poverty is a predictable and acquired condition
In the United States, so many people are convinced that poverty is a predictable and acquired condition, especially when one is from a particular section of society. This is a misleading stereotype that has led to the conception of the underclass in the country. The existence of the underclass is primarily a social construction and is often used as a political weapon (Ruggles, 175). Mostly, this concept is intrinsically linked to poverty and is commonly used to symbolize the elucidation of these state of affairs. Most of the problems surrounding the idea of the underclass revolve around the public understanding of poverty. For instance, poverty may be defined in a behavioral aspect where the people in this class are believed to be morally contaminated with no ambitions, and thus an economic burden (Rodgers, 13). This understanding of poverty makes it harder to find solutions for the poor in society. Therefore, the concept of the underclass of poverty is an ideological construction. Like many ideological constructions, it is not a permanent concept and may only be eradicated with the change of the system and social construction of the concept.
I believe that there is a relationship between poverty and race. Poverty is not just a singular concept but is a culmination of multiple facets, such as educational attainment and financial security (Geronimus et al., 201). However, one’s socio-economic status is also associated with the subjective perceptions of their social status and class. Status includes all the attributes of the quality of life and the privileges and opportunities that society affords to people. Research shows that ethnicity and race affect one’s stratification, thus determining the socio-economic status of a person. It also leads to segregation, a risk factor for many risk factors to a low socio-economic status. Therefore, the relationship between race and ethnicity and poverty is intimately intertwined.