|
WHAT
KEEPS US FROM THE POORHOUSE ? |
|||
|
by Linda M. Crannell |
|||
| PHS Commentary # 5 |
(The Poorhouse Lady) |
12/23/2003 |
|
|
|
|||
|
All that keeps us from "SOCIAL SAFETY NET" which was carefully constructed ... and which is being at the start of the 21st Century!!!
|
|
||
|
CHESTER COUNTY
FARM |
|||
|
http://www.artprintcollection.com/html/andrew_wyeth_-_chester_county_.html |
|||
ASTONISHINGLY
EASY TO FALL INTO POVERTY It is no coincidence that a system of county poorhouses had to be instituted about the time of the Industrial Revolution -- at the start of the 19th century. The switch to a wage labor system not only changed the way people earned a living, but it also transformed their entire way of living. One major change in lifestyle involved the fact that people (single individuals as well as families) became much more mobile. They traveled to find employment. This marked the beginning of the end of a long era during which entire extended families lived in the same communities over not only several decades but several generations. The support of such extended families living as an integral part of such communities had long provided the "safety net" which carried people through "hard times." That informal support was no longer readily available once people were living as "strangers among strangers." So, more and more, as people fell upon hard times ( becoming widowed or orphaned, or simply growing old alone, or suffering the effects of illness or disability) or when the only wage earner was laid off or injured on the job, or when a family experienced the very common devastation of losing their home because of fire or natural disaster -- they had no alternative except to ask for public relief. As the "poor relief" rolls grew alarmingly large -- and expensive to the taxpayers -- governments began to respond by denying any form of "outdoor relief." The only help offered was at the poorhouse. The primary reason poverty led to the poorhouses established in the 1800s was simply this: THERE WAS NO SOCIAL SAFETY NET! Poorhouse enrollments were gradually reduced as legislation during the last half of the century required that children and people who were mentally ill be provided with more appropriate facilities -- orphanages or foster homes and mental hospitals. However, the poorhouse remained the ultimate refuge for a vast number of people for almost 100 year.
|
|||
|
Let's Look at What We Did NOT Have During the 1800's |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| We
did not see the elimination of poorhouses until the
strongest strand in this social safety net was provided -- with the
enactment of the Social Security Act in 1935. When we are asked
whether it seems possible that we may ever be sending people to poorhouses again ... we want to say no; but ... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a huge and
rapidly growing category of people who are not able to benefit
from many of these programs -- even if the programs survive the
current threats. While government spin doctors proclaim
the increase in opportunities for people to start their own businesses
as the great benefit of American capitalism -- many in these
statistics are simply people who can no longer find any salaried
employment. We call these the ... Recently there has been increasing concern about "outsourcing" : American companies moving jobs out of the country. But a great deal of outsourcing is domestic. Work is being done more and more by people who are not direct employees of these companies. They are doing "contract labor" ... working without the benefits or protections that are available only to salaried employees. And they are doing so both overseas and here at home. In the late 1800s and early 1900s there was a great moral outrage about "sweatshops" and people working for near-slave wages in their homes. Working "piecework" for contractors who offer no unemployment compensation when contracts run out and whose excessive demands for more and more volume in production may lead to unsafe work practices is no less problematic when it is done on computers than when it is done on a sewing machine! Yet there does not now seem to be as much outrage over such trends as there was a hundred years ago. That may be because those who benefit financially (not the workers!) from such arrangements misrepresent them as a "growth in entrepreneurship" and hope we will view this as something homey like a "cottage industry." It's not!
When we look at these
trends ...
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Return to List of COMMENTARIES (with links) Return to POORHOUSE STORY home page |