This article needs additional citations for verification .(June 2022) |
Author | B. Seebohm Rowntree |
---|---|
Genre | Sociology |
Publisher | Macmillan and Co. |
Publication date | 1901 |
Media type | Print (hardback and paperback) |
Pages | 437 |
ISBN | 1-86134-202-0 |
OCLC | 318236487 |
Poverty, A Study of Town Life is the first book by Seebohm Rowntree, a sociological researcher, social reformer and industrialist, published in 1901. The study, widely considered a seminal work of sociology, details Rowntree's investigation of poverty in York, England and the subsequent implications that arise from the findings, in regard to the nature of poverty at the start of the twentieth century. It also marks the first usage of a poverty line in sociological research.
Rowntree and his assistants conducted the study on over two-thirds of the population of York; around 46,000 people, excluding those individuals who were able to afford to employ a domestic servant. Of the 46,000 people surveyed, the study revealed that 20,000 were living in poverty; defined by falling below a calculated minimum weekly sum of money 'necessary to enable families to secure the necessities of a healthy life'. 28% of York's population were living in the most serious poverty (or absolute poverty), unable to acquire even basic necessities such as food, fuel and clothing. There were discovered to be two chief reasons for such poverty. Firstly, in 25% of the cases, individuals or families were impoverished as a result of an absolute lack of income, on account of the chief wage-earner being either dead, disabled or otherwise unable to work. However, in around 50% of cases, the chief wage-earner was employed in regular work, but paid mere pittance, unable to sustain a healthy level of living. In the remainder of the cases, income was satisfactory to purchase necessities, but the spending of it was often "unwise", or simply unnecessary. Importantly, the study revealed that poverty in Britain was widespread, and not simply confined to the sprawling urban metropolis of London.
Rowntree's findings proved instrumental in changing public perception of the causes of poverty, and are widely regarded as a significant catalyst in the emergence of the New Liberalism movement, as well as the subsequent Liberal welfare reforms from 1906 to 1914, providing the foundation for the modern-day Welfare State.
The publication had particular influence on the leading liberal and future prime minister, David Lloyd George, primarily as a result of Rowntree's tireless lecture tour across the country, and the media frenzy that surrounded its publication. Another future Prime Minister, Winston Churchill (who famously "crossed the floor" in the House of Commons and sit as Liberal Party member in 1903) was equally influenced by the study. When addressing an audience in Blackpool in 1902, he stated that Rowntree's book had "fairly made [his] hair stand on end", going on to call the revelations of the study in regard to poverty, a "terrible and shocking thing", and subsequently expressing sympathy with "people who have only the workhouse or prison as avenues to change from their present situation." [1]
To many politicians, such as Churchill, rather than simply highlighting the plight of the poor, Rowntree's study prompted further evidence for the necessity to improve National Efficiency; an issue of great contemporary concern for government, fuelling fears in relation to the perceived decline of the British Empire as a world power, at least in relation to other major powers, namely the growing military might of Germany. In addition to this, Churchill concluded from Rowntree's findings that it was quite evident "that the American labourer is a stronger, larger, healthier, better fed, and consequently more efficient animal than a large proportion of our population, and this is surely a fact which our unbridled Imperialists, who have no thought but to pile up armaments, taxation and territory, should not lose sight of." Furthermore, he wrote: "For my own part, I see little glory in an Empire which can rule the waves and is unable to flush its sewers." Contextually, the study was published in 1901 amidst furore over the ongoing Second Boer War, in which Britain, an Imperial power, was seemingly unable to defeat a "far-inferior" Boer force of Calvinistic farmers. During the war, the authorities encountered immense difficulty in actually finding men to fight One in three potential recruits were refused on medical grounds.[ citation needed ]
The publication received some amount of contemporary criticism, predominantly from groups such as the Charity Organisation Society who advocated the principles of self-help and limited government intervention in regard to poverty; which fundamentally indicated that the poor were poor of their own accord. These beliefs, of course, ran counter to the revelations of Rowntree's study, which discovered quite the opposite to be the case. Helen Bosanquet, one of the founders of the Charity Organisation Society, and wife of Bernard Bosanquet, expressed scepticism about the accuracy of the findings, explaining that Rowntree's poverty line represented "no statistical evidence at all", being "merely a summary of impressions." Similarly, Charles Loch, the COS secretary, was particularly scathing, citing the content of the study as "generalisations cloaked in numerical phraseology".[ citation needed ]
The poverty threshold, poverty limit, poverty line, or breadline is the minimum level of income deemed adequate in a particular country. The poverty line is usually calculated by estimating the total cost of one year's worth of necessities for the average adult. The cost of housing, such as the rent for an apartment, usually makes up the largest proportion of this estimate, so economists track the real estate market and other housing cost indicators as a major influence on the poverty line. Individual factors are often used to account for various circumstances, such as whether one is a parent, elderly, a child, married, etc. The poverty threshold may be adjusted annually. In practice, like the definition of poverty, the official or common understanding of the poverty line is significantly higher in developed countries than in developing countries.
Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America is a book written by Barbara Ehrenreich. Written from her perspective as an undercover journalist, it sets out to investigate the impact of the 1996 welfare reform act on the working poor in the United States.
The welfare state of the United Kingdom began to evolve in the 1900s and early 1910s, and comprises expenditures by the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland intended to improve health, education, employment and social security. The British system has been classified as a liberal welfare state system.
A living wage is defined as the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their basic needs. This is not the same as a subsistence wage, which refers to a biological minimum, or a solidarity wage, which refers to a minimum wage tracking labor productivity. Needs are defined to include food, housing, and other essential needs such as clothing. The goal of a living wage is to allow a worker to afford a basic but decent standard of living through employment without government subsidies. Due to the flexible nature of the term "needs", there is not one universally accepted measure of what a living wage is and as such it varies by location and household type. A related concept is that of a family wage – one sufficient to not only support oneself, but also to raise a family.
