Welcome to the first issue of Within Our Means, a biweekly newsletter about ending poverty in America. If you’d like to receive this in your inbox, please sign up here:
I have always been interested in how race and class shape our society, and my work often focuses on issues such as criminal justice, Housingand the social safety net. But while I want to highlight issues, I also think that’s only half of my job. The other half is asking, “Now what?”
That’s what this newsletter will do. Some topics will dig into specific ways that poverty punishes people across the country. Others will see policies that either increase or decrease poverty. The main goal is to find practical solutions to improve people’s lives. And so if you, like me, think that poverty is a problem that can be eradicated in the United States, think of this newsletter as a way for us to imagine what a realistic path to the future might look like.
Why are so many Americans poor?
America has been through many ups and downs since the civil rights era, but one thing has remained remarkably constant: In 1970, 12.6 percent are Americans was considered poor; In 2023, this number was 11.1 percent – or 36.8 million people. Sociologist Matthew Desmond says “to graph the share of Americans living in poverty over the past half-century is like drawing a line that resembles a gently rolling hill.” Wrote last year.
It may seem that the persistence of poverty in the United States says something about how complex the problem is. After all, it is the richest country in the world. If America can not eliminate poverty, then who can? But this is not America can’t do it; It doesn’t like that.
That said, there isn’t a single answer to why so many Americans are stuck in poverty. It’s true, for example, that the American welfare system is broken, consistently underfunded, and in some cases set up to fail. Studies have shown that programs like Work requirements do not workAnd the state has been Billions of dollars in stocks were seized Instead of the value of welfare funds they distribute to those for whom they are intended.
But it is also true that a tremendous amount of money and effort goes into establishing and running anti-poverty programs, and many of them succeed. Social Security, for example, keeps More than 20 million people Above the poverty line.
In recent years, America has shown how poverty is a choice More than a third. And a stronger social safety net from the Covid relief bill almost halved child poverty in a year – sharpest decline on record. Once those programs expire, however, child poverty rates Bounce right back.
One reason poverty is so stubborn
Last year, many homeowners in Lexington, Massachusetts came out to oppose a zoning change that would have allowed more housing to be built in the affluent Boston suburb. People who needed new housing were understandably unaffected.
“How do you think it makes me feel when some people from some vantage point say they don’t want the kind of multifamily housing I live in because it might look ugly or doesn’t fit the essence of this city? “A young resident, whose family relied on multi-family housing to be able to live in Lexington, Told the city legislature. “Are we really setting the bar of entry as a $1 million dollar home to join our community?”
This situation is one answer to the question that makes the problem of poverty so complex: competing interests. That’s the reality Many people benefit From the existence of poverty. With the economy already pitting so many groups against each other, many Americans fear that they have too much to lose if we choose to build a more just society.
Homeowners are told that their homes are the key to wealth creation, so they reasonably want their property values to continue to rise. For renters, on the other hand, rising housing costs are a loss. So while renters may want lawmakers to make room for more housing, Homeowners often resist Any changes that could cause their home prices to stagnate.
It’s a theme we’ll explore in our medium — who benefits and who stands to lose from the policies our lawmakers choose to pursue. We will also look at questions about justification, political viability and why anti-poverty programs should be seen as investments rather than handouts. And while we’ll often look at economic arguments, we won’t shy away from reaching morally driven conclusions either. Sometimes, a program that helps the most vulnerable people is still worth paying for even if it doesn’t necessarily help the economy grow.
It doesn’t have to be this way
Even when divergent interests exist — such as between renters and homeowners — change is possible: Lexington Approval is over Zoning changes required to build more housing, and Follow the neighboring cities its lead
This was by no means an inevitable or easy outcome. for many decadesLexington and its neighbors were A symbol of liberal hypocrisy — the kind of place where you might see “Black Lives Matter” and “Refugees Welcome” signs, but fierce opposition to any new housing projects that would serve to desegregate the area.
But one lesson from Lexington is that sometimes people take a hit. It wasn’t just that the townspeople had a sudden change of heart – although some residents did was clearly in trouble by their own history. the state enacted a law Jurisdictions served by public transit are required to approve the construction of more multi-family housing if they want to receive certain state funding. Whether the city ends up building the housing units that would make the suburbs more affordable depends on where residents put their money. But now at least the door has been opened.
Some of the changes needed to alleviate poverty are small, uncomfortable bureaucratic adjustments, such as local zoning reforms in Lexington and elsewhere. Others require an ambitious rethink.
The project of poverty alleviation will be expensive, but it is clear for a long time That America can afford it. If more than two-thirds of household wealth Concentrated in the top 10 percent When the bottom half owns only 2.5 percent of households, no one should live in disgrace.
“There is nothing new about poverty now.” Martin Luther King, Jr. said almost 60 years ago. “What’s new at the moment though is that we now have the resources, we now have the skills, the strategies to get out of poverty. And the question is whether our nation has the will.”
Share your thoughts
If you have any ideas, thoughts or personal experiences you’d like to share, I’d love to hear from you. You can contact me at abdallah.fayyad@vox.com.
This story was featured in our Medium newsletter. Sign up here.
