What do you think?
Rate this book
Urban Injustice: How Ghettos Happen
David Hilfiker has committed his life, both as a writer and a doctor, to people in need, writing about the urban poor with whom he's spent all his days for the last two decades. In Urban Injustice, he explains in beautiful and simple language how the myth that the urban poor siphon off precious government resources is contradicted by the facts, and how most programs help some of the people some of the time but are almost never sufficiently orchestrated to enable people to escape the cycle of urban poverty.
Hilfiker is able to present a surprising history of poverty programs since the New Deal, and shows that many of the biggest programs were extremely successful at attaining the goals set out for them. Even so, Hilfiker reveals, most of the best and biggest programs were "social insurance" programs, like Medicare and Social Security, that primarily assisted the middle class, not the poor. Whereas, "public assistance" programs, directed specifically towards the poor, were often extremely effective as far as they went, but were instituted with far less ambitious goals.
In a book that is short, sweet, and completely without academic verboseness or pretension, Hilfiker makes a clear path through the complex history of societal poverty, the obvious weaknesses and surprising strengths of societal responses to poverty thus far, and offers an analysis of models of assistance from around the world that might perhaps assist us in making a better world for our children once we decide that is what we must do.
Hilfiker is able to present a surprising history of poverty programs since the New Deal, and shows that many of the biggest programs were extremely successful at attaining the goals set out for them. Even so, Hilfiker reveals, most of the best and biggest programs were "social insurance" programs, like Medicare and Social Security, that primarily assisted the middle class, not the poor. Whereas, "public assistance" programs, directed specifically towards the poor, were often extremely effective as far as they went, but were instituted with far less ambitious goals.
In a book that is short, sweet, and completely without academic verboseness or pretension, Hilfiker makes a clear path through the complex history of societal poverty, the obvious weaknesses and surprising strengths of societal responses to poverty thus far, and offers an analysis of models of assistance from around the world that might perhaps assist us in making a better world for our children once we decide that is what we must do.
158 pages, Paperback
First published September 3, 2002
10 people are currently reading
231 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
September 10, 2007
why isn't this book more famous? cause you know that hard to find combo of informative and readable? this book has it, and more. it's written by a doctor and is extremely insightful.
November 2, 2020
In drawing out the origins of ghettos, Hilfiker mentions the USA’s war on poverty, war on drugs, and war on welfare reform. Though Hilfiker doesn’t name this, the term ‘war’ is employed to symbolize a social and national call to fight against immaterial enemies. Whereas wars of old used to be armed conflict between sovereign nation-states, these wars, armed or not, all occur within the sovereignty of capitalism. These wars that Hilfiker traces are also domestic civil wars; no longer is the USA only announcing war in a neo-imperialist manner on sovereign nation-states, but the USA is declaring ‘civil wars’ against immaterial, largely domestic enemies under global capitalism’s sovereignty. This hermeneutic of war has been largely developed in Negri and Hardt’s Empire and the secondary literature it begot.
The funding and resources that USA administrations allocated towards each of these wars illustrates that the USA remains captive to capitalism’s sovereignty. As Hilfiker rightly states, the Johnson administration’s war on poverty was more of a skirmish or flirtation with poverty. That is, the historical data shows the Johnson administration, apart from platitudes, was not interested in abolishing poverty. Yet, the Regan administration’s war on drugs was a transnational effort, often involving armed conflict, that resulted in the world’s largest prison-industrial-complex. So, whereas the war on poverty was a gesture towards helping the poor, the war on drugs was an onslaught upon American citizens that resulted not in less drugs, but in stricter punitive networks. And revolving around said punitive and disciplinary networks was, importantly, nascent neoliberalism. Hence, in juxtaposing the war on poverty and the war on drugs, we can conclude that the war on drugs was a more effective national campaign under capitalism’s sovereignty. Similarly, the war on welfare reform was more of a war on those refusing to labor in the name of capital. The welfare reforms in the late 20th century delineated between the deserving and undeserving poor and in doing so concluded that the deserving must have a Protestant work ethic.
