In his new book, Poverty, by America, sociologist and Pulitzer Prize-winning author Matthew Desmond seeks to answer the question, “Why is there so much poverty in America?” He approaches this question as both a social scientist seeking a “fundamental theory” of the problem and a “poverty abolitionist” on a moral crusade to eliminate poverty and its associated problems from American life.
Desmond argues that poverty in America is perpetuated by the collective exploitation of the poor through low wages and higher prices, the subsidization of the wealthy over the poor, and the hoarding of opportunities by those in privileged communities. He supports his arguments with personal stories of those affected by these forms of exploitation, abandonment, and exclusion. Desmond’s writing seamlessly weaves these two strands together into an eminently readable book.
However, Poverty, by America has three tragic flaws that limit its reception. To answer the book’s opening question and point to solutions, Desmond needs to provide a clear definition of poverty, an understanding of cases in which poverty has successfully been reduced, and insight into the requirements for emulating those cases. He falls short in all three areas.
While social scientists agree that poverty is a situation in which households have insufficient resources to meet their basic needs, there are substantive disagreements over how to measure poverty. Depending on how it is measured, we see very different trends over time and across countries. Desmond relies on the Census Bureau’s Official Poverty Measure, which excludes tax credits, food assistance, and housing vouchers from its definition of income, rendering it an outdated and unreliable indicator. Desmond rejects the newer Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) as flawed, leaving the reader feeling underwhelmed.
Desmond’s focus on the “lived experience” of the poor is common among sociologists studying poverty. However, he warns the reader about the limitations of simply “bearing witness” to the problems facing the poor. To understand the causes of poverty, he argues, we must look beyond the poor. Desmond’s goal is to put personal responsibility front and center by highlighting the human element of social structures and institutions. He challenges readers to interrogate their role in perpetuating the social structures that exploit, abandon, and exclude the poor.
Desmond struggles to identify and examine successful cases of poverty reduction, which is crucial to problem-solving sociology. His motivating question – Why is there so much poverty in America? – cries out for comparative analysis. Desmond’s claim that America has seen no change in poverty for decades precludes him from following this line of inquiry.
Desmond’s call to tax the rich will make him popular among Democratic partisans. However, denying the necessity of broad-based taxes to pay for European-style social spending only undermines efforts to reduce poverty. The reality is that finding ways to outsmart the problem – to find viable solutions that reduce poverty – is frustratingly hard. This doesn’t make the problem any less urgent or poverty any less painful. But it does force us to start from the humble premise that moral clarity does not necessarily bring epistemic clarity.
