Tag Archives: poverty

The American Deficit: Where Do We Go from Here?

By Marian Wright Edelman

“There is nothing new about poverty. What is new, however, is that we now have the resources to get rid of it. Not too many years ago, Dr. Kirtley Mather, a Harvard geologist, wrote a book entitled Enough and to Spare. He set forth the basic theme that famine is wholly unnecessary in the modern world. Today, therefore, the question on the agenda must read: Why should there be hunger and privation in any land, in any city, at any table, when man has the resources and the scientific know-how to provide all mankind with the basic necessities of life?”

Forty-five years ago this month, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. took a very rare sabbatical at an isolated house in Jamaica far away from telephones and the constant pressures of his life as a very public civil rights leader to write what would become his last book: Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? The excerpt above feels as though it could have been written yesterday. Professor Mather’s book arguing that mankind had achieved the ability to move beyond famine was published in 1944, but in 2012, despite nearly seventy more years of unparalleled advances both in scientific and technological capability and in global resources and wealth, hunger and want are still rampant. Back then Dr. King wrote:

“There is no deficit in human resources; the deficit is in human will… The well-off and the secure have too often become indifferent and oblivious to the poverty and deprivation in their midst. The poor in our countries have been shut out of our minds, and driven from the mainstream of our societies, because we have allowed them to become invisible. Ultimately a great nation is a compassionate nation. No individual or nation can be great if it does not have a concern for ‘the least of these.'”

When Dr. King died in 1968 calling for a Poor People’s Campaign, there were 25.4 million poor Americans, including 11 million poor children. Today there are more than 46 million Americans living in poverty, including 16.4 million poor children. The question of why we still allow poverty and hunger to exist-and the answer-remain the same: The deficit in human will.

As another political season gets into full swing in the United States, a new crop of candidates are making a lot of promises about their competing visions of America. But how many TV debates are focusing on whether America is a compassionate nation? How many stump speeches are saying how shameful it is that last year more Americans relied on food stamps to eat than at any time since the program began in 1939? How many are responding to Occupy Wall Street’s outcry about the morally obscene gulf between rich and poor in our nation where the 400 highest income earners made as much as the combined tax revenues of 22 states in 2008? Which PACs are running commercials to remind Americans that we are normalizing poverty, child hunger, and homelessness, and creating historic income, wealth, and mobility gaps that threaten to destroy the American dream? If the qualification for individual and national greatness is genuine concern for the ‘least of these,’ too many of our political leaders and citizens are failing.

As our nation pauses for the national holiday celebrating Dr. King’s birthday, I hope we will not spend it just listening to speeches praising Dr. King but instead will heed and act on his words.

When will we hear what Dr. King declared in 1967-“the time has come for an all-out world war against poverty”-and work to win the first victory right here at home in the richest nation on earth? Is it possible to overcome our deficit in human will, or is the fact that we have already squandered so much time and still have so far to go a reason to give up?

Dr. King’s voice guides us if we are willing to take the next step and use it as a road map for action. In Where Do We Go from Here?, as he reflected on what direction the struggle for civil rights and social justice should take next, he shared a story about the need to commit to difficult struggles for the long haul. Dr. King described a flight he had taken from New York to London years earlier in an older propeller airplane. The trip took nine and a half hours, but on the way home, the crew announced the flight from London back to New York would take twelve and a half. When the pilot came out to visit the cabin, Dr. King asked him why. “‘You must understand about the winds,’ he said. ‘When we leave New York, a strong tail wind is in our favor, but when we return, a strong head wind is against us.’ Then he added, ‘Don’t worry. These four engines are capable of battling the winds.'”

Dr. King concluded: “In any social revolution there are times when the tail winds of triumph and fulfillment favor us, and other times when strong head winds of disappointment and setbacks beat against us relentlessly. We must not permit adverse winds to overwhelm us as we journey across life’s mighty Atlantic; we must be sustained by our engines of courage in spite of the winds. This refusal to be stopped, this ‘courage to be,’ this determination to go on ‘in spite of’ is the hallmark of any great movement.”

Today we need to rev up our engines of courage, battle against the fierce head winds of economic downturn, unemployment, poverty, and greed that threaten to undo the progress of the last fifty years, and stay true to the course Dr. King set for us. Now is the time to end child poverty and hunger in America.

[Read King’s 1967 speech titled Were Do We Go From Here?]

Marian Wright Edelman is President of the Children’s Defense Fund whose Leave No Child Behind® mission is to ensure every child a Healthy Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start and a Moral Start in life and successful passage to adulthood with the help of caring families and communities. For more information go to www.childrensdefense.org.

