From: sug6@usite-next.uchicago.edu (Patrick Sugent)
Subject: Re: American underclass
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:54:55 GMT

  Since you are really looking for reading material, I'll make a couple
of recommendations and keep my opinions short and sweet.

In article <BtK4Jy.2uz@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> idfriedm@hertz.uwaterloo.ca (id friedman) writes:
>
>I have always wondered why the U.S, the richest country in the world in
>terms of per capita GNP, is having such a hard time solving the problems
>of homelessness, urban poverty, drugs, etc..

  Because you can't get rid of poverty by spending money.  With the
money our government devotes to poverty, it should put every poor
person above the poverty line (in terms of straight math.)  If someone really 
knew what the problem was, I think it would be fixed by now.  The fact is,
no one knows how to fix it and I believe many different solutions should
be tried in conjunction with one another rather than assuming that a
"Grand Plan" can work.

>Of course, Democrats and Republicans yell and scream at each other for
>ignoring and neglecting these problems. I am wondering whether people
>know of *** good *** books addressing this problem.

  Well, I recommend a US News & World Report article from April 20, 1992.
I also recommend Lawrence Mead, "Beyond Entitlement" and 
Charles Murray, "Losing Ground".  You are unlikely to agree with them,
but they do represent two schools of thought on the issue.

>
>I am ** not ** interested in unsubstantiated accusations.

  Who is?

>
>I am interested in opinions on the following subjects:
>
>
>(1) Is rent control is places like N.Y a large part of the problem in terms
>of distorting the housing market?

  Absolutely.

>
>(2) Do you think that either Clinton or Bush are *** serious *** about
>addressing these problems?   

  Yes and no.  Clinton has shown success with Project Success in Arkansas
(from what I hear).  However, he pretty much emphasizes his vague "economic"
plan as the way out.  Bush seems to believe that the States should be
responsible and is more than willing to give them free reign.  However,
the solutions usually proposed are short-term more expensive than
just letting the problem continue.  With government at all levels in a
budget crunch, not many states/cities are picking up short-term more
expensive new ideas.

  Overall, I'd say it is a back-burner issue for both of them.  I
have yet to see any vaguely impartial source give credit to either
Bush or Clinton's economic plan and neither (to the best of my
knowledge) has any realistic proposals specifically addressed at 
urban poverty. 
>
>(3) Is there any way that these problems can be ameliorated without a large
>tax increase?

  Tough to say.  Really, as near as I can tell, nobody really has
a solution that will work no matter how much money you throw at the 
problem.  Some programs have certainly shown some level of success,
but come far short of eliminating the problem.  I'm convinced 
that no one knows.

Pat


-- 
Patrick Sugent				"Cry 'Havoc!' and let slip   
sug6@usite-next.uchicago.edu		 the Hogs of Peace."
(708) 447-1771				 --P.J. O'Rourke
Newsgroups: sci.econ