Perspectives for Understanding the Urban Economic Divide

Photo Credit: http://liu.english.ucsb.edu/wiki1/images/2/2b/Sign.jpg

In a previous post I referred to a series of recent articles examining the growing inequality gap proliferating from the division of the labor force into professionalized and low-skilled jobs.  Within that post I explored the topic from a position of leadership development, considering how leaders could be fostered from within the struggling, low-skilled labor clusters, as a means of creating community assets and igniting growth.  However, in reviewing the re-emergence of the culture of poverty school of thought, I have found myself examining the labor force divide with new questions. 

First, I think it is worthwhile to explain that I see a distinction between many of the current culture of poverty scholars and Charles Murray, who I believe continues a stance of inherent deficiency.  Taking readings such as Richard Thompson Ford’s “Why the Poor Stay Poor”, Patricia Cohen’s “Culture of Poverty Makes a Comeback”, and Small, Harding & Lamont’s “Reconsidering Culture and Poverty”, you can see an exploration of the influences of culture, which also takes into account structural forces.  In some ways I see the discussions of many culture of poverty scholars as comparable to a discussion of social capital, rather than deficiency. For example, Small, Harding & Lamont reference work by Annette Lareau which suggests “poor children may do worse over their lifetimes in part because their parents are more committed to “natural growth” than “concerted cultivation” as their cultural model for child-rearing.” While the culture of poverty model contends that the cultural forces at play, the child-rearing strategy, influence outcomes, it does not proclaim the culture is in and of itself lacking. Rather, one can say that the skills learned through concerted cultivation, such as independent thinking and comfort expressing ideas to authority figures, are skills touted in the dominant society. Furthermore, the cultural aspects discussed by these scholars are not considered stagnate and unwavering, they are instead understood in a broader context, influenced by the history and experiences of people within a larger society.

Murray, in contrast, extorts a position which connects character deficiency to poverty.  While moving away from race discussions, Murray continued this perspective in his 2010 book, “Coming Apart”, by connecting IQ scores to the behavioral aspects that keep poor people poor.  This perspective downplays external forces and influences, and emphasizes qualities within individuals (Murray does move slightly away from describing IQ in terms of “innate” ability, to that of “intractable” but the distinction seems superficial in my opinion, as Murray’s perspective of the “deficiencies” seems steadfast in being independent from any social, political, or economic influence).

What was of interest to me in reading reviews of Murray’s work was the perspective it brings to the current economic geography of the country, with division between the professionalized and low-skilled labor markets. In a series entitled “Class-Divided Cities”, Richard Florida examines the segregation of the creative and service classes in America’s cities, as can be seen in the mapping of DC to the right.  The areas that are predominately service class are also the poorest in the city, specifically the Southeast quadrant, which has a reputation of poverty and crime.  Murray’s perspective would postulate that those living in Southeast D.C. are lacking the IQ to make the appropriate choices, fulfill the requirements of higher sector jobs, and improve their standing in the labor force. 

Countering such claims from Murray and his supporters, a more structuralist perspective may contend that the divide is a reflection of the opportunities available to the labor force; opportunities in both employment and education/training.  In the video below, Florida discusses the need to transform service jobs into creative jobs, taking the stance that the American economy does not need to return to a manufacturing foundation, but rather needs to adjust to the current landscape and make the jobs that are available better.  Very much counter to many of Murray’s notions of people, Florida states that every person should be considered a creative person, and viewed as a creator.  He goes on to explain that the education system could be changed to better foster exploration (rather than continuing down the rigid, formal testing experience currently in place), and that the government has a role in upgrading the jobs that exist, so that service jobs are better jobs. 

http://www.creativeclass.com/richard_florida/multimedia_showcase?media=MSNBC-The_Dylan_Ratigan_Show-Quantity_plus_Quality_Creating_High-Paying_Jobs&play=true

This contrast between Murray and Florida shows how the same social phenomena can be understood very differently, and how the understanding of the issue influences the approach suggested for responding to it.

In addition to the resources included within the post, readers who enjoyed this discussion may be interested in the following:

• The Devastating Disconnect Between Rich and Poor.  This post from SALTLAW blog (“a community of progressive law teachers working for justice, diversity and academic excellence”) provides an analysis of the perspective postulated by Murray in “Coming Apart.”  The author explores Murray’s examination of the class divide in America, but moves away from other critiques I have seen by focusing in part on the disconnect between the classes, specifically the distance the rich place between themselves and the poor.
• Reconsidering the ‘Culture of Poverty.’ Within days of publishing her article “Culture of Poverty Makes a Comeback” Patricia Cohen appeared on NPR’s “Talk of the Nation”, speaking with host Neal Cohan, as well as Columbia University Professor Sudhir Venkatesh.  The conversation not only presents Cohen’s arguments from her New York Times piece, but also further explores the factors contributing to poverty, that questions social scientists must grapple with when trying to combat poverty, and the variations in experiences of poverty—hearing from callers about their personal experiences and perspectives. 
• Where the Skills Are.  This 2011 Florida article, which appeared in The Atlantic, provides an thought-provoking analysis of the labor market in cities, eliciting both structural and behavioral perspectives.  Florida not only explores the geographic clustering of job sectors, but also discusses the skills required for individual success within the sectors, and how innovation and knowledge is fostered in high density cities.  It is interesting to compare the arguments made by Florida in this piece, to the points he highlights in the video presented above.