Download POVERTY IN CANADA - Mrs. Saturno

DEFINING POVERTY
- every year, Statistics Canada establishes the low-income cut-off line (LICO)
or “poverty line”, based on calculations of what percentage of income
Canadians spend on basic necessities such as food, clothing and shelter.
- average Canadians spend about 36% of their income on necessities; StatsCan
adds 20% to this figure, and determines that any family spending more than
56% on these areas is effectively living below the “poverty line” (LICO).
- while poverty encompasses all ethnic groups and family types, the rates of
poverty within these groups can vary widely (see: text 85, figure 3.12).
- women are more likely to live below the LICO than men, and particularly
female-headed single-parent families have some of the highest rates (45%).
- education level is a considerable factor likely to contribute to poverty, as
people with limited education (or those who dropped out prior to graduating
high school) are significantly more likely to live in poverty.
- efforts have been made to reduce income inequalities within Canada, with
specific attention directed at the groups seemingly most affected by poverty;
these include employment training programs and hiring incentives/quotas.
- welfare and social assistance programs have been established to assist
people in need, though such programs are often criticized for fraud or
inefficiency; many groups in Canadian society (physically disabled, mentally ill,
developmentally delayed, battered/abused, homeless, etc.) depend on some
kind of social assistance (financial support or subsidization) to survive.
- major criticisms of welfare include concern about a disincentive effect (belief
that recipients of social assistance will not be motivated to improve their life
situations by seeking employment or improving education).
- in 1995, the Ontario Government cut its welfare payments by 21.6% to try to
motivate more recipients off social assistance; this was considered controversial
by some, as welfare recipients were are generally considered easy targets for cuts
(since they are not seen to actually earn the money received).
- as welfare payments for needs and shelter typically provide less than half of
what is required for a family to live above the LICO, there is some question as
to whether or not welfare is too generous, and in fact possibly insufficient.
- while Ontario and other provinces boasted high numbers of recipients moving
off welfare, others pointed out that some of these policies only temporarily
solved problems; as a result, many people were only employed for short periods
of time, paid very low wages, or were simply blocked from assistance altogether.
POVERTY IN CANADA
- Karl Marx first highlighted the profound social effects of income inequality;
he helped demonstrate the lack of economic power leads to lack of social and
political power – a major issue in modern industrial societies.
- in Canada, the gap between richest and poorest narrowed between 1920 and
the 1970s; it was assumed that such a gap would always exist in free-market
countries, as a characteristic of capitalism (some do better than others).
- during the 1970s, major economic recession, increased layoffs and
unemployment, and rising production costs began widening the gap.
- sociologists found that not only were poverty levels increasing, but that some
groups (women, minorities) were disproportionately harder-hit than others.
- questions were raised about whether societies should assist their poorer
members through assistance (ie. subsidized child care, medical care, welfare), as
well as how best to slow/reverse the overall trends of increasing poverty.
- examining levels of relative income inequality (comparing income of the
highest fifth – or quintile – of the population with the lowest fifth) helps to
demonstrate a significant spread of income levels; more importantly, examining
levels of absolute income inequality (comparing income levels of specific
groups) highlights particular people most in need of assistance within Canada.
(see: text 83, figures 3.9 and 3.10)
QUESTIONS:
Q: What are some short-term things a society can do to assist their poor?
Q: What are some long-term things a society can do to assist their poor?
Q: What obligation do the rich of Canada have to the poor of Canada?
Q: What are the positive features of a “work-fare” approach to welfare?
Q: What are potential negative consequences of cutting social assistance?