Fixing the Flaw in the Political Economy : Casinos and Poverty, Welfare and Capitalism

The following except is from the World Bank blog “Development Impact”. Jed Friedman’s post titled “Build a casino to help understand the consequences of poverty” does not favor Casinos, gambling, or the idea that either one improves the well-being of a community. Friedman believes certain types of research may still be important that can help us understand how economics affects our health and families. Even so, as you will see, the presence of a Casino was beneficial to a certain group of poor Americans in one community.

I was reminded of the legacy of natural experiment as I reread a paper that explores the relationship between poverty and mental health in children by E. Jane Costello and co-authors. It was published 8 years ago in a leading medical journal but flew under the radar in the economics community presumably because it was written by epidemiologists for the medical and public health community.

Also the study focused on the relationship between poverty and mental health – not a common cross-over area of interest in our field. However it is a long standing interest of mine. And it’s a nice example of what can be learned when researchers get lucky with an unanticipated change in the environment under study.

In the middle of an 8-year study of mental illness in children in the Smoky Mountains region of North Carolina, a casino opened on a Native American reservation that fell in the study area. The casino paid a percentage of profits to all tribal households. The casino and surrounding motels and restaurants also became a source of employment. Roughly a quarter of all children in the study was Native American and resided on the federal reservation, so there was sufficient density in the data to contrast changes in the Native American population with the neighboring white population that didn’t receive these direct transfers.

Children living in poverty are more likely than non-poor children to have a psychiatric disorder. In the baseline study data, children below the poverty line were 59% more likely to have a psychiatric symptom than non-poor children. However the problem of disentangling the relational direction of poverty and mental health is clear. It’s possible that the adversity and stress of poverty can lead to worse mental health, but it’s also possible that causation can run in the other direction — poor mental health of adults can lead to adverse economic outcomes and may also be transmittable to children.

Enter the casino and the annual transfers of up to $6000 per year to each reservation household. Poverty rates declined significantly. In these same households certain dimensions of child mental health, notably conduct disorders, improved significantly over a short period. (Although, importantly, other dimensions of mental health such as depression did not improve). The one significant mediator of the observed change in child health status appears to be an increase in parental supervision and parental presence in the child’s life.

Just in case you didn’t connect the dots, Friedman’s post reveals both the flaw in America’s political economy and suggests a way to fix it. The flaw is the stress of poverty and its terrible effects on the health of the poor. Stress and ill health both reciprocate producing dysfunctional lives and families. The American founders didn’t need a degree in psychiatry or economics to understand that ill health adversely affects the pursuit of happiness including wealth, good relationships, and enjoyment of both.

Yet, politicians today do not seem to understand.

Providing health care for all will not fix the problem and neither will welfare handouts. The idea of hard work for sub-standard living (i.e., poverty level living) does not lead to realizing the American dream.

As noted by Friedman, the poor’s health related problems significantly decreased when they rose out of poverty and became steadily employed. Their self-worth rose with routine useful work that was rewarded with wealth. Yes, unearned income received from the Casinos seems to have contributed to health improvement but so did employment. Overtime, however, the unearned casino money will be regarded as an entitlement, which in turn results in a welfare dependency mentality. From that point on, the poor will return to the problem that they began with, except the Casino does not need their votes. Their demands for the entitled money may eventually be answered with denial and silence.

Except for those who are truly disabled, welfare is not the fix to poverty. Rather, a political economy that rewards creativity and productive work with livable income, that protects both rights and property, and that promotes healthy family and other relationships will fix the poverty problem.

The fix to the flaw in the political economy isn’t socialism. Socialism isn’t need if capitalism is balanced with morality and justice for the good of all.

From Weeping to Laughing : Sermon on the Mount

In the two versions of the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus taught his disciples about grief and sorrow. In the version recorded in the gospel of Matthew, Jesus said, “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted” (5:4). Luke’s gospel interprets Jesus as saying, “Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh” (6:21b). Matthew’s gospel interprets Jesus saying from the internal process of grieving while the gospel of Luke depicts the same as an outward expression.

The question is this: what the heck is Jesus talking about? Is he speaking about grief due to sin? Or is he referring to the loss of a loved through death? Or is he alluding to something else?

The context of both versions seems to point to grief over sin. In both gospels, what Jesus says after the beatitudes contradicts the status quo view of right and wrong. In effect, the practical requirements of righteousness as expressed in the Sermon reveals how most people then and now fail to measure up. It is what Paul meant when he said, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Here are a few examples from the gospel of Matthew: Jesus said, “Don’t worry about your life-food, shelter, clothing, transportation, money” (6:25-34). How about “do not have a savings account, an IRA, or 401K, or the like” (6:19-21). Here is another commandment: “Love your enemies; pray not for their destruction but rather pray for God to bless them”. (6:43-47). Here the easy one: “Be perfect as God is perfect” (6:48). How are you measuring up?

