IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/povpop/v9y2017i4p402-425.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Two Legends of American Poverty: Breaking Out of Poverty's Historic Snare

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Dobelstein

Abstract

Efforts to reduce poverty in America have been hobbled by poverty's historic explanation accompanied by a political reticence to accept its contemporary manifestation. Public policy has directed resources toward modifying personal behavior rather than attending the role macroeconomic decisions contribute to poverty. Whereas poverty could be understood within an environment of economic individualism independent of political choices, the Employment Act of 1946 gave Congress the authority to shape the economy, putting economic choices in the center of the political process, and poverty has become a consequence. Congress holds the political power to shape the economy, and the scope of its constitutional obligation to provide for the General Welfare Clause as stated in the Preamble and in Article 1, Section 8, was clarified in 1936 and applied to the Social Security Act in 1937, giving Social Security and Unemployment Insurance constitutional legitimacy. Social Security has assumed the growing burdens of poverty as America's economic individualism world has waned. Expanded extraordinarily over the past 80 years to enlarge its income maintenance protection, Social Security's twentieth‐century economic structure endangers its twenty‐first‐century obligations while Unemployment Insurance's byzantine financing and its administrative structure have failed miserably to address the problems of contemporary poverty. 一直以来, 贫困的历史性解释阻挠着为减少美国贫困状况所做的努力, 同时美国政治也在接受贫困的当代表现形式上保持沉默。公共政策已命令资源朝着调整个人行为的方向发展, 而不是关心宏观经济决策在促成贫困一事上扮演的角色。尽管可以在摆脱政治选择的“经济个人主义”(economic individualism)环境下理解贫困, 美国1946年就业法(Employment Act of 1946)却给与了国会影响经济的权力, 将经济选择作为政治过程的中心, 由此贫困便成为了结果。国会有影响经济的政治权力, 同时1936年在宪法前言部分和第1条第8节都规定了国会应给“一般福利”(General Welfare)提供宪法义务, 1937年宪法义务被应用到了社会保障法案, 这赋予了社会保障和失业保险在宪法上的正当性(Constitutional legitimacy)。社会保障认为, 随着美国经济个人主义的衰退, 贫困的压力正在加大。过去80年来为扩大对特定人口的收入维持保护, 社会保障进行了大规模扩张, 但社会保障的20世纪经济结构却威胁了其在21世纪的义务, 同时失业保险的行政结构和难以捉摸的融资也很不幸地未能处理当代贫困问题。 Los esfuerzos para reducir la pobreza en Estados Unidos han sido dificultados por la explicación histórica de la pobreza acompañada por una resistencia política a aceptar su manifestación contemporánea. La política pública ha dirigido recursos a modificar el comportamiento personal y no a atender el papel que las decisiones macroeconómicas juegan en su contribución a la sociedad. Mientras que la pobreza podría entenderse dentro de un ambiente de individualismo económico independiente de las preferencias políticas, el Employment Act de 1946 le dio al congreso la autoridad para darle forma a la economía, lo que puso las preferencias en el centro del proceso político y la pobreza ha sido una consecuencia de esto. El congreso tiene el poder político de darle forma a la economía, y la envergadura de la obligación constitucional de proveer el bienestar común como está escrito en el Preámbulo y en el Artículo 1 Sección 8 se clarificó en 1936 y aplicó al Social Security Act de 1937, lo que le dio al Seguro Social y al Seguro de Desempleo legitimidad constitucional. El Seguro Social se ha hecho responsable de llevar las cargas de la pobreza mientras el mundo del individualismo económico estadounidense se ha apagado. Habiendo sido expandido en los últimos ochenta años para ampliar el mantenimiento de su presupuesto de protección, la estructura económica del siglo veinte del seguro social pone en peligro sus obligaciones del siglo veintiuno mientras que el complejo financiamiento del seguro de desempleo y su estructura administrativa han fallado gravemente a la hora de enfrentar los problemas de la pobreza contemporánea.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Dobelstein, 2017. "The Two Legends of American Poverty: Breaking Out of Poverty's Historic Snare," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 402-425, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:povpop:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:402-425
    DOI: 10.1002/pop4.198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pop4.198
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pop4.198?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Congressional Budget Office, 2010. "Social Security Policy Options," Reports 21547, Congressional Budget Office.
    2. Congressional Budget Office, 2010. "Social Security Policy Options," Reports 21547, Congressional Budget Office.
    3. Congressional Budget Office, 2010. "Social Security Policy Options," Reports 21547, Congressional Budget Office.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joseph F. Quinn & Kevin E. Cahill, 2015. "The New World of Retirement Income Security in America," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 887, Boston College Department of Economics.
    2. Gustman, Alan L. & Steinmeier, Thomas L., 2015. "Effects of social security policies on benefit claiming, retirement and saving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 51-62.
    3. Kathleen Krier, 2013. "Sustainable Social Security," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(3), pages 74-92.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:povpop:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:402-425. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1944-2858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.