Comparing Gilder's Wealth And Poverty

The definition of poverty described by Heywood is as “being deprived of the necessities of life, sufficient food, fuel and clothing to maintain physical efficiency.” (2004: 305). To begin with, Gilder defines poor as being part of an “alien tribe” (2012: 97), specifically referring to black people. Gilder’s chapter 6 is full of assumptions and generalizations without providing any data or support. The first edition of Wealth and Poverty was published in 1981, it is highly important because between 1980 and 1982, the U.S.A. was going through a deep recession (The Bancroft Library, 2011). It is also worth mentioning that the President during that period of time, also referred as ‘Reagan Revolution’, was Ronald Reagan, someone who was against a Welfare

For instance, Gilder’s thoughts in chapter 6 support Reagan’s preferred doctrine, classical liberalism. The author described the welfare state as a way to “cut productivity, limit job opportunities and perpetuate poverty” (2012: 101), similar to Heywood’s opinion as “counter productive society” (2004: 313), it originated individuals’ dependency on the system, causing them to be victims of circumstance. Gilder is very critical from my point of understanding, and implies (without providing any support) that being a black, Hispanic, immigrant, divorced, single parent with children, American Indian, amongst others, individual is a cause for poverty. He states that poverty is caused by discrimination and racism; however, the words he uses to express himself in this chapter only encourage more discrimination and racism. Furthermore, he suggests that a nuclear family is most likely to not fall into poverty and that it should be taken as a model for prosperity. It is a really strong argument to make, since nowadays society is trying to provide equal access of opportunity to everyone regardless race, sex, age, marital status,