Benjamin Seebohm Rowntree, CH was an English sociological researcher, social reformer and industrialist. He is known in particular for his three studies of poverty in York, conducted in 1899, 1935, and 1951.
The working poor are working people whose incomes fall below a given poverty line due to low-income jobs and low familial household income. These are people who spend at least 27 weeks in a year working or looking for employment, but remain under the poverty threshold.
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) is a charity that conducts and funds research aimed at solving poverty in the UK. JRF's stated aim is to "inspire action and change that will create a prosperous UK without poverty."
Charles James Booth was a British shipowner, Comtean positivist, social researcher, and reformer, best known for his innovative philanthropic studies on working-class life in London towards the end of the 19th century.
Peter Brereton Townsend was a British sociologist. The last position he held was Professor of International Social Policy at the London School of Economics. He was also Emeritus Professor of Social Policy in the University of Bristol, and was one of the co-founders of the University of Essex. He wrote widely on the economics of poverty and was co-founder of the Child Poverty Action Group. The Peter Townsend Policy Press Prize was established by the British Academy in his memory.
In economics, a cycle of poverty or poverty trap is when poverty seems to be inherited, preventing subsequent generations from escaping it. It is caused by self-reinforcing mechanisms that cause poverty, once it exists, to persist unless there is outside intervention. It can persist across generations, and when applied to developing countries, is also known as a development trap.
Workfare is a governmental plan under which welfare recipients are required to accept public-service jobs or to participate in job training. Many countries around the world have adopted workfare to reduce poverty among able-bodied adults; however, their approaches to execution vary. The United States and United Kingdom are two countries utilizing workfare, albeit with different backgrounds.
Poverty in Australia refers to the incidence of relative poverty in Australia and its measurement. Relative income poverty is measured as the percentage of the population that earns less than the median wage of the working population.
Poverty in the United Kingdom is the condition experienced by the portion of the population of the United Kingdom that lacks adequate financial resources for a certain standard of living, as defined under the various measures of poverty.
Helen Bosanquet was an English social theorist, social reformer, and economist concerned with poverty, social policy, working-class life, and modern social work practices. Helen worked closely with the Charity Organisation Society (COS), using her direct experience with living among "the poor". Bosanquet focused much of her career on family, specifically working-class families, and their relationship with poverty. Helen was the wife of English philosopher Bernard Bosanquet.
The Minority report was one of two reports published by the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws and Relief of Distress 1905–1909, the other being Majority report. Headed by the Fabian socialist Beatrice Webb, it called for a system that was radically different from the existing Poor Law. She, amongst the others heading the report, who included George Lansbury, felt that it was shortsighted of society to expect paupers to be entirely accountable for themselves.
Poverty is measured in different ways by different bodies, both governmental and nongovernmental. Measurements can be absolute, which references a single standard, or relative, which is dependent on context. Poverty is widely understood to be multidimensional, comprising social, natural and economic factors situated within wider socio-political processes.
Social work as a profession dates back to years ago, with the first social welfare agencies appearing in urban areas in the 1800s. It has its roots in the attempts of society at large to deal with the problem of poverty and inequality. Social work is intricately linked with the idea of charity work, but must be understood in broader terms. The concept of charity goes back to ancient times, and the practice of providing for the poor has roots in all major world religions.
The term juvenilization of poverty is one used to describe the processes by which children are at a higher risk for being poor, suffer consistent and long-term negative effects due to deprivation, and are disproportionately affected by systemic issues that perpetuate poverty. The term connotes not just the mere existence of child poverty but the increase in both relative and absolute measures of poverty among children as compared to both other vulnerable groups and the population at large.
Poverty in Poland has been relatively stable in the past decades, affecting about 6.5% of the society. In the last decade there has been a lowering trend, as in general Polish society is becoming wealthier and the economy is enjoying one of the highest growth rates in Europe. There have been noticeable increases in poverty around the turns of the decades, offset by decreases in poverty in the years following those periods.
The Family Assistance Plan (FAP) was a welfare program introduced by President Richard Nixon in August 1969, which aimed to implement a negative income tax for households with working parents. The FAP was influenced by President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty program that aimed to expand welfare across all American citizens, especially for working-class Americans. Nixon intended for the FAP to replace existing welfare programs such as the Aid to Assist Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program as a way to attract conservative voters that were beginning to become wary of welfare while maintaining middle-class constituencies. The FAP specifically provided aid assistance to working-class Americans, dividing benefits based on age, the number of children, family income, and eligibility. Initially, the Nixon administration thought the FAP legislation would easily pass through the House of Representatives and the more liberal Senate, as both chambers were controlled by the Democratic Party. In June 1971, the FAP under the bill H.R. 1 during the 92nd Congress, passed in the House of Representatives. However, from December 1971 to June 1972 H.R.1 bill that included the FAP underwent scrutiny in the Senate chamber, particularly by the Senate Finance Committee controlled by the conservative Democrats, while the Republicans were also reluctant on passing the program. Eventually, on October 5 of 1972, a revised version of H.R.1 passed the Senate with a vote of 68-5 that only authorized funding for FAP testing before its implementation. During House-Senate reconciliation, before Nixon signed the bill on October 15, 1972, the entire provision on FAP was dropped. The FAP enjoyed broad support from Americans across different regions. Reception towards the program varied across racial, regional, income, and gender differences. The FAP is best remembered for beginning the rhetoric against the expansion of welfare that was popular during the New Deal. It initiated the support for anti-welfare conservative movements that became mainstream in American political discourse during the Reagan era.