Introduction

Poverty continues to be an issue of pressing concern to legislators in the United States even after the country had witnessed some progress in the past years in its eradication. The Census Bureau reported 39.7 million people living in poverty in the country representing an estimated 12.3% poverty rate in 2017. This was a major decline from 14.9% and 12.7% in 2014 and 2015 respectively. There is diversity in the face of poverty in the U.S and includes people from all backgrounds, race, ethnicity, ages, gender, and family structure. Nonetheless, some individuals are more likely to experience the adversity of poverty than others. These are the groups who are most likely to depend on others. Children top the list as the group who are particularly at risk. 32.4% and 42.4% of children live in episodic poverty and chronic poverty respectively (Morduch, 2017). Poverty is more concentrated in the minority group than the whites. African-Americans represent a higher percentage of those who are likely to be poor compared to other ethnic groups (DeNavas-Walt et al., 2013). Female-headed families are most likely to be poor than those male-headed or marriage-couple families. Additionally, those with low levels of education are more likely to be poor because of the problem of being absorbed into the job market (Rank and Hirschl 2010).

Poverty assessment and measurement is essential as the indicator will help to designate and differentiate the poor from the rich. The literature identifies various methods of measuring poverty. Poverty can be expressed in absolute and relative terms. Alkire et al. (2015) measured poverty using economic and non-economic well-being while other researchers depended on absolute and relative factors. Absolute poverty implies a lack of necessities such as shelter, food, and clothing—it is indicated in terms of a monetary threshold. Relative poverty is defined in relation to the standards that exist everywhere, for instance, the experience of the poor. It is generally complex to quantify. On the international scale, however, poverty is increasingly measured in terms of deprivation of well-being instead of lack of income (Madonia et al., 2015). U.S focuses on income when measuring poverty using either the supplemental poverty measure (SPM) and the official poverty measure (OPM) (Hutto et al., 2011; Shah, 2010). However, these approaches have been unrepresentative prompting—they do not capture the multi-dimensionality nature of poverty (it goes beyond economics to include, among other things, political, social, and cultural issues). This had prompted some researchers to begin measuring poverty using multi-dimensional approaches (Ciula and Skinner, 2015; and Brucker et al., 2014).

Poverty affects the victims in every facet of their lives from impacting the quality of life, lower living standards, and derailed development in children, health problems and increased mortality. Several government anti-poverty programs in U.S help keep the people out of poverty, for instance, Earned Income Tax Credit, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Investment in education is considered the best way to eliminate poverty. This paper provides a review of the issue of poverty.

Qualitative and Quantitative

Qualitative and quantitative research methods have been used extensively to answer public policy questions about poverty. The first essential facet of poverty that has been extensively researched is its measure. Poverty has been measured both qualitatively and quantitatively. For example, the World Bank uses quantitative methods to measure poverty using absolute indicators. Such poverty lines differentiate the poor from the rich and are generally founded on minimum living standards expressed in the spending power of an individual. Britz (2007) measured poverty using quantitative measures using income and expenditure.

Nonetheless, such profiles reflect poverty only moderately. There is also a qualitative element to poverty which is among other things articulated in terms of human experiences (Karim and Noy, 2016). Lindqvist et al. (2017) used the qualitative approach includes a wider range of poverty indicators such as income and consumption levels, vulnerability, security, basic needs, asset ownership, survival, powerlessness, health, nutrition, literacy, social relations, isolation, and self-respect and stereotypes. Another facet is the causes and views of poverty. The studies on the causes of poverty utilize various scientific methods, both qualitative and quantitative. Based on research by Wolfe (2018), and Pradhan and Ravallion (2000) various causes of poverty have been identified such as political, economic, geographic distribution, and individual causes.

Theories

There is a vast literature on empirical results and statistics concerning poverty but the data on theories to explain them is limited. Researchers distinguish between theories that root the cause of poverty in individual deficits (conservative) and those that are based on broader social phenomena (progressive or liberal) (Bradshaw, 2006). The individual deficiency theory assumes that the problems of poverty are caused by the individual themselves. It is mainly backed by politically conservative scholars who put the blame on individuals for being responsible for their poverty situation. Upward mobility could be easier if they learnt to work hard and made better life choices. Individual factors, those caused by genetics, i.e., low intelligence have also been cited to cause poverty (Bradshaw, 2006; Curley, 2005). Second is the culture theory—proposed by Oscar Lewis (1968) (Gajdosikienė, 2004). Culture theory asserts that poverty is formed among the minority who are not psychologically able to take advantage of opportunities that may be made available to them such as education and job opportunities. This can also describe why many immigrants live in poverty. The third theory which is mainly adopted by the liberals to explain poverty is the restricted opportunity theory—poverty caused by political, economic, and social discrimination or inequality. Many poor people lack sufficient access to economic opportunities and continue to experience the hardship of poverty unless the economic opportunities are made accessible. According to Ghatak( 2015) discrimination has created a system which makes it difficult for people to work especially those from minority and those with low skills.