Another contextual clue precedes Jesus’ saying about mourning and weeping. Blessed are the poor both in spirit and otherwise refers to the lack of a right relationship with God. What does being poor in spirit mean? It means not being full of the Spirit. If a person is not full of the Spirit of God it usually means that person is full of something else. In writings of the Apostle Paul, the Greek word used for the something else is sarkikos. It is usually translated as carnal, natural, fleshly, or worldly. It actually means ungodly or behavior uncharacteristic of Christ. The essence of sin then is living contrary to God’s way, which the way Jesus teaches in the Sermon..

One of the best examples of a person grieving over sin is found in Luke’s gospel. Jesus presents a parable of two different types of people praying in the Temple. One is a Pharisee and the other a wretched tax collector. The Pharisee tells God about his righteous deeds while the tax collector cries out to God for mercy. Ashamed by the realization of his evil ways, “the tax collector was unwilling to lift up his head toward heaven. Instead, he pounds his chest, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner'” (18:9-14).

Another good example is the woman who repented of her sins by washing Jesus feet with tears and wiping his feet with her hair, which took place in the house of a Pharisee who had invited Jesus to his home for dinner. Entering the house of a Pharisee uninvited was pretty risky. Sinners were not allowed but to allow a immoral woman to touch you even more grievous. But, as Jesus pointed out, his host failed to perform the customary purity ritual of feet washing, but the sinful woman did. She washed his feet with tears of sorrow over her own sins. She demonstrated unusually humility when she wiped his feet with her hair. A woman’s hair represented the glory of her beauty. This unnamed woman did all of it as a silent cry for God’s forgiveness. She was not disappointed. (Luke 7:36-50).

The term mourning usually depicts loss of some sort. The loss of wealth or possession certainly is something about which people mourn. From the viewpoint of political economy, poverty more often than not is the result of sin. Often it is the result of an abuse of power and a result of greed. Communist Russia (USSR) impoverished a majority of its people by its empire building efforts around the world. I have heard of people being impoverished in China and Muslim countries only because of their Christian beliefs. United States government is also impoverishing many citizens by means of its ever-increasing debt spending and, to a lesser extent, its sanctioning of corporate globalism. American empire building is the reason for much of the enormous national debt. Poverty may also be the result of an impoverished mentality. The story of the ancient post-Exodus Jews present one example. Many second and third generation Americans who lived by government welfare is another. Sometimes poverty is the result of illness or similar tragedy. That is why the American founders agreed to the idea of a right “to the pursuit of happiness” rather than a guaranteed right to prosperity.

Because the blessed poor have access to the kingdom of God, their wealth in material things and in spirit is supplied by God. And God delights in the prosperity of His people. (1 Corinthians 8:9; 9:6-11; Ex. 30:5-10)

The vagueness of Jesus’ saying about mourning and weeping most likely was meant to encompass all human grief and sorrow. As the prophet Isaiah foresaw it, Jesus bore all our grief, sorrows, and infirmities (Isaiah 53). Not just for our sins, but for our loss of loved one simply through death, the loss of jobs and wealth, the loss of homes due to some disaster, the loss of health resulting in other losses as well. Therefore, God comforts those whose mourning is directed toward Him. Relatives and friends simply being present while grieving the loss of a spouse, parent, or child is a comfort. Being there proves that not all is lost–not all life is lost. In the kingdom of God, the expectant hope is that one day the grieving will one day be together with their loved one who died. That hope is reinforced when God is manifestedly presence during such a time.

Some biblical examples include a Shunammite’s women’s grief over the death of her son and God raising her son from the dead through the prophet Elisha (2 Kings 4:18-37); Jesus raises the dead son of widow in Nain because he saw her weeping and empathized with her loss (Luke 7:11-15); a woman who had suffered a hemorrhage 12 year and spent all her wealth attempting to get healed was instantly healed of her terrible affliction (Mark 5:25-34); and ten men who suffered the extremely painful and crippling disease leprosy cried out for Jesus to have mercy on them and Jesus healed them (Luke 17:11-19).

When people in the kingdom lose jobs, health, or wealth, God makes them laugh. Those taught by God learn to laugh at adversity. When God heals through whatever process, God gives people a reason to laugh. When couples who were unable have children give birth to their first child because of answered prayer, they laugh. (Genesis 17:17; 18:13; 21:1-8) When God provides resources during times of loss, God gives people a reason to laugh. When loss happens, people who seek God find a reprieve from the anxiety of uncertainty. A joyful heart (internal) is like medicine (Proverbs 17:22). Laughter (external) proceeds out of such a heart (Matthew 15:18). Because Jesus is the Great Physician, those who weep now will laugh. (Luke 4:23; 5:31; 6:2b).

By Daniel Downs