YOUR
NAME
Entry: Wright--Preface and Chapter
1 Date:
Feb. 26, 1999
KEY
POINTS:
·
The
homeless are a very diverse group of unfortunates (p.3).
·
Emphasizing
on personal defects as an explanation of homelessness is a way of diverting
attention from the more basic issues of housing, poverty, welfare and public
policy (p.5).
·
Wright
who holds a social structural, or political economic view of homelessness,
argues that "trends in urban political economies have created structural conditions that literally destine some people to be homeless (p. 13).
· "Mentally
ill and addicted people do not become homeless because of their defects but
rather because these defects render them most vulnerable to these larger social
structural developments" (p. 13).
·
The
homeless are relatively young (average age is low to middle thirties), are
drawn mostly from the poverty population, exhibit high rates of personal and
social disabilities, and exhibit astonishingly high levels of estrangement from
family and other social networks (pp. 17-18).
APPLICATION:
Camobreco (1996) has another theory
that explains the stronger political influence of the elderly. The elderly have
other groups who hold interest in their welfare programs such as Medicaid.
"A careful examination of Medicaid reveals that, despite its standing as a
'welfare' program it is important for a number of different groups, not all of
whom represent the poor" (p.864). Plural elitists believe that health care
providers are the interest group that has the most important impact on Medicaid
and that the poor and the elderly are other groups who have interest in the
program. This indicates that it takes more than one interest group and
sometimes a more powerful group to demand such a large portion of the
government's welfare expenditures. Women and children in poverty have a lot
more to compete against. It is no longer only a united elderly population but
other interest groups with more political power.
FURTHER
STUDY:
QUESTION:
Outside
Research:
1996 "Medicaid and Collective Action." Social Science
Quarterly. Vol. 77: 4, pp. 860-876.