Many observers think there is a permanent underclass in American society most of those in
poverty typically remain poor from year to year. Over the period of 1970 - 2000, the percentage
of the American population in poverty each year has been remarkably stable at 12% or so.
Income figures for each year were taken from the March Current Population Survey of that year;
the cutoff for poverty was based on official gov\'t definitions.
To what extent do this data support the theory of the permanent underclass?
Discuss briefly.
Solution
the data do support the theory of permanent underclass but not to much extent as
out of 12 % many persons would be there who had become poor recently due to job loss. Thus,
keeping this argument in mind it could be said that while the percentage of american population
under poverty remained constant there could have been an exchange in number of people where
few people from above poverty became poor while few persons below poverty became richer.
Thud it could be said that while the given data supports theory of permanent underclass it is not a
definite proof of it..
Presiding Officer Training module 2024 lok sabha elections
Many observers think there is a permanent underclass in American soc.pdf
1. Many observers think there is a permanent underclass in American society most of those in
poverty typically remain poor from year to year. Over the period of 1970 - 2000, the percentage
of the American population in poverty each year has been remarkably stable at 12% or so.
Income figures for each year were taken from the March Current Population Survey of that year;
the cutoff for poverty was based on official gov't definitions.
To what extent do this data support the theory of the permanent underclass?
Discuss briefly.
Solution
the data do support the theory of permanent underclass but not to much extent as
out of 12 % many persons would be there who had become poor recently due to job loss. Thus,
keeping this argument in mind it could be said that while the percentage of american population
under poverty remained constant there could have been an exchange in number of people where
few people from above poverty became poor while few persons below poverty became richer.
Thud it could be said that while the given data supports theory of permanent underclass it is not a
definite proof of it.
