Poverty is a sad but unfortunately integral part of the world, and only a few countries can boast of its absence or a low level. At the same time, the country’s policy is implemented depending on the culture of society, and the general level of welfare reflects its effectiveness. Some people blame the state, poor social policies, bureaucracy, discrimination, and education system for all the troubles, while others claim that poor people themselves are responsible for their poverty. According to Royce (2015), American society is no exception, but a second understanding of the problem prevails in the public mind. Consequently, this paper will apply the concepts of an individualistic and structural view on poverty presented in the book Poverty and power by Royce to explain the discussions about the child tax credit policy.
In the New York Times article, “The tax break for children, except the ones who need it most,” the author discusses tax credit increases. The Trump administration doubled the tax credit for families with children in 2017, and now parents can receive $ 2,000 per child (Deparle, 2019). However, the central thesis of the article is the fact that despite the increase in credit, which should save families with children more money, most parents do not earn enough to satisfy the requirements to get it. For this reason, 25% of families receive only part of the tax credit, and 10% do not receive it at all (Deparle, 2019). Consequently, despite formal improvements and efforts to combat poverty, reform is not useful for poor people who really need help.
In addition, the article shows different views and attitudes towards such a policy. For example, a mother of two children who receive only part of the credit says that the wealthier people who get the full amount do not need this money, since they already have enough (Deparle, 2019). At the same time, a divorced mother with three children, who can get a credit, says that they are necessary as her family pays more taxes in general (Deparle, 2019).
The article also reflects the ideas of politicians from different parties and famous personalities about social benefits, which shows that they are mostly opposite. The author also cites evidence that social allowance to children bring positive results as it helps them to eat and learn better. At the same time, Deparle (2019) shows examples of how poverty can harm the development of children. Thus, this article highlights the broad issue of combating poverty, although its central theme is concrete measures, and it also shows the attitude of the population towards poor US citizens.
The concepts presented in the book Poverty and power help to better understand the content of the article and the reasons for such a different attitude of people to the same problem. First, Royce explains the concept of individualism, which shapes people’s view of poverty. “Americans’ routine exposure to ideologies of poverty and inequality is consistently skewed toward a language accentuating the efficacy of individual striving rather than the constraint of limited opportunities.
Finally, the ideology of individualism is influential not only because it proposes easily understandable and culturally sanctioned explanations for poverty, but also because it suggests straightforward and uncontroversial solutions to the problem: education, hard work, and family values” (Royce, 2015, p. 144). In other words, the individualistic approach argues that poverty is the result of laziness and the reluctance of poor people to change their lives. Supporters of this idea believe that a person can live better and become richer if he or she works hard, and the help of the government only allows them to do nothing.
The individualistic concept explains the situation in the United States associated with tax cuts for families with children. Most families do not receive full tax credits because they do not earn enough, and they need additional benefits, but the government does not want to revise this policy (Deparle, 2019). Most people believe that higher income requirements help poor people work harder to get full credit, and the government will allow them to be lazy by reducing this level.
Deparle (2019) notes that although many countries offer benefits to combat child poverty, opponents of this idea say that such measures impede responsibility and development. This idea is further supported by the words of a particular politician: “Robert Rector of the conservative Heritage Foundation warns that a universal child allowance would promote dependency and discourage work” (Deparle, 2019, Fighting Child Poverty section, para. 16). Thus, the concept of individualism prevailing in American society is reflected in US policy, as can be seen in the article.
Moreover, this attitude to poverty creates a vicious circle, since the words of famous personalities and politicians are authoritative for the media that shape public opinion. Popular ideas among the population, in turn, force politicians to form their views and programs and make decisions that will satisfy the general public. Royce (2015), in his book, also discusses the impact of media on society and emphasizes that almost all channels and newspapers form their agenda in a way that encourages an individualistic view on poverty. Consequently, although the New York Times article does not promote an individualistic approach, it demonstrates its manifestation in the life of Americans.
The concept of structuralism also explains the second side presented in the article. Royce (2015) claims by speaking about proponents of a structural view on poverty: “The other camp attributes poverty primarily to structural or external factors, such as discrimination, low quality schools, or lack of jobs” (p.148). This concept explains the views of people, who tend to believe that poverty is caused by of influence of external factors that people cannot overcome without help. Supporters of this approach believe that inequality of opportunity prevents many people from achieving financial wealth despite their efforts. Obstacles may include a lack of access to quality education and well-paid jobs and others. For this reason, the state should assist the population in eliminating these factors or reducing their impact.
Many examples illustrating this concept are covered in the article from the first lines. The very fact that many families do not receive full credits because of their low earnings indicates the injustice of the existing system, or systemic factors that prevent them from getting out of poverty. The first example of Ciera Dismuke demonstrates that despite her hard work, she still couldn’t earn enough money (Deparle, 2019). Ivanka Trump’s tweet “we are fighting each and every day for hard-working American families” does not sound convincing by comparing to the previous example (Deparle, 2019, Fighting Child Poverty section, para. 14).
The author further notes that social assistance benefits children, which is another manifestation of the structural concept of poverty. For instance, Deparle (2019) notes that this money goes both to pay bills and to additional classes for schoolchildren, which increases their level of education and helps to get qualified for a well-paid job. Therefore, a structural view of poverty is necessary to combat unfortunate circumstances.
Furthermore, the concept helps to understand the initiatives of some politicians to combat poverty, as well as their failures. For example, knowing the prevalence of individualistic views on poverty in American society, it becomes clear why attempts to establish an allowance for all low-income families with children did not find support. In addition, explanations of the adverse effects of external factors on children’s well-being also underline the existence of a structural approach to the problem.
Deparle (2019) shows the cause of child poverty by the example of the teenager as he is forced to pay less attention to school to get to work and buy food for himself. Thus, this article demonstrates that a structural view of poverty has support in society, but the prevailing individualistic approach shapes the country’s politics.
Therefore, reading the chapter “Cultural system and poverty” in the book Poverty and power: The problem of structural inequality by Royce provided a deeper understanding of the causes and effects of poverty in the US. The concept of individualism, as well as its vast influence on social policy, was reflected in the very topic of the article, which was the central issue of discussion. An understanding of this concept helped me see the reasons for the formation of the current policy but not emotionally perceive its consequences presented in the article.
In addition, examples of the positive impact of social benefits on the fight against child poverty and the harmful effects of their absence helped me realize the importance of the structural approach in political discourse. I hope that other readers have been able to see this aspect also, and this helps to reduce the influence of an individualistic view. I was also pleased that the author focused on the structural approach to reveal the problem, since it is the media and authoritative sources that primarily affect the consciousness of society in the fight against poverty.
References
Deparle, J. (2019). The tax break for children, except the ones who need it most. The New York Times. Web.
Royce, E. (2015). Cultural system and poverty. In Poverty and power: the problem of structural inequality (2nd ed., pp. 143-170). Rowman & Littlefield.