Prevention

Various countries including the U.S have waged a number of anti-poverty initiatives. In the U.S, income transfers, coupled with programs in food security, education, employment, and health have assisted low-income people (Lippold, 2015). These programs including the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program that offers cash benefits to low-income families. The Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) offers support in terms of goods to people and families with low-income. An additional program is the Earned Income Tax Reform—it provides benefits to taxpayers whose earned income is below a specified level. The U.S also has programs for affordable housing and for the homeless. Though these programs have been helpful, they do not seem to significantly reduce the rate of poverty in the country. This is because they are not stimulus and encourages dependence instead of independence (Lippold, 2015)

Various studies have found that job transition is critical in lifting people out of poverty (Azevedo et al., 2013; Lanjouw, 2011; Machado, 2010). These studies assessed the dynamics of poverty and economic mobility and found that improved returns to paid work, especially those that offer returns to both human and physical capital, are vital for leaving poverty. Though demographic changes and non-labor incomes can aid in increasing economic mobility, enabling an environment that fosters better work and pay for the poor to have no substitute (Machado, 2010). Hong Ng et al. (2013) points out education as the most critical poverty preventive measure. The authors argue that children under the age of sic should be given the highest priority so that the learning habits and techniques of study can be developed and instilled early, hence providing a greater chance of future success. Additionally, quality of education skill acquisition, vocational training throughout life are crucial instruments to eliminate poverty.

Prevention Recommendation

A combination of different strategies can help solve the poverty crisis in the U.S. The first recommendation is to invest heavily in education especially for the young children and the youths. The lack of quality early childhood education is one of the main barriers to class mobility. The U.S should do some reforms in the Development Grant, Child Care, and Head Start to ensure that children are provided with high-quality care and learning (Kearney and Harris, 2014; Cascio and Schanzenbach, 2014). Programs should also be extensive in addressing family circumstances and parenting practices. For instance including pregnant and mothers such as home-visiting to help struggling families to get childcare they need to help improve the future of economic mobility. This is because early childhood intervention has a substantial long-term effect on education and economic attainment.

Helping disadvantaged youths is another practical solution to poverty eradication. The disadvantaged youths should be helped to stay in school to improve their academic attainment for instance, by financial incentives for public schools to offer classes in high return professions and to offer affordable college tuition for youths from low-income families. Additionally, enhancing placement in higher education remediation classes, offering better university adoption measures, and offering education funds for youths from low-income households can help keep them in school to acquire skills and knowledge that can help them climb the social ladder more easily (Ingels, Owings, and Kaufman 2002; Kearney and Harris, 2014).

Job creation and skill development are critical practical strategies that should be implemented by any nation. Securing a job without limited skills and education is very difficult anywhere in the world. This can be corrected by creating more effective education and workforce development systems and workforce training. Additionally, the government should consider raising the minimum wage so that people can have enough to live on and save (Wimer et al. 2013).

Research

The rate of entry into poverty for the U.S has declined since 2014; nonetheless, the current rate of 12.3% is still higher than the 11.6% recorded in 2000 (Fontenot et al. 2018; Census Bureau, 2018). Research shows that among the poverty demographics, children show the highest prevalence almost twice the number of the elderly. Other groups also mostly to enter poverty are the Black, Hispanics, and female-headed families. Despite a progressive decline in the rate of poverty in the U.S, the issue continues to cause panic for the policymakers and the public. A number of studies have indicated that the lack of improvement in the rate of poverty indicates a weakened relationship between poverty and micro-economy (Kearney and Harris, 2014). The lack of improvement in poverty despite the increase in living standards is due to the stagnant growth in median wages and increasing inequality. Quality education is the most critical solution to poverty prevention. Investing in early childhood education and care, youth education, job transition, and increasing wages should be the priority of the government and advocacy groups in eradicating poverty (Hong Ng et al. (2013).

Ethics

The precedence attached to poverty alleviation can be justified on the basis of multiple perspectives. Such precedence may be rooted in an ethical view based on the principle of happiness maximization in society. Another point of justification is to distribute resources for the purpose of promoting equality (Temkin (2003). Additionally, it is the moral duty to help people who are struggling in society to reach a particular threshold (Arneson, 2002; Crisp, 2003).

One of the greatest ethical challenges regarding poverty is the action taken by the U.S government to reduce the level of federal government involvement in poverty alleviation. Welfare reforms introduced in 1996 significantly changed how the federal government helped the poor—the government significantly reduced the funding on poverty programs. Part of the reason for this change in policy goes to the individualistic ethic that pervades the nation.