欢迎来到留学生英语论文网

客服信息

我们支持 澳洲论文代写 Assignment代写、加拿大论文代写 Assignment代写、新西兰论文代写 Assignment代写、美国论文代写 Assignment代写、英国论文代写 Assignment代写、及其他国家的英语文书润色修改代写方案.论文写作指导服务

唯一联系方式Q微:7878393

当前位置:首页 > 论文范文 > Sociology

What Are the Causes of Poverty in Certain Social Groups in the UK?

发布时间:2017-04-22
该论文是我们的学员投稿,并非我们专家级的写作水平!如果你有论文作业写作指导需求请联系我们的客服人员

What are the major causes of poverty in certain social groups in the UK?

Introduction

This literature review will examine the major causes of poverty in certain social groups in the UK. It will do this with the aid of books and internet sources. The review will look at the reasons why different social groups such as, women, old people (pensioners).children, ethnic minorities and disabled people are more likely to be in poverty in a developed country such as the UK, and if class has anything to do with it.

Methodology.

To get a broader view at the causes of poverty and the social groups that are most at risk, I used a variety of sources that included books, on-line library searches and I also accessed other on-line articles that spoke about poverty. The sources I used were very helpful in getting the facts and statistics that I then used for this review.

Findings.

The research findings from the deferent sources used varied on what they said were the reasons that caused poverty and the groups that were most affected. Giddens(2011) argued that the inequalities between the rich and the poor has got wider over the years and he blamed this on government policies such as, the transformation of the occupational structures which to a certain extent have made the numbers of the unemployed grow in the process making many people poor. This could be supported by the argument Macionis and Plummer (2005) put up which argued that William Ryan (1976) holds that, social structures not the people themselves are to blame for the unfair distribution of resources that make some people poor therefore making them responsible for poverty. Fulcher and Scott (2011) were also of the opinion that the inequality in the provision of education was why some groups experienced more poverty than others. Their argument was based on the fact that education instilled the value of achievement and that, without education some groups missed out on the allocation of human resources that enables people with ability to find their way into jobs that required those abilities however, the Economic Co-operation and Development report of 2010 was of the view that class played a very big role on whether you succeeded or you remained in poverty in British society. They argued that Britain was a highly stratified society where back ground determined a person’s success to a higher degree than almost all the other rich countries. The OECD found that education was not as important for social mobility and that opportunities for the poor to better themselves were harder to come by than in countries such as France and the U.S.A. The report also argued that people in Britain did not enjoy equal opportunities nor equal outcomes. This in a way can be supported by a study that was carried out by Beverly Skeggs (1997) on formation of class and gender. In her study of women in the north east of England, Skeggs followed lives of 83 working class women over a 12 year period who had enrolled at one point in a course for carers at a local further education college. Using Bourdieu’s terminology, Skeggs found that the women in her study possessed low economic, cultural, social and symbolic capital and that they were poorly paid, they had limited success in formal education, they had a few relationships they could count on so, Skeggs claimed that lack of these various forms of capital amongst these women reflected a wider lack of positive identities for working class women. The way in which the economy has evolved might also have left people with old skills disfranchised from work, making them prone to poverty. In the articles, the people who were said to be in poverty or are prone to poverty were:

Women.

Giddens (2011) argued that according to a study that was carried out in 2000 by Gordon and his friends, women were found to be more likely than men to be in poverty. Women made up 58% of adults that were living in poverty. The reasons given varied. The main element being the gendered division of labour both inside and outside the home. Other reasons included, the burden of unpaid labour at home and the responsibility of looking after children, being in part time work which resulted in women earning less, the fact that there is segregation between the so called ‘‘men’s job’’ which pays more and ‘‘women’s job’’ which pays less that is entrenched in society’s thinking and most importantly, women are more represented in less paying industries which makes them very prone to poverty.

Pensioners (old People)

Giddens(2011) also argued that, resent studies have shown that pensioners are more likely to be in continuous poverty even though they might have had jobs that paid reasonably well but upon retirement they experienced a sharp decline in their income and status. He said the statistics showed that 18% of pensioners’ experienced continuous poverty in comparison to 7% of those in work.

Children.

According to Macionis and Plummer (2005), today the burden of poverty falls on children also. The number of children needing help has risen from 800 000 in 1974 to 2.3 million in 1991 and they argued that 10% of children now live below the poverty line. This was supported by the Rowntree Foundation who suggested that the rates were even higher for children in households without anyone in work, those from lone parent families, those who come from families with a large number of siblings, those who come from families with family member/s suffering from long term illnesses, those who come from families that are not white and live in council housing etc.

Ethnic Minorities and disabled people.

Multiple deprivation of ethnic minorities led to substantially higher levels of poverty in this social group Macionis and Plummer (2005) argued. They also suggested that disabled people were also severely affected by poverty because they were on most part, excluded from daily activities of life which left them socially excluded. The fact that they were disabled compromised the type of jobs and income which this social group gets. Their situation is compounded by the fact that they have to meet the ‘extra costs’ of being impaired.

Although the literature on the most part argued that it was social and political problems that caused poverty, some sociologists have also argued that, poverty was the responsibility of the poor themselves. In England this argument has raged on since the creation of the poor laws where the distinction between the deserving and the undeserving poor was made until to date where theories of the likes of Charles Murray have been quite influential to governments who have followed neo-liberal polices (Thatcher government).Charles Murray’s argument is that, the lower class sub-culture was and is as a result of the erosion of ambition and achievement. He argues that immediate gratification that encourages living for the moment has eroded ambition instead of having future orientation guides that encourages people to study, plan, work hard and save. Murray saw poor people as failing to look beyond the moment. ‘’In living for the moment, Murray concluded that, the poor make it worse for themselves therefore they reap what they deserve.

Conclusion.

It is quite clear from the argument in this review that poverty is caused not by one thing but by a variety of reasons. It is also very obvious that particular social groups are more prone to poverty than others and the fact that other groups and classes are not so affected by poverty raises the question of whether class plays a part in who gets into poverty and who succeeds in Britain however, it has to be acknowledged that education and the provision of education also separates who gets which jobs in the process separating people into classes. It is therefore fair to surmise that poverty is caused by class, lack of education, lack of cultural, social, symbolic and economic capital, race, and disability and so on.

Bibliography.

A family affair part 2 chapter 5: Intergenerational social mobility across OECD countries. Retrieved 15 November 2014 from www.oecd.org/eco/growth/chapter%205%20gfg%202010.pdf.pp181-198.

Fulcher, J, and Scott, J, 2011, Sociology. Fourth edition. New York: Oxford University press inc.pp703-740.

Giddens, A, 2011, Sociology. Sixth Edition.Cambridge:Polity.pp481-519.

Macionis, J.J., and Plummer, K, 2005, Sociology. A global Introduction. Third Edition. London: Prentice Hall.pp245-268.

The IEA Health and Welfare Unit, Choice in welfare number 33.Charles Murray and The Emerging British Underclass. Retrieved 14 November 2014 from www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/cw33.pdf.pp32-61.

上一篇:Dying, Death, and Bereavement 下一篇:How Do Myths Danger Society? A perspective on India.