How can you argue that the market will provide the solution to urban poverty, when that same market caused the urban working poor to lose their manufacturing jobs? Wages and taxes could be lower in suburban, rural or overseas, thus to maximize profits the jobs left. Many were without work, and since America does not guarantee social rights, that being the right to a job, education, etc., these individuals were left behind. Factor in New Federalism thus fewer Federal Dollars going to Cities and it can be seen how well the market solved the problem. The black middle class moved out of the City, did gain wealth, but the bottom 3 socioeconomic fifths of the African American population actually lost per capita income over time, adjusted to inflation.
Sowell makes the statement: "It is the people who were born and raised in the welfare state atmosphere who seem to have great difficulty finding jobs."
He is speaking from a personal responsibility angle. If people are not responsible then how can they stand on their own?
Yet, the alternative to welfare is service sector jobs which do not provide health care or insurance. To maximize profit these benefits are not provided. Many people would cycle on and off of AFDC because of this problem. They would try to get a job, yet didn't have health insurance or child care, thus got back on AFDC. With a higher wage and some benefits, they would have remained working. The majority of the poor actually have the desire to work per William Julius Wilson's analysis of
Urban Poverty and Family Life Study survey data, which is contrary to the prevailing belief that the poor are that way because they are simply lazy free riders.
Moreover, Clinton's original plan for TANF called for mandatory health and child care for those transitioning into work, as often employers do not provide such benefits for lower wage jobs. Thus, people leaving TANF would have an easier transition. Moreover, his first draft provided a guarantee to work, not only opportunity, thus public sector jobs would be created if the person is unable to actually obtain a job. This is similar to what was done during the Depression.
Obviously Clinton's plans were not included as the 1994 Republican landslide and the Contract on America made those politically impossible.
What we have now is a 15.4 billion block grant not indexed to inflation, that gives much discretion to the states, nor does it provide health insurance, child care, the guarantee of a job, and is very effective at keeping people off the rolls.
William Julius Wilson makes the point that Affirmative Action generally benefits middle class blacks greatest, when compared to the actual urban poor. He suggests a formula that also takes into account class, as opposed to race alone. This way poor individuals, regardless of race, would benefit, while the poorest would definitely benefit due to need, and these are African Americans.
