented) was $600 to $800 depending on locations for a family of three. A Brookings Institution study of 1934 ("America's Capacity to Consume") said that the basic necessities budget was $2000 (about twice Hunter's line in real dollars), and even in the midst of the Depression fewer families fell under it than back in 1900. In 1962 the Social Security Administration said it was $3000 for a family of four or $1,500 for an individual, and they made no location adjustment. Although that "poverty line" has defined poverty in America ever since, even with inflation adjustments the average person under the line has much greater access to cars, televisions, and housing than a poor person in the 1960s. Today, according to this line, 12% of the population is regarded as living "in poverty," almost the exact same percentage that Hunter believed was impoverished over 100 years earlier. Yet today's poor are infinitely better off than those who inhabited earlier industrial coketowns or sharecropped the Deep South. Despite his concern with continuing privation, Patterson draws attention to our tremendous success in reducing poverty, or at least alleviating it, in the United States.
Patterson also complicates pictures of a unified "culture of poverty." Though such a position has had adherents on both the left and the right at least since Hunter and Joseph Dollard, Patterson reminds us that a large proportion of the poor have always been children, the aged, and the disabled. Also, only a small percentage of "the poor" stay poor for long stretches of time. Any attempt to create a single conception of "poverty" and its culture inevitability ignores such variety. In the early 1900s the dominant image of the poor was of immigrant slums, a la Jacob Riis; in the 1930s it was rural poverty, as presented by Walker Evans; in the 1960s it was black inner cities, as portrayed by writers like James Baldwin. All ignored the poor who continuing to exist and suffer in other climes and environments. Patterson reminds us that the people in poverty are as varied as the nation (though not necessarily representative of the nation).
The main problem with this book is like numerous 20th century histories it is loaded with disjunct facts and figures, often given with little context. Patterson sometimes tries so hard to be balanced that he'll present facts that directly contradict each other and not try to come to any resolution. Still, the history contained here is crucial for anyone concerned with how our nation should continue to direct our vital anti-poverty efforts.
June 28, 2010
I read this book in graduate school and it opened my eyes to government manipulation of the poor, but also sincere government officials trying their best to help the poor.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews