+1-817-968-5551
+61-488-839-671
+44-7480-542904About Expert
Key Topics
Requirement
I need 8 pages ( from 8-10 of the best attached peer-reviewed journals/book) worth of literature review. The topic of the paper is on poverty and how the current definition/calculation is 50 years old and how we need a more updated def/calc. The lit reviews need to focus more on what the current studies on poverty and the current poverty threshold have to say. The variables and demographics I am focusing on is income levels, race, gender, ethnicity, and geographic location. This needs to be in APA format with a reference page, please.
Solution
Literature Review
Around one in five children living in the U.S. are living in poverty and this percentage is comparatively higher for selected population subgroups. As per the reports of UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre (2012), among the world’s 35 richest countries, the United States has been ranked as the second-highest regarding poverty and is surpasses only in Romania. The challenges related to poverty have increased by the lingering effects of the Great Recession of 2007 leading to challenges in numeracy, literacy, and educational attainment.
The poverty status is determined by the U.S. Census Bureau by comparing the pre-tax cash income with the threshold being customized at thrice of the total cost of the 1963’s minimum food diet. This is updated annually using the Consumer Price Index for the inflation and is accordingly adjusted according to the composition, family size, and age of the householder. When the people living together are related to each other by marriage, birth and adoption, they are termed as the family by the official poverty measure, a statistical tool for gauging the progress against poverty. While setting the poverty line, the poverty rate must be based on the family resources’ full accounting. According to the official measure, a family is considered to be poor when the income coming from all the family members fall below the poverty line.
Are you searching for essay writing help online at an affordable price? Allassignmenthelp.com can provide you with the best online custom essay help at a very reasonable charge. If you need any assistance with your essay, then take our descriptive essay writing service at a minimal price.
However, the poverty measurements in the United States have been seen to be highly flawed and with widespread consensus for over three decades of debate and discussion has not resulted in any considerable change in the statistic. The official poverty measure of the United States has been the same as it was developed in the 1960s. This measure has been criticized heavily as the current indicator of the poverty will full documentation on the basis of the family cash income. Further, this poverty measure is using the absolute threshold of poverty which is not in pace and accordance with the current standard of living and does not even differ by geographic area. The various transformation has been seen in the political and academic discussion on poverty and poverty measures over the past three decades (Haveman 2000). In order to erase this problem, and to have insights of the changed behavior and nature, it is important to understand poverty (Patrick Moynihan, 1969). It is important to consider that the poverty line varies highly with family size. Every year, the message has been provided to the policymakers and the public by the official statistic regarding the poverty trends, even when it has been argued by many that a minimally decent living standard is not the same as it was in the mid-1960s. A study by H. Luke Shaefer and Kathryn Edin where the trends of extreme poverty were examined defining extreme poverty as living on less than $2 per day, and it is considered as the World Bank metric of global poverty. In their study, they found that extreme poverty on the basis of money income is seen to increase from 1996 to 2011 from 1.7 percent to 4.4 percent. On adding refundable tax credits and non-cash benefits, extreme poverty is seen to rise from 1.1 to 1.6 percent in the same span. This indicated that poverty has increased and it could have been much worse without additional resources that are being provided by the safety net programs.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and its 1995 panel have studied the poverty measure and criticized it thoroughly, mentioning the following points:
-
While counting the family income, the poverty measurement excludes the in-kind benefits like housing assistance and food stamps.
-
While calculating the net income of the family on the basis of their working members, the cost of earning incomes like child care costs has been ignored.
-
While determining the consumption needs of the family, the regional variation in the cost of living is disregarded, mainly in the cost of housing.
-
While measuring the family income, the direct tax payments, income taxes and payroll are ignored.
-
While determining the consumption needs of the family, medical care needs and while determination of the family income, the health insurance coverage are ignored.
-
It is not updated as per the change in the consumption patterns of the households in the U.S.
The depth of poverty provided by the Census Bureau regarding the income-to-poverty-ratio measuring the income of the individual or the family to their poverty threshold. This will help in measuring the poverty depth for people below the poverty threshold and also for those who are above this threshold. Either CPS (Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement) or ACS (American Community Survey) can be used for measuring the poverty depth.
Two reports are released by Census Bureau annually for describing the statistics related to poverty United States. The official poverty measures of the nation are calculated in the first report on the basis of the cash resources whereas the second one known as supplemental poverty measure (SPM) which takes into account the cash resources along with the governmental program’s non-cash benefits which are aimed particularly for the low-income families. This current social poverty measure was developed by the then-President Lyndon Johnson, in the early 1960s on declaring the war against poverty. In order to help low-income people, no changes have been considered in this measure. However, SPM does not count all the resources that have been channeled towards ameliorating poverty, such as EITC and SNAP. If the SPM statistics are to be believed, poverty has increased from 2009 to 2012 by a margin of 0.9.
Recently, a study was done by researchers at Columbia University who estimated the values associated with SPM from 1967 to 2012 annually. The importance of counting the benefits being received by the poor. It was estimated the poverty rate in the absence of safety net programs and cash safety being counted in the official measure.
Since 2010, the Census Bureau has been releasing the SPM report which extends from the social poverty measure as it accounts for the necessary expenses along with government benefits.
Other than these two the only other alternative for measuring poverty only on the basis of income level is the multidimensional approach. However, factors like culture, gender, race, geography, environmental problems are also identified, but these have not been factored into the alternative policy or measure proposal.
It is difficult to improve the official poverty statistics of the U.S. owing to the following measures:
-
The odd historical accident leading to the Executive Office of the President to become the official poverty measurement in charge.
-
The longer the statistics go without any changes or improvements, it becomes harder to incorporate changes, as all the programs are led by the Poverty Income Guidelines.
-
The term poverty is considered to be a vague concept, and various arbitrary assumptions are required for developing a poverty measures.
Rebecca M. Blank (2012), discusses that the current official U.S. poverty measure is highly outdated and is even non-responsive to various anti-poverty initiatives. The various efforts for updating and improving the statistics are seen to have failed for various institutional, technical and political reasons. The various methods for improving the poverty measure like assigning a statistical agency for developing an alternative measure of income poverty. In this manner, the authority for this measure can be improved from time to time. Control over the poverty measurement from the Executive Office of the President in order to update and improve the poverty measure. Various researchers have urged that one primary Revised Poverty Measure has to be produced. Currently, research has been going on where four or five alternative Revised Poverty Measures are selected, and the best one is evaluated. An appropriate resource measure with a credible threshold for poverty can only be produced by providing an apt definition for poverty. According to a study in 2015, the current poverty thresholds are listed as given below:
-
$12,331 for a single individual under age 65
-
$24,036 for a family of four with two children under age 18
-
$14,326 a household of two people with a householder 65 years or older with no children
According to Blank (2008), public programs must be allowed to continue the definition of poverty provided by OMB as the eligibility cutoff. The present poverty rate calculations along with the underlying current poverty thresholds must be calculated by the Census regularly as OMB has directed them to do so. This is because, on the reauthorization of the programs, a decision has to be made on the advantages of switching to the new measure of poverty. In case the new thresholds are found to be higher or maybe lower, the programs use lower or higher (respectively) the percentage of the threshold for avoiding the discontinuous changes in the eligibility cut points. Similarly, the author suggests that on the basis of the current poverty rate calculations, programs funds have to allocate which will also be an imperative factor on how to make changes. According to the researchers, this method is only possible if suggestions are provided for making the transition towards the new measures along with minimal program disruption.
According to various studies like Ruggles (1990) and McKernan and Ratcliffe (2005), the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) can be used for evaluating the proposed changes in poverty measures. In the study given by McKernan and Ratcliffe (2005) the annual poverty threshold was divided by 12 and the monthly thresholds were compared to the income of every month. Whereas in Eller (1996) and Naifeh (1998) the thresholds on a monthly basis were adjusted as per the required changes of the consumer price index.
U.S. Census Bureau and other studies have revealed that static poverty rates are different from those who are under the new proposed measures (Besharov, 2006; Dalaker, 2005). Dynamic differences suggest static differences. These studies have suggested that alternate poverty measured leading to lower rates of poverty result in short spell duration and fewer poverty spells.
Duncan and Rodgers (1991) have reported that lower poverty rates along with less poverty persistence while measuring the income is seen to be measured as the after-tax money along with food stamps as compared to the income measured before the tax money. However, it is highly ambiguous to know the likelihood of entering as well as exiting the poverty under the alternate poverty measures. Various researchers have a different perspective, and it has been analyzed that using alternative poverty measures can lead to policy implications.
An Act called Measuring American Poverty or MAP Act had been evaluated in order to address all the features dealing with criticism. MAP along with working towards eliminating the challenges of NAS will establish modern poverty measures that will lay the groundwork in order to develop a Decent Living Standard Measure. This living standard measure is intended so as to recognize that the family requires far more than so as to exceed the poverty line of the existing era to lead a decent life. MAP is intending to create a Decent Living Standard as a critical vehicle that will be beneficial in analyzing the importance of the higher number of families looking for decent living standard along with reducing the problem of poverty. However, the bill is estimated not to adopt to a relative measure, but it will become easier for calculating and measuring and further to improve discussions on the strengths as well as the shortcoming of the measures. (Greenberg, M. H., 2009).
The present set of measures are specified in an injunction of Office of Management and Budget and these measures can be changed anytime by the administrators without Congressional action. In various considerations, the administration action is the best result, and in light of that the measures could be developed and constantly processed without checking on the elaborated rules that are contained in parts of the MAP Act. For these purposes, the introduction of the MAP Act is a crucial step forward in showing as to how the administration or Congress could develop the recommendations for the National Academy of Sciences. So, the subsequent learning and experiences are needed for the purpose of developing considerably better poverty measures and also create groundwork for a Decent Living Standard.
Place Order For A Top Grade Assignment Now
We have some amazing discount offers running for the students
Place Your OrderReferences
-
Besharov, D. J., & Call, D. M. (2009). Income transfers alone won't eradicate poverty. Policy Studies Journal, 37(4), 599-631.
-
Blank, R. M., & Greenberg, M. H. (2008). Improving the measurement of poverty. Brookings Institution.
-
Dalaker, J. (2005). Alternative poverty estimates in the United States, 2003. US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, US Census Bureau.
-
Dalaker, J., & Naifeh, M. (1998). Poverty in the United States, 1997. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
-
Duncan, G. J., & Rodgers, W. (1991). Has children's poverty become more persistent?. American Sociological Review, 538-550.
-
Haveman, R. (2000). Poverty and the Distribution of Economic Well-Being since the 1960s. Economic Events, Ideas and Policies: The 1960s and After.
-
Innocenti, U. (2012). Measuring Child Poverty: New league tables of child poverty in the world's rich countries. UNICEF-IRC. Retrieved 21 October 2016, from ? https://www? .unicef-irc.org/publications/660/
-
McKernan, S. M., & Ratcliffe, C. (2005). Events that trigger poverty entries and exits. Social Science Quarterly, 86(s1), 1146-1169.
-
Moynihan, D. P. (Ed.). (1969). On understanding poverty: perspectives from the social sciences (Vol. 1). Basic Books.
-
Ruggles, P. (1990). Drawing the line: Alternative poverty measures and their implications for public policy.
-
Short, K., Shea, M., & Eller, T. J. (1996, August). Work-Related Expenditures in a New Measure of Poverty. In Prepared for the 1996 Meetings of the American Statistical Association.
-
Greenberg, M. H. (2009). It's time for a better poverty measure.Counterpoise, 13(3/4), 21.
Give your grades a boost
Just share your requirements and get customized solutions on time.
-
1,168,768 Orders
-
4.9/5 Overall Rating
-
5,052 Experts