All in all, the USA cannot fight against poverty because global capitalism rules the USA. Hence, these ghetto creating wars illustrate how the USA fights valiant wars when its conducive to the continuation of racial capitalism and that capitalism, despite clichés that signal otherwise, has usurped the USA’s sovereignty.
The funding and resources that USA administrations allocated towards each of these wars illustrates that the USA remains captive to capitalism’s sovereignty. As Hilfiker rightly states, the Johnson administration’s war on poverty was more of a skirmish or flirtation with poverty. That is, the historical data shows the Johnson administration, apart from platitudes, was not interested in abolishing poverty. Yet, the Regan administration’s war on drugs was a transnational effort, often involving armed conflict, that resulted in the world’s largest prison-industrial-complex. So, whereas the war on poverty was a gesture towards helping the poor, the war on drugs was an onslaught upon American citizens that resulted not in less drugs, but in stricter punitive networks. And revolving around said punitive and disciplinary networks was, importantly, nascent neoliberalism. Hence, in juxtaposing the war on poverty and the war on drugs, we can conclude that the war on drugs was a more effective national campaign under capitalism’s sovereignty. Similarly, the war on welfare reform was more of a war on those refusing to labor in the name of capital. The welfare reforms in the late 20th century delineated between the deserving and undeserving poor and in doing so concluded that the deserving must have a Protestant work ethic.
All in all, the USA cannot fight against poverty because global capitalism rules the USA. Hence, these ghetto creating wars illustrate how the USA fights valiant wars when its conducive to the continuation of racial capitalism and that capitalism, despite clichés that signal otherwise, has usurped the USA’s sovereignty.
August 9, 2018
We'll researched
November 28, 2020
An exceptional and accessible look at economic realities in the US, and what it would take to address the issue of poverty in this country.
February 25, 2023
This should be compulsory reading for anyone interested in oolitics povert, or housing
Although it is bssed on US data, the patterns are present in other countries
Although it is bssed on US data, the patterns are present in other countries
September 10, 2011
i was interested in this book based on the topic and based on the book sample from barnes and noble. however, after actually reading the book, i was quite disappointed. i had already known from the length that the author would not have been able to do more than skim the surface of the topic, yet i felt that the book itself was full of some stereotypes and inaccuracies that were from personal knowledge/experience rather than the literature base that was said to be the basis of the text. the author did cover quite a bit of territory on some of the root causes of continuing poverty and disparities in urban areas, many that i agree with particularly the attitudes of the general non-poor population about assisting the poor, the suburbanization of america and white flight, and the disproportionate number of african americans being arrested for different offenses and jailed (leading to further problems). however, i had three major problems with the book.
first, the discussion about how no single group of immigrants ever were marginalized to the proportion that african-americans were is disturbingly short. the immigrants that he speaks of were predominantly immigrants from europe. while they may not have been from a single ethnic group or country, they were not initially accepted as american by the caucasian majority. european immigrants who were poor or affluent were only able to leave certain areas after white americans accepted them and allowed them to assimilate. today they only call themselves white americans, but their path is very similar to immigrants to the united states today. move to this country where people like you live and where you have a support network, make a way to support your family, then help someone else come. speaking of marginalization, however, we should always remember that the majority of one group came here involuntarily while the other came voluntarily. the one that came voluntarily had a much easier road to acceptance but their path was not necessarily easy.
second, by focusing the book on african-americans in inner cities in america, the author continued the american perception that all inner city residents are african-americans or poor. most of the points he made were applicable to any inner city resident in poverty, not just african-americans. he may have written the book about african-americans since that is what he said he knew, but when the book started he stated he didn't know much at all. he drew quite a bit on the idea that these problems occurred among non-african-americans as well, but did not discuss it enough to make the point clear (more statistics would have been useful).
