Because they are working and everyone around them is working, they make the assumption that the only people who aren't working are the people who don't want to. A sociological explanations relating to the perspective David Marsland and Charles Murry are prominent spokesmen for the idea that, people, when they are functioning "properly," not lazy or in some way chemically impaired are driven "by rational self-interest and self-maximising behavior" (Martin, 2004) Other sociologists use the term rational choice to discuss "social order as the consequences of rational thought
Alice O'Conner writes: More recently, scholars working in the "new institutionalist" tradition have developed the argument further, focusing on how the courts (Bussiere 1997), federal administrative agencies (Lieberman 1998), and political regimes at the subnational level (Amenta 1998) played a powerful role in shaping social relations and limiting the scope of anti-poverty policy. (O'Connor, 2000, p
At least in its idealized form, socialists argued that a democratically controlled, centrally planned economy would eliminate poverty and greatly reduce inequality, enhance the democratic capacity of the local and national state, reduce alienation by giving workers greater control within the process of production, and strengthen values of community over individualistic competition. (Wright, 1995, p
Some were also placed in institutions such as boarding schools. In order to justify the practice of removing Indian children from their birth homes, authorities at the time claimed that there was a dramatic rise in unmarried Indian mothers and unwanted children (Jacobs)
These goods (such as monetary payments, subsidies and vouchers, health services or housing) come with certain provisos, such as means testing or other conditions, and the category of people who receive it are very sharply and critically delineated. The system, too, is intended to be only for a temporary amount of time with the recipient being constantly inspected by the government to ensure that he is using the money according to government conditions and that conditions for him being recipient still apply (Gilens, 1996)
A. are Medicare, Medicaid and the Social Security programs (Schram, 2005)
28). With many teachers in America struggling to make it from paycheck to paycheck, the results of these misguided economic priorities have included many teachers searching for greener career fields elsewhere and many children being left behind despite the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (Allen, 2007)
386). Likewise, other researchers have examined the relationship between poverty and juvenile crime through literature reviews (Barton & Watkins, 1997), case studies (Bogenschneider & Gross, 2004) and longitudinal studies (Mann & Reynolds, 2006)
19). Moreover, juvenile crime is not the result of a single cause or even a multitude of causes that can be identified with precision (Bogenschneider & Gross, 2004)
19). Moreover, juvenile crime is not the result of a single cause or even a multitude of causes that can be identified with precision (Bogenschneider & Gross, 2004)
103). These trends have also been matched by changesin the American juvenile justice system that are characterized by so-called "get-tough," "zero-tolerance" and "accountability" policies in primary and secondary educational institutions (Brown, 2009)
9). Although the relationship between youth crime and a social welfare state is well documented, the precise relationship between population size and local juvenile crime rates remains less clear (Carcach & Huntley, 2002)
Table 1 Timeline of proposed research and study conclusion ACTIVITIES/TASKS TIME (MONTHS) (2013-2014) Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr 1 Bibliographic Searches X X 2 Photocopy info from non-bibliographic sources X X 3 Reading X X X 4 Submission of study proposal X 5 Fine tune research question and methodology X X 8 Data collection X X X X 9 Data analysis X X X X 10 Writing up of study X X 11 Revision, editing and submission X 12 Submission of study X X Literature Review The research concerning the relationship between youthful offenders and their socioeconomic background has a fairly lengthy history, beginning in the late 19th century and becoming more intensified thereafter. Much of this research has regarded the problem of juvenile delinquency as being multifaceted, of course, but there is a general consensus that a lack of social services resources and a dearth of meaningful educational employment opportunities have contributed to the problem which are the responsibilities of the government (Ellis, 2011)
With many teachers in America struggling to make it from paycheck to paycheck, the results of these misguided economic priorities have included many teachers searching for greener career fields elsewhere and many children being left behind despite the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002 (Allen, 2007). Federal mandates for social programs for housing, Social Security, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Medicaid, food stamps, and Supplemental Security Income programs together with state and local initiatives for women, children and infants (WIC) have all been cited as characteristic of a social welfare state with the intended outcome being reduced poverty and improved social and employment opportunities that will reduce the need for young people to resort to crime in the first place (Flammang, 1997)
In reality, though, the focus on youths at risk of becoming involved with the law enforcement community is relatively recent in origin. For example, the publication of the National Commission on Excellence in Education's 1983 study, A Nation at Risk, caused educators and governmental policymakers to attempt to identify the country's at-risk youth populations for the first time in an effort to reverse the tide of declining test scores and growing dropout rates that were the major antecedents to success later in life (Fusick & Bordeau, 2009)
60). What is known for certain is that there are some approaches that have been identified as being effective in at least mitigating the impact of poverty on juvenile crime (Hornel et al
386). Likewise, other researchers have examined the relationship between poverty and juvenile crime through literature reviews (Barton & Watkins, 1997), case studies (Bogenschneider & Gross, 2004) and longitudinal studies (Mann & Reynolds, 2006)
The majority of the programs that have proven successful to date have all emphasized the family component and have included parental training as part of their interventions (Bogenschneider & Gross, 2004). Finally, a seminal study by Shaw and McKay (1942) employed one square mile sections of Chicago to investigate the relationship between poverty and juvenile crime, and other researchers have since used this method for other geographic units, including wards, police precincts, and census tracts (Ouimet, 2000)
127). These perplexing outcomes fly directly in the face of common sense, but these unintended and unexpected outcomes have nevertheless continued to adversely affect the poor despite governmental efforts at all levels to reduce poverty and the conditions that contribute to it (Weatherburn & Lind, 2000)
Preliminary results suggest that work requirements and time limits have succeeded in moving low-income women with children into jobs, but have decreased the wages they are able to obtain compared to women who are not subject to time limits." (Schmidt, 2000) This is demonstrating how the PWRORA is having a positive impact in helping recipients to support themselves