Introduction America's Response to Poverty From Moral Guidance to Income Support The Cycle Repeats Changes in Government Expenditures on Poor Children How Rich and Poor Children Differ Measures of Children's Well-Being How Large Are the Differences? Why Parental Income Might Be Important Conventional Estimates of the Effect of Income What Other Studies Show Re-estimating the Conventional Model Changes in Parental Income The "True" Effect of Income The Source of Income Income before and after an Outcome Income and Material Well-Being How Families Spend Additional Money Income and Material Hardship Living Conditions and Children 's Outcomes Income, Psychological Well-Being, and Parenting Practices Income and Parental Stress Income and Parenting Practices More Evidence on the "True" Effect of Income Trends in Parents' Income and Children's Outcomes State Welfare Benefits and Children's Outcomes What Social Experiments Show Helping Poor Children Raising Parental Income How Much Is Enough? Changing Parents' Noneconomic Characteristics Where the Trouble Begins Appendix: Description of the Samples and Variables Appendix: Conventional Estimates of the Effect of Income Appendix: The "True" Effect of Income Appendix: Index Construction Appendix: More Evidence on the "True" Effect of Income Notes References Index
Susan E. Mayer is Associate Professor, Harris Graduate School of Public Policy Studies, University of Chicago.
Everyone involved in 'welfare reform' could usefully read What
Money Can't Buy, a study by economist Susan Mayer of the University
of Chicago. Its message is somber: as a society, we are fairly
helpless to correct the worst problems of child poverty. This is
not a new insight, but by confirming it, Mayer discredits much of
the welfare debate's overwrought rhetoric. `Welfare reform' may
raise or lower poverty a bit (we can't say which), but neither its
supposed virtues nor its alleged vices are powerful enough to alter
the status quo dramatically. What's impressive about Mayer's study
is that it contradicts both her politics and her history...[and]
demolishes much of the welfare debate's rhetorical boilerplate,
liberal and conservative.
*Newsweek*
Mayer's findings make a useful--and sometimes
surprising--contribution to the long and painful debate over
welfare reform and its iffy implementation...More money does help
the children of poor families, Mayer concedes. But the effect is
considerably less--and more complicated--than is generally thought,
even among social scientists, her research shows...The results of
her extensive research--appendices, references, and notes make up
almost one third of the book--show that 'once children's basic
material needs are met, characteristics of their parents become
more important to how they turn out than anything additional money
can buy.
*Chicago Tribune*
[Mayer] explores a social-science conundrum that has been near the
center of the technical policy debate for 30-odd years...Some of
her [social science] innovations are important contributions to the
art...[Her] analysis indicates that more income transfers are not
going to do much about the life chances of the children whose
current life chances she properly deplores. The details of her
findings will be argued by policy analysts of all stripes...[but]
to transgress those [political] boundaries has required an
independence of spirit...[and] Mayer has made it a bit easier for
more young scholars to question the orthodoxy.
*Washington Times*
[In What Money Can't Buy, Susan Mayer] developed a statistical
model that predicted what would happen to children's prospects if
poor families' incomes were increased from $15,000 to $30,000 a
year. The surprising answer is: not much. Ms Mayer found that
although doubling the income of poor families would lift most
children above the poverty line, it would have virtually no effect
on their test scores and only a slight effect on social
behaviour...There are two reasons for this. First, Ms Mayer notes
that the extra money tends to be spent on such things as restaurant
meals, clothes, dishwashers, roomier houses or second cars, none of
which matters much in helping children succeed in school or
life...Second, good parenting has much in common with being a good
worker. In both roles, the reward goes to diligence, determination,
good health, willingness to co-operate, and so on. Children with
parents who possess these qualities tend to do well in life, even
if mother and father do not make much money.
*Economist*
A major accomplishment that merits and will almost certainly
receive the attention of social scientists, policymakers, and the
general public. Mayer has identified a central policy issue and
examined it carefully and without flinching from many angles. It is
not likely to be the last word on the relationship between family
income and children's outcomes...Like most important books, it will
redefine the terms of the debate about the effects of family income
on child outcomes. Whether one agrees with its conclusions or not,
they cannot be ignored.
*Contemporary Sociology*
This well-argued book will surely become fodder in political
debates concerning welfare programs.
*Library Journal*
Everyone involved in 'welfare reform' could usefully read What
Money Can't Buy, a study by economist Susan Mayer of the
University of Chicago. Its message is somber: as a society, we are
fairly helpless to correct the worst problems of child poverty.
This is not a new insight, but by confirming it, Mayer discredits
much of the welfare debate's overwrought rhetoric. `Welfare reform'
may raise or lower poverty a bit (we can't say which), but neither
its supposed virtues nor its alleged vices are powerful enough to
alter the status quo dramatically. What's impressive about Mayer's
study is that it contradicts both her politics and her
history...[and] demolishes much of the welfare debate's rhetorical
boilerplate, liberal and conservative. -- Robert J. Samuelson *
Newsweek *
Mayer's findings make a useful--and sometimes
surprising--contribution to the long and painful debate over
welfare reform and its iffy implementation...More money does help
the children of poor families, Mayer concedes. But the effect is
considerably less--and more complicated--than is generally thought,
even among social scientists, her research shows...The results of
her extensive research--appendices, references, and notes make up
almost one third of the book--show that 'once children's basic
material needs are met, characteristics of their parents become
more important to how they turn out than anything additional money
can buy. -- Joan Beck * Chicago Tribune *
[Mayer] explores a social-science conundrum that has been near the
center of the technical policy debate for 30-odd years...Some of
her [social science] innovations are important contributions to the
art...[Her] analysis indicates that more income transfers are not
going to do much about the life chances of the children whose
current life chances she properly deplores. The details of her
findings will be argued by policy analysts of all stripes...[but]
to transgress those [political] boundaries has required an
independence of spirit...[and] Mayer has made it a bit easier for
more young scholars to question the orthodoxy. -- Charles Murray *
Washington Times *
[In What Money Can't Buy, Susan Mayer] developed a
statistical model that predicted what would happen to children's
prospects if poor families' incomes were increased from $15,000 to
$30,000 a year. The surprising answer is: not much. Ms Mayer found
that although doubling the income of poor families would lift most
children above the poverty line, it would have virtually no effect
on their test scores and only a slight effect on social
behaviour...There are two reasons for this. First, Ms Mayer notes
that the extra money tends to be spent on such things as restaurant
meals, clothes, dishwashers, roomier houses or second cars, none of
which matters much in helping children succeed in school or
life...Second, good parenting has much in common with being a good
worker. In both roles, the reward goes to diligence, determination,
good health, willingness to co-operate, and so on. Children with
parents who possess these qualities tend to do well in life, even
if mother and father do not make much money. * Economist *
A major accomplishment that merits and will almost certainly
receive the attention of social scientists, policymakers, and the
general public. Mayer has identified a central policy issue and
examined it carefully and without flinching from many angles. It is
not likely to be the last word on the relationship between family
income and children's outcomes...Like most important books, it will
redefine the terms of the debate about the effects of family income
on child outcomes. Whether one agrees with its conclusions or not,
they cannot be ignored. -- Saul D. Hoffman * Contemporary Sociology
*
This well-argued book will surely become fodder in political
debates concerning welfare programs. * Library Journal *
|
Ask a Question About this Product More... |
|
