EXPLNATIONS FOR POVERTY
Functionalist explanation of poverty
Davis and Moore argue that inequalities in wealth and income are necessary to
maintain society, this is also the preferred position of the New Right.
Some positions in society are more functionally important than other in
maintaining society.
Those who earn more have specialist skills that not everyone has the talent
and ability to acquire.
Those who do have the ability and talent, as well as the motivation to
undertake lengthy training, need the promise of high rewards in terms of
income and wealth.
A system of unequal rewards is necessary to make sure that the most able
people get into the most important social positions.
There is no way of knowing which positions in society are the most
important, and this often relies on personal judgments.
Some people have higher levels of wealth not because they have talent or
occupy important positions in society, but because they have inherited it.
Marxist explanations of poverty
Marxists argue inequalities are an outcome of the ruling-class owning the means of
production (the factories) who exploit their position when employing the working-
class.
By owning the means of production, the ruling-class capitalise on the profits
generated by their working-class employees.
The ruling-classes exploit the working-classes by getting them to work as hard as
possible for lowest wage possible.
The ruling-class then invest their profits in more plant and machinery to generate
even more profits.
The outcome of such a process is social class inequality.
Marxist explanations ignore the upper middle classes as they don’t own the means
of production but earn incomes large enough to earn vast amounts of wealth.
It ignores wealth won on lotteries such as Euro Millions.
Marxists never identify what amount is too much wealth or too high an income,
therefore many middle-class occupations can be seen as giving people too large an
income and making someone too wealthy.
Feminist explanations of poverty
Feminists would identify patriarchy as being the cause of inequalities between
genders.
Because men tend to be in a position of authority within the home and workplace,
they inevitably control the decision making.
Jan Phal (1993) found women are economically disadvantaged within the home as
men tend to control and manage a couple’s income.
In the workplace, women's careers are often cut short to raise children constraining
their lifetime earning potential.
The glass-ceiling reduces the capacity of women to reach higher positions in their
career.
Recent evidence also suggests when women do reach senior positions their pay is
significantly less than their male counterparts.
, Distribution of Poverty
Ethnicity
Poverty in minority ethnic groups is about double that of White British
people.
Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are the poorest groups in the UK.
Ethnic minorities are more likely to be employed in low pay jobs or be
unemployed than White British.
Pakistanis and Bangladeshis often have large families, combined with low
paid jobs, this increases poverty levels.
Racism in employment means that some ethnic minority groups find it
difficult to find the best-paid jobs.
Some ethnic minority groups are more likely to underachieve at school,
making it hard for them to secure the higher paid skilled jobs.
Functionalists argue that poverty amongst minority ethnic groups is
functional for the system, in that they are motivated to take the lower paid
manual jobs.
Weberian theories suggest that some minority ethnic groups have a weaker
market situation due to educational underachievement.
Marxists see racism and low pay contributing to divisions in the working
class, by separating the poor working-class from the non-poor working class,
dividing black and white workers and, thus, preventing the development of
working-class unity that might threaten the capitalist system.
New Right theorists suggest that some minority ethnic groups are to blame
for their poverty, as they are part of a dependency culture and a work-shy
underclass.
Child Poverty
Older people are now less likely to be living in low-income households than adults
of working age.
Child poverty in the UK remains higher than in most other countries of the EU;
around 27 percent of all children in the UK were living in poverty in 2013-2014,
compared to 19 percent of adults.
Poverty is greatest amongst homeless children, those with disabled parents,
children from Pakistani and Bangladeshi households, and children from
marginalised groups like asylum seekers and Gypsy/Traveller communities.
Poverty affects educational achievement and has long-lasting effects on health and
psychological development.
Poor children are more likely to become poor adults.
Child poverty can generate wider social problems, for example, crime and anti-
social behaviour.
Child poverty can lead to children becoming socially isolated and stigmatised, for
example, because they cannot afford the things that many children take for
granted.
Hirsch offers a number of reasons for the high levels of child poverty:
o Lone parenthood.
o Lack of work or parents in low pay jobs.
o Disability, resulting in parents finding it harder to find work.