third, indicating that inner city residents have a different dialect than the rest of america is continuing to perpetuate the myth that slang (which the same slang exists outside of the urban inner city) is a different language than what the "haves" speak. the telephone test that the author speaks of isn't based on a "dialect" it is based on someone "sounding black". i speak perfect standard english as the author calls it and have multiple degrees and yet i have been discriminated against (just as have thousands before me) simply because i "sound" black (and no i did not grow up in an urban area). while there may be plenty of people that live in urban areas that choose not to enunciate or truly have not learned how to speak or how to form grammatically correct sentences, that would be a byproduct of the educational system rather than a cultural byproduct from living in urban areas.
the book could have been longer, which might have solved some of these problems since the author could have gone into deeper discussion of some issues. the topic is very important to understand for anyone in this country, but acceptance of the truth of these matters is more important because we must change the opinion of those that believe the problems are the result of the behaviors of the urban (or non urban) poor. i have a couple other books of the author in my list to read and i hope he discusses some of these topics a little more in depth.
first, the discussion about how no single group of immigrants ever were marginalized to the proportion that african-americans were is disturbingly short. the immigrants that he speaks of were predominantly immigrants from europe. while they may not have been from a single ethnic group or country, they were not initially accepted as american by the caucasian majority. european immigrants who were poor or affluent were only able to leave certain areas after white americans accepted them and allowed them to assimilate. today they only call themselves white americans, but their path is very similar to immigrants to the united states today. move to this country where people like you live and where you have a support network, make a way to support your family, then help someone else come. speaking of marginalization, however, we should always remember that the majority of one group came here involuntarily while the other came voluntarily. the one that came voluntarily had a much easier road to acceptance but their path was not necessarily easy.
second, by focusing the book on african-americans in inner cities in america, the author continued the american perception that all inner city residents are african-americans or poor. most of the points he made were applicable to any inner city resident in poverty, not just african-americans. he may have written the book about african-americans since that is what he said he knew, but when the book started he stated he didn't know much at all. he drew quite a bit on the idea that these problems occurred among non-african-americans as well, but did not discuss it enough to make the point clear (more statistics would have been useful).
third, indicating that inner city residents have a different dialect than the rest of america is continuing to perpetuate the myth that slang (which the same slang exists outside of the urban inner city) is a different language than what the "haves" speak. the telephone test that the author speaks of isn't based on a "dialect" it is based on someone "sounding black". i speak perfect standard english as the author calls it and have multiple degrees and yet i have been discriminated against (just as have thousands before me) simply because i "sound" black (and no i did not grow up in an urban area). while there may be plenty of people that live in urban areas that choose not to enunciate or truly have not learned how to speak or how to form grammatically correct sentences, that would be a byproduct of the educational system rather than a cultural byproduct from living in urban areas.
the book could have been longer, which might have solved some of these problems since the author could have gone into deeper discussion of some issues. the topic is very important to understand for anyone in this country, but acceptance of the truth of these matters is more important because we must change the opinion of those that believe the problems are the result of the behaviors of the urban (or non urban) poor. i have a couple other books of the author in my list to read and i hope he discusses some of these topics a little more in depth.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 10, 2008
*The American stereotype of poverty has become the single-parent, black, inner-city family. And indeed, African Americans are three times more likely to become poor than whites. In the 2000 Census, almost half (46.8 percent) of American's poor were white, close to another quarter (23 percent) were Hispanic, and (6.2 percent) were Native Americans, Asian, and Pacific Islanders. Over just one-quarter (26.2 percent) were African American. Of those poor Americans, almost a quarter (22.0 percent) lived in rural areas and more than a third (36.4 percent) live in the suburbs. Of African Americans in poverty, less than half live in the urban ghettos that have come to be the almost exclusive definition of poverty in the American mind.
This book is largely about those black Americans only make up about 12 percent of the poor people, who do live in the inner-city ghettos. (XII, Intro).*
...This book was deeply sad and eye opening for me. I've been sold a view of poverty by the media and by my middle class suburban up bringing that is simply not true. Including negative stereotypes of those living off welfare in the ghettos (single African American mothers who continue to have children to get a larger welfare check). Also the systems created to help those in poverty have served more to keep them there. My stereotypes have been greatly perpetuated by my fear of the unknown and misinformation about who's living in poverty, where they live and what they look like. Of course my ignorance is part of the problem.
