Discrimination Does Not Cause Poverty by Byron M. Roth, professor of psychology at Dowling College in Oakdale, New York, (1994) cites statistics and states that factors other than discrimination are responsible for low black income. He suggests that those who have claimed that low black income is a result of discrimination is not considering the fact that most black families are headed by a single women, while most white family households consist of two parent families. His opinion is that this difference in the family structure, not discrimination is the cause of a higher rate in poverty among African Americans than Whites.
Byron M. Roth's article was an opposing viewpoint to "Discrimination Causes Black Poverty" by Robert Staples, a sociology professor at the University of California in San Francisco. Mr. Staples argues that widespread discrimination is the cause of persistent poverty among African Americans. His opinion is that racial discrimination ensures that many African Americans remain poverty stricken and limits opportunity for all African Americans.
Author Con Side:
The Black and White Face of Poverty by Richard Harwood, a Washington Post columnist (1997), and seeks to destroy the myth that most poor Americans are black. He states that many more whites grow up poor than blacks, and that many more whites are on welfare than are blacks. He states that the media image of the poor black, poverty stricken mother disregards the fact that in all income groups there is a higher percentage of black women who are employed than there are white women. He further states that the greater problem of white poverty is ignored as society focus' on black poverty causing an unfavorable impression of blacks.
Critical Issue Analysis
Poverty Opposing Viewpoints - The Black and the White
One fact according to Harwood (1997) is that more whites are poorer and on welfare than blacks. Another fact according to Roth (1997) is that discrimination does not cause poverty, having only one income to support a whole family cause's poverty.
Each opposing side wishes to convince us that he has the correct viewpoint. Harwood (1997) would like society to focus on the plight of poverty stricken whites who he says has the highest rate of poverty. He also has called attention to the unflattering image of African Americans put forth by the Media. However, Roth (1997) believes that African Americans are impoverished because of their single parent roots not because of discrimination. He would certainly disagree with Harwood's opinion that whites have the higher rate of poverty as his assertion is that African Americans have the higher rate of poverty due to one income, while white two parent households are doing better because of dual incomes. As it stands, Roth seemed to have more of the facts as is supported by the 2003 US Census report on Income and Poverty.
The 2003 US Census Bureau Income, Poverty and Health Insurance by DeNavas-Walt C., Procter, B. D. and Mills, R. J., (1997) reported that 35.9 million people were in poverty, up 1.3 million from 2002. The poverty levels between Hispanics and Blacks remained the same. The poverty rate was lower for non-Hispanic whites than the other racial groups and accounted for 44.3% of the people in poverty compared to 67.6% of the rest of the population. The poverty number of families headed by single women with no husband was 3.6 million at the rate of 28.0%. The poverty rate and number of families in married households rose to 10% and 7.6 million in 2003. Among the races black families had the lowest median income. Their median income was around $30,000, which is 62% of the median income for non-Hispanic White households whose median income was around $48,000. The median income for Hispanic households was around $33,000. in 2003, 69% of the median income for non-Hispanic White households. Asian households had the highest median income among the race groups. The 2003 median income of Asian Households was around $55,500., 117% of the median income for non-Hispanic White households.
Pro Side:
The U.S. Census Press Release for 2004 and in 2003, among people who reported a single race, the poverty rate for non-Hispanic Whites was 8.2%, unchanged from 2002. For blacks, neither the poverty rate nor the number in poverty changed between 2002 and 2003. People who reported black as their only race, for example, had a poverty rate of 24.4% in 2003.
Roth (1997) states that the 1990 Census indicated that 75% of all black families below the poverty line were headed by single women, while only 20% were married couples
The poverty number of families headed by single women with no husband was 3.6 million at the rate of 28.0%.
The poverty rate was lower for non-Hispanic whites than the other racial groups and accounted for 44.3% of the people in poverty compared to 67.6% of the rest of the population.
For blacks neither the poverty rate nor the number changed between 2002 and 2003. People who reported black had a poverty rate of 24.4% in 2003.