Functionalist explanation of poverty
Davis and Moore argue that inequalities in wealth and income are necessary to
maintain society, this is also the preferred position of the New Right.
Some positions in society are more functionally important than other in
maintaining society.
Those who earn more have specialist skills that not everyone has the talent
and ability to acquire.
Those who do have the ability and talent, as well as the motivation to
undertake lengthy training, need the promise of high rewards in terms of
income and wealth.
A system of unequal rewards is necessary to make sure that the most able
people get into the most important social positions.
There is no way of knowing which positions in society are the most
important, and this often relies on personal judgments.
Some people have higher levels of wealth not because they have talent or
occupy important positions in society, but because they have inherited it.
Marxist explanations of poverty
Marxists argue inequalities are an outcome of the ruling-class owning the means of
production (the factories) who exploit their position when employing the working-
class.
By owning the means of production, the ruling-class capitalise on the profits
generated by their working-class employees.
The ruling-classes exploit the working-classes by getting them to work as hard as
possible for lowest wage possible.
The ruling-class then invest their profits in more plant and machinery to generate
even more profits.
The outcome of such a process is social class inequality.
Marxist explanations ignore the upper middle classes as they don’t own the means
of production but earn incomes large enough to earn vast amounts of wealth.
It ignores wealth won on lotteries such as Euro Millions.
Marxists never identify what amount is too much wealth or too high an income,
therefore many middle-class occupations can be seen as giving people too large an
income and making someone too wealthy.
Feminist explanations of poverty
Feminists would identify patriarchy as being the cause of inequalities between
genders.
Because men tend to be in a position of authority within the home and workplace,
they inevitably control the decision making.
Jan Phal (1993) found women are economically disadvantaged within the home as
men tend to control and manage a couple’s income.
In the workplace, women's careers are often cut short to raise children constraining
their lifetime earning potential.
The glass-ceiling reduces the capacity of women to reach higher positions in their
career.
Recent evidence also suggests when women do reach senior positions their pay is
significantly less than their male counterparts.
, Distribution of Poverty
Ethnicity
Poverty in minority ethnic groups is about double that of White British
people.
Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are the poorest groups in the UK.
Ethnic minorities are more likely to be employed in low pay jobs or be
unemployed than White British.
Pakistanis and Bangladeshis often have large families, combined with low
paid jobs, this increases poverty levels.
Racism in employment means that some ethnic minority groups find it
difficult to find the best-paid jobs.
Some ethnic minority groups are more likely to underachieve at school,
making it hard for them to secure the higher paid skilled jobs.
Functionalists argue that poverty amongst minority ethnic groups is
functional for the system, in that they are motivated to take the lower paid
manual jobs.
Weberian theories suggest that some minority ethnic groups have a weaker
market situation due to educational underachievement.
Marxists see racism and low pay contributing to divisions in the working
class, by separating the poor working-class from the non-poor working class,
dividing black and white workers and, thus, preventing the development of
working-class unity that might threaten the capitalist system.
New Right theorists suggest that some minority ethnic groups are to blame
for their poverty, as they are part of a dependency culture and a work-shy
underclass.
Child Poverty
Older people are now less likely to be living in low-income households than adults
of working age.
Child poverty in the UK remains higher than in most other countries of the EU;
around 27 percent of all children in the UK were living in poverty in 2013-2014,
compared to 19 percent of adults.
Poverty is greatest amongst homeless children, those with disabled parents,
children from Pakistani and Bangladeshi households, and children from
marginalised groups like asylum seekers and Gypsy/Traveller communities.
Poverty affects educational achievement and has long-lasting effects on health and
psychological development.
Poor children are more likely to become poor adults.
Child poverty can generate wider social problems, for example, crime and anti-
social behaviour.
Child poverty can lead to children becoming socially isolated and stigmatised, for
example, because they cannot afford the things that many children take for
granted.
Hirsch offers a number of reasons for the high levels of child poverty:
o Lone parenthood.
o Lack of work or parents in low pay jobs.
o Disability, resulting in parents finding it harder to find work.
