When Work Disappears Analysis

 

In constructing a model that identifies the inputs, outcomes and outputs of joblessness according to author William Julius Wilson, a Harvard sociologist, the key acknowledgment that he stresses is the understanding that “ghetto” culture and racism are only minor factors in urban poverty despite popular belief. This analysis will discuss how the New Federalism that has occurred since 1980 serves as one of the key inputs, that has caused the output of insufficient institutional reaction to the problem of social dislocation that has created jobless neighborhoods, and according to Wilson must be combated with the output of programs which are modeled after those which were prevalent during the Great Depression that seek to address any and everyone who is in need of a job instead of those solely contingent upon skill or qualifications.

            According to Wilson, since 1980 the New Federalism has insisted there be a more localized response to social problems, which was manifested through drastic cuts in spending on basic urban problems at a time when the exact opposite was most needed. Essentially, as the targeted start of “white-flight” was occurring, and the former primary enticement of commerce and social organization was fleeing to the suburbs, the federal government was also abandoning the inner-city which created a complete abandonment of resources that were necessary to sustain social order and typical community life.

            Additionally, Wilson asserts that the inevitable outcome of such a set of circumstances was destined to be the recipe for joblessness in the inner-city. Specifically, most communities must have a thriving economic source to ensure that greatly needed social institutions that deal with the issues of joblessness, poverty, crime and other influential factors. Before the New Federalism of the 1980’s, when extenuating circumstances occurred (i.e. a major job provider such as a factory or mill closing down) the funding that was provided by the federal government assisted in financing the various social organizations within the community that assisted individuals with locating alternative employment options. However, when the federal government transitioned to the New Federalism which forced local communities to create such income revenues to support these kinds of programs and social organizations, it all but guaranteed that the communities who were rapidly approaching poverty were all but guaranteed to arrive at such a place because of the lack of funding for greatly needed social institutions and programs.

            Subsequently, the output which Wilson propagates will be the most effective in dealing with such an input is a shift in the federal approach to joblessness in inner-cities. He utilizes the approach which was most successful during the most desolate economic tenure in United States history—the Great Depression. That approach consisted of public policy that generated jobs that were committed to employing anyone who needed a job, as opposed to the current job market which has a heightened focus on an individual’s education and experience qualifications. By doing this, Wilson argues that in areas where joblessness (which is the primary cause of poverty) is rampant the opportunity for individuals to overcome that predicating factor is neutralized, which in turn neutralizes the overall issue of poverty.

            Finally, in attempting to gauge the likelihood and plausibility of such an output, one must examine the contemporary perspective concerning the role of the federal government. Typically, the Republican perspective concerning federal intervention in issues such as poverty, joblessness and the disinvested is a resistant or hesitant one. Most Republicans feel that the federal government should engage in as little social intervention on a localized level as possible, and because the current administration and previous Congressional composition is/was Republican, it’s hard to imagine that such legislation that would be necessary to accomplish such a purpose could be conceived from such a government. However, as has been witnessed by the unimagined or anticipated support that Democratic candidate Barack Obama has received on the basis of a campaign rooted in hope and the possibility for political change guarantees that there must be a considerable segment of the country that is willing to consider the possibility of a change to a more unified approach to overcoming poverty than what currently exists. Thus, it’s just as possible for such legislation to emerge in the upcoming years as is the chance of Obama being the captain of such change.