I'm so thankful for this thoughtful book and how the fog is beginning to lift in my mind and heart as I wrestle with what I've been told and was truly is.
This book is largely about those black Americans only make up about 12 percent of the poor people, who do live in the inner-city ghettos. (XII, Intro).*
...This book was deeply sad and eye opening for me. I've been sold a view of poverty by the media and by my middle class suburban up bringing that is simply not true. Including negative stereotypes of those living off welfare in the ghettos (single African American mothers who continue to have children to get a larger welfare check). Also the systems created to help those in poverty have served more to keep them there. My stereotypes have been greatly perpetuated by my fear of the unknown and misinformation about who's living in poverty, where they live and what they look like. Of course my ignorance is part of the problem.
I'm so thankful for this thoughtful book and how the fog is beginning to lift in my mind and heart as I wrestle with what I've been told and was truly is.
May 29, 2012
This book is carefully titled, note the word "why" but "how", and describes the sad history of welfare policies at various government levels in the USA. The policies of (federal and state) governments targeting the poor have misguided goals and implementations, and achieve limited or in many cases negative results, as the formation of the inner cities as we know them today demonstrates. Are there better approaches? Policymakers might learn from the example of social policies of Finland. While one might disagree with the observation of the author, that personal effort is only able to play minimal role in rising out of poverty, this book is a passionate plea for societal justice.
February 3, 2013
Brilliant analysis. Must read for anyone to get a deep and very factual understanding of America's "War on Poverty" through the ages. Very unbiased, deconstructs all myths associated with welfare, race based stereotypes regarding education, health care, poverty, education, just everything. It also deeply analysis why American society is so highly dichotomous and gives reasons for the disappearing middle class. Equips the reader with ways to combat this 'urban injustice'. Best part is, the author is a doctor, and his scientific approach to the entire process and its resultant effects are simply amazing!
May 24, 2013
A challenging book: portions were particularly good at portraying the hopelessness & injustice of inner-city ghetto life. The descriptions of the inadequacy of the current welfare system made for very depressing reading. I found the section on alternatives, while helpful, to be too brief to be truly convincing. The distinction in approach--between social insurance and assistance for the deserving--is helpful, but again, needs more development. The description of Chicago's Gautreaux Project was fascinating.
April 17, 2010
A great summary of the history of the public's perception of the urban poor and how this has influenced policies aimed at alleviating poverty since the early twentieth century. Hilfiker is a doctor who has spent more than 20 years working with homeless and HIV-positive men in Washington, DC. He brings a unique and personal perspective to the topic, and offers his own ideas about approaching the problem of poverty.
July 7, 2012
Statistics about urban (mostly African American) poverty are overwhelmingly negative and are 90% of the book. A glance at solutions outlined Finland's response and the final few pages are the author's suggested solutions. First and most significant solution - universal healthcare coverage. Now that this is more a reality than dream, it will be interesting to see if this is the much hoped for poverty panacea.
October 2, 2014
Although the data at this point may be outdated, this book makes the strong case for systemic changes to reduce the likelihood of poverty. I appreciated the history lesson, as it were, to understanding how black ghettos came to exist. I do wish the author wouldn't have focused only on one type of person, because there are plenty of white people who live in abject poverty as well. The same systemic issues also apply to them.
June 26, 2008
Simple, yet not simplistic survey of the most influential studies on the causes and symptoms of urban poverty. A great beginner's guide to issues of social justice.
November 1, 2010
From the author of Not All of Us Are Saints, with annotated bibliography. ILL or BPL.
Read
November 4, 2013Really interesting. Got me a lot more engaged with the topic.
November 11, 2013
A must read for anyone interested in the reasons for our society and cities of today.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews