Tag Archives: Class #20

The True Underclass

Leave a reply

In the excerpt we read by Katz he writes that the underclass transformed, in it of itself it is now coming to be defined as entrepreneurs. Katz means by this that the people who were previously seen as poor and underprivileged were now more hopeful where they are waiting for an opportunity and then be able to capitalize on it and thereby become successful. Personally, I believe that what Katz is saying holds some truth to it but, it is not completely true, furthermore putting them to this standard may have some repercussions.

During the beginning of Katz’s excerpt my first thoughts were complete disagreement. My first thought was that you have to explain what underclass means, which he does by saying it has many societal factors. But, he proceeds to give an example of a teenage girl who gets pregnant out of wedlock and then ‘mooches’ off society. That sounds a bit underclass, this is not implying that all people who take money from society are underclass, quite the opposite. The differentiation I’m trying to emphasize is that being poor doesn’t necessarily make one underclass. Rather, if one chooses to accept themselves as being poor and being less than everyone else they are underclass, not because they are any worse than anybody else, but because they don’t believe enough in themselves to succeed. And in my opinion that’s the true meaning of underclass.

Regarding what Katz said about the concept of the ‘underclass’ being considered entrepreneurs (again I hold this to mean the poor, as not all poor are underclass) this holds some truth where they just need an opportunity as he says. Take Steve Jobs, when he was founding Apple he built the first computer in his parents’s garage. In fact Steve’s parents couldn’t really afford to pay for his higher education, so he audited a lot of classes and slept on the floor in his friends’ dorm rooms. However, he soon became one of worlds greatest entrepreneurs of the 21st century. But, I guess it refers back to what Katz said, he waited for an opportunity and seized it, for him it was Apple the company he helped cofound and he did a great job at it.

Finally, one has to be careful by putting the poor/underclass in a way where one is claiming they are Entrepreneurs. The reason for this is that on the one hand you set them up for failure, but on the other hand you are setting them up for greatness. By placing them in this light one of two situations may occur, either the people will use this as a motivation and will accept there’s more to them than meets the eye. Or they might think the bar is set too high and since they will never make it they might as well not try. I guess this refers back to my definition of the underclass, where here there is a clear distinction. Those who will use it to fuel their drive are simply poor, while those who will just give up because of it, those are the true people who are underclass.

Finally, after an analysis of how Katz introduces the topic of underclass meaning entrepreneurs I have to disagree. I think that the poor has the potential to become entrepreneurs (as does everyone else) but, the true underclass are those who don’t choose to act on this.

Response to Katz “From Underclass to Entrepreneur”

Leave a reply

In “From Underclass to Entrepreneur,” Katz brings up the term “underclass” and goes into length defining the term and describing the connotations. It surprised me that this term was used recently in the 70s and 80s though I had never heard the term used in such a way before. What is more surprising is how much New York City has changed since then. Underclass, used to describe New York’s urban inner city areas, “conjured up a mysterious wilderness in the heart of America’s cities; a terrain of violence and despair.” The New York now, with it’s much lower crime rates, doesn’t seem to resemble the dangerous urban area filled with the “underclass” as it used to be.

It was interesting to read about Brace’s 1854 report about how “the growing density of America’s cities had eroded the character of their inhabitants.” Unlike Jane Jacobs’ ideas of how a bustling city would be a safer one, Brace argued that the density and over crowding was “corrupting” others around those areas. Housing reformers from the 1900s had similar reactions to slums, labeling them as “viruses infecting the moral and physical health of the city districts that surrounded them.” Poorer districts were considered to be an infection of the city and were avoided in order to prevent contamination.

From such an attitude towards the slums grew the distinction between the “deserving and undeserving poor.” Those whose misfortunes came about accidentally, such as in the case of a widowed women, were labeled the deserving poor. Unskilled, minority, or unwilling to work men, especially alcoholics, were considered undeserving and “sentiment … did not shift in [their] favor.” Thus campaigns were run to deplete such people from relief programs.

Michael Porter brought up several very interesting points regarding these inner-city neighborhoods. He spoke about the potential of these areas to “create wealth.” I agree with his point that policies should get out of the “trap of redistributing wealth,” which doesn’t create any real value, and instead work with an economic model to develop profitable businesses that would benefit the people and the communities. Porter claimed such areas had four concrete competitive advantages such as a “strategic location” in the middle of the city, high “local market demand” in an unsaturated market, “potential for integration,” and vast “human resources” of people who are eager to work. The policies of the government and other sectors mainly needed to provide a “hospitable environment” to allow for such businesses to grow. Porter was successful with some of his theories after developing the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City and opened up thousands of jobs in small businesses for people in inner-city areas.

A more recent program to help out such neighborhoods included Bloomberg’s Opportunity NYC. Not particularly effective, the program was said to award the “undeserving poor” by providing incentives for “parents who had not been sending their children to school regularly.” I don’t think any similar programs can be effective since there may always be a population to take advantage and be incentivized to do less in order to receive benefits. Something that encourages people to invest in themselves and the surrounding community may be more effective but the question remains of how to implement such a program without too much policy involvement.

Katz – “From Underclass to Entrepreneur” || Response

Leave a reply

In the excerpt, “From Underclass to Entrepreneur: New Technologies of Poverty Work in Urban America”, Katz talks about how the expression “underclass” evolved over time. During the late twentieth century, “underclass” was used to describe the poor, especially poor black women. The term also described the life of drugs, crime, high poverty, and urban decay. And thus, America’s inner cities were deemed as “a terrain of violence and despair”. I personally think that these characteristics actually describe just being “underclass” and not poverty. One can choose a life of drugs and crime and not necessarily be poor. One can choose to ignore education. That is what I define as “underclass”.

At the turn of the century however, these same people are seen as highly motivated and ambitious. Because of their low social status, they wanted to prove to everyone that they were not a lower class of people. Katz states that the label essentially became a metaphor of social transformation. Formerly described as “underclass”, these individuals jumped at any opportunity and became entrepreneurs. Market-based technologies certainly helped the poor obtain this newfound status.

Katz discussed exactly how market-based technologies gave the poor a boost. Four market-based strands were intertwined with poverty work, including “place-based initiatives that intended to unleash poor people as consumers by rebuilding markets in inner-cities; microfinance programs that turned poor people into entrepreneurs; asset-building strategies that helped poor people accumulate capital; and conditional cash transfers that focused on deploying monetary incentives to change behavior.” As a business major and psychology minor, I found these ideas to be very interesting. These market-based brands mixed aspects of business and psychology together to obtain a positive result.

Other points I found interesting was when Katz talked about Clinton’s presidency and Muhammad Yunus. Throughout my studies in American History before college, I have never heard of the Enterprise Zone or the Empowerment Act of 1998. Although it ultimately did not succeed, the Clinton administration did try hard to revitalize the inner-city. This act called for nine empowerment zones and ninety-five enterprise communities, both of which were allowed tax breaks and “other incentives” to help the poor. Clinton also added eligibility to social services and community-based programs. On the other hand, Yunus’ Grameen program proved successful. He was more inclined to help women because he felt that they were more likely to do good for their families compared to men. He also believed that that was the main reason for the program’s success. Although it may come off as a little unfair to men, I do agree with Yunus and his method of helping the poor.

Overall, I found this reading to be very informative and insightful. As a New Yorker exposed to a variety of entrepreneurial ideas, I certainly do see a great deal of talent and motivation coming from individuals who are less wealthy. But how exactly is the government dealing with poverty today? I do believe that our government is doing an adequate job (considering the economic circumstances) assisting the poor today. There are many social services including food stamps, Medicare, Social Security, etc. With that said, there is always room for more improvement.

“Underclass to Entrepreneur” Response

Leave a reply

In Katz’s “From Underclass to Entrepreneur: New Technologies of Poverty Work in Urban America,” the underclass is a group of people defined not by poverty but by characteristics like drugs, crime, teenage pregnancy and high unemployment. Over time, those qualities became synonymous and the poor became the underclass. I think that was inevitable because they overlap, so it makes sense, but it’s a little too general for my liking.

There was one particular description of the underclass that I found very interesting: the categorization of the poor. Ken Auletta organized poor people into groups that he labeled as the passive poor, the hostile, the hustlers, and the traumatized. I like this approach because it helps to differentiate the people who are making the best and the worst of the same situation. Naturally, we see the bad things and then assume that everyone in that predicament is doing them. Not every poor person is a criminal, but many people, including myself sometimes, perceive them all that way. This categorization can change that. Although it might be true to a certain extent, it is still unfair to say that every poor person is a dropout or an addict. If that can be eliminated, then a lot of issues regarding stereotypes can too.

Something that comes up is that the concept of the underclass supports the practice of blaming the victim. I believe this happens a lot to those involved with drugs, delinquency, and pregnancy out of wedlock. This isn’t to say that it is never their fault, but it seems that people ignore the possibility of external factors. For example, a drug addict may not have chosen to become one of his or her own free will. However, all we see is a poor life choice. Nobody considers what could have driven that person to that point and whether or not it had anything to do with him or her at all. Instead, we cast these people aside as the underclass. With this logic, people in that type of situation may never be able to find a way out.

The example that Katz makes of Muhammad Yunus, who distributed money on the idea that the poor are inherently entrepreneurial, brought a few questions to my mind. How true is that statement? We hear stories all the time of people who came from nothing and now have everything, but how often does that actually happen? If the poor really are such fervent entrepreneurs, how successful are they? Clearly there is some truth to this statement, or else Katz would not have written this chapter, but I wonder if it still holds true today. All we’ve been hearing about in the news lately is the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Maybe it was the time period and the need to oppose racism that encouraged them back then, but I’m not so sure that poor people nowadays have that ambition or opportunity.

Even so, the micro-finance method sounds effective. I don’t expect everyone to climb to the top with this bit of help, because that’s just impossible, but it’s better than nothing. At the very least, it supports saving, which can eventually assist the elimination of the underclass. The question is not if they should be saving but how the government can help them save. I think people are definitely capable of that, and they should absolutely be aided in doing so. Sadly, in today’s economy, I can’t say that the government is doing such a great job of that.

“Underclass to Entrepreneur” Response

Leave a reply

In “From Underclass to Entrepreneur: New Technologies of Poverty Work in Urban America,” Katz talks about the transformation of the term “underclass.” It started out as a derogatory term used towards black people dominating the crumbling core of the nation’s inner cities. It eventually grew as being the culture of the poor. However, I find it interesting that Katz is celebrating the entrepreneurial energy and talent within poor people who were waiting for the chance to improve their lives. This transformation resulted from the increase in support and aid given to the poor. This help gave them the ability to focus on making something out of themselves rather than remain in poverty.

The example of Muhammad Yunus and his support for people in poverty is a perfect way of helping them climb out of their unfortunate circumstance. I also agree with the rejection the belief that the underclass hurt the safety, health, and prosperity of America’s inner cities. Instead, I think that these effects are brought about by a lack of effort to help the people in poverty, which sometimes causes them to use alternative methods in making a living.

I think that many of the issues that defined the underclass at the time are still persistant today. For example, prominent drugs, crime, teenage pregnancy, and high unemployment, not necessarily poverty, defined the underclass. The people who are thought of as being underclass are also very similar. They are usually young and minorities. All of these qualities of the urban underclass would make anyone to think that they would make up the highly disproportionate number of the nation’s juvenile delinquents, school dropouts, drug addicts and welfare mothers, and much of the adult crime, family disruption, urban decay, and demand for social expenditures.

The programs set in place for the underclass played a large role in why it took so long for them to rise from poverty. The poorhouses that were put in place to despise and neglect the underclass. Even the public schools that were created to educate the children of the urban underclass were not effective. They were less effective than the the smaller schools of the past were. I feel like the struggles that these people faced were a big reason why the current underclass is so willing to work hard to get out of poverty.

I think that the idea of micro-finance is very good since it recognizes the importance of saving to poor people. According to me, the U.S. government tries to help build individual assets, but it is not as effective as it probably can be. It helps the people who already in the upperclass increase their wealth, such as paying interest on mortgages being tax deductible and since the upperclassmen tend to have higher mortgages, they benefit from such a program. I think that there should be more programs that direct their help specifically to the people who are in poverty and are trying to better their living conditions.