Child Poverty in Canada

Article: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1202030--canada-lags-on-fighting-child-poverty-report-finds.cp

            A current social policy issue in Canada is child poverty. This is a big issue in Canada, and not enough is being done by our government to address it. I believe that as a rich and developed country, child poverty should not be as high as it is, yet it is a very common issue here in Canada.

            The issue of child poverty in Canada is very serious and important because the rate of children who are living in poverty in Canada is increasing and its impact on children's futures and society can be devastating, (Forouzin, 2010). Children who are born into poverty are usually embedded into poverty and most of the time they live in poverty their whole lives. They live with inequality and stigma from being born into poverty, and they are less likely to receive a post-secondary education and a good career than children who are not born into poverty. I think that our government should be providing more funding to help children living in poverty.

            I think that our government uses more of the neo-conservative/neo-liberal approach on child welfare because the government is only providing basic security to parents with children under the age of 18. I think our government values inequality, and our social welfare society is still stigmatized. Social welfare is limited to the very needy in most services, and our benefits are minimal. I believe that Canada should develop more of a social democratic ideology on child poverty, and value equality instead of inequality, and they should provide equal chances for all. Children born into poverty are definitely not treated with equality or given an equal chance as children who are not born into poverty.
 

            The article posted above is titled ‘Canada lags on fighting child poverty, report finds,’ and it was published on an online Canadian newspaper called thestar.com. In this article the author discusses a report written by the United Nations Children’s Fund and a companion report written by UNICEF. These reports were written about child poverty in the world and in Canada, and conclude that our government hasn’t been paying enough attention to child poverty rates in the past few years. According to the report done by the United Nations Children's Fund, "with a child poverty rate of 13.3 per cent, Canada ranks 24th out of 35 industrialized nations, behind the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and most of northern Europe," (Monsebraaten, 2012). Both reports imply that Canada needs to lean towards the social democratic ideology on child poverty and increase funding to social welfare services needed to counteract child poverty. To address this issue, the United Nations Children's Fund "calls on the federal government to increase the Child Tax Benefit to at least $5,000 a year from the current $3,485 maximum and index it to inflation." They also advise that "parents with children under age 18 should also be allowed to retain more earned income from the Working Income Tax Benefit and Employment Insurance," (Monsebraaten, 2012). If our government doesn’t do anything soon, our child poverty rates are just going to keep increasing.

 

                I definitely agree with the article’s perspective of the way that Canada has been dealing with poverty, and I agree that the government needs to pay more attention and put more of an effort in to address the issue of child poverty. I think that Canada needs to adapt more of an institutional approach to social welfare, and see it as normal with no stigma. I also think that our federal and provincial governments need to increase funding to our social welfare systems, lower tuition rates for colleges and universities, and create more job opportunities. These are all things that could help address the issue of child poverty and the futures of children who were born into poverty. Our government needs to stop valuing inequality and start to care about the citizens and our right to life. I know that child poverty is a huge complex issue with no clear-cut resolution, but it will be a huge issue in Canada for a long time to come if our government doesn’t put more of an effort into addressing it.
 

References
 

Forouzin, S. (2010). Broken Promises: Child poverty in Ontario and the Greater Toronto Area. Page 1. Retrieved from:

http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.auc.ca/pqdtft/docview/816711166/13A14130FCF6A402CE8/2?accountid=46683

Monsebraaten, L. (2012). Canada lags on fighting child poverty, report finds. Thestar.com. Retrieved from:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1202030--canada-lags-on-fighting-child-poverty-report-finds.

-Lyndsay

A Penny for Your Thoughts

           It was long foretold in North American First Nation tribes that the white men would come. “In the time of the ancestors lived a Lakota holy man, Drinks Water, who dreamed of what was to be. In a dream Drinks Water saw all the four-leggeds go back into the earth and in their place a race of two-legged strangers wove a web around the Lakota. Then, in his dream, Drinks Water saw his people living in square gray homes, on a barren land (…)” (Kennedy, 1999).

 When the first wave of Europeans arrived on the shores of what we know today as Eastern Canada, the First Nations were curious about the strangers. Over time, their numbers would pour in, carried in large ships coming from the eastern sea. As their numbers grew, the longer the strangers remained and the deeper they ventured into the forestlands, the Anishinaabe people would learn that these newcomers would bring with them death and disease for years to come.

 However, this is not the only thing the Europeans brought with them that would inhibit the Anishinaabe people. With us, we brought our industrializing ways, which technically led to poverty. Over time, the gap between the poor and the wealthy grew, and it continues to grow even to this day.

In Pre-Contact times, Anishinaabe tribes lived and worked in close-knit communities. They relied on human, natural and social capital to uphold their community. Every individual in the tribe had a position; they each had a task to fulfill and required no monetary payment. They did not mass-produce products of innovation but used what their Creator gave to them on the land they lived on; and whatever they used, they only took what was needed for their populace. Not a single tree or animal more was taken, for in their culture, they must treat Mother Earth with the utmost respect. In a sense, their community capacity was dependent on their environment. They would not try to push and shove people together, taking down forests to permit expansion and decreasing the wildlife population in the process. “In the pre-contact era, aboriginal peoples were distributed unevenly across the Canadian landscape, population densities varying according to the ability of the lands to support human life.” (Miller, n.d). According to Trosper, there are three conditions for resilience of a community, those are: buffering disturbance, learning and self-organiztion (Trosper, 2003). The aboriginal communities definitely harnessed the power of these three conditions to achieve their resilience. 

           

           The aboriginal people lived in a way that was very in tune with nature and centrally based on a web of relationships. Every resource, every task and every hardship was shared amongst members of the tribe. Therefore, poverty, as we know it, was non-existant. However, this does not mean the Anishinaabe people lived simple, unproblematic lives throughout pre-contact history. Surely, they had their own complications that needed to be dealt with. In winter for example, sources of nourishment would become scarce. The beauty and the effectiveness of the intratribal system comes into play here. Families would band together to survive the hardships of nature.

There is much to be learned from the ancient ways of living of the Anishinaabe people as more and more people from our communities fall victim to the cruel reality of poverty.

Miller, J.R. The Pre-Contact Era. (n.d) Retrieved October 18, 2012, from http://www.multiculturalcanada.ca/Encyclopedia/A-Z/a1/5

Giizhik, Zhawaano. The Universe of the Ojibwe/Anishinaabeg. (n.d.) Retrieved October 18, 2012, from http://www.unieketrouwringen.nl/media/files/the-traditional-anishinaabe-world-view.pdf

Kennedy, Ira (1999). American Indian Prophecies. Retrieved October 18, 2012, from http://www.texfiles.com/features/prophecies.htm

Trosper, R. (2003) Resilience in Pre-contact Pacific Northwest Social Ecological Systems. Ecology and Society, Volume 7. Retrieved December 15, 2012 from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol7/iss3/art6/

~ Valerie

Poverty in Feudalistic Europe and how it affected Child Welfare

               Poverty is an enormous social issue today that’s growing at an alarming rate, and was even a huge problem formerly in the 11^th century. I believe personally that we are not doing everything that we can to prevent and help the people in poverty and people who don’t have enough to afford proper nutrition. It would cost roughly $175 billion dollars to end world poverty (Harack, 2011) and considering that there are roughly 271.6 million Americans not living in poverty and Americans spent about $646 on Christmas gifts in 2011 (American Research Group, 2011), there would be over $175 billion and we would be able to end world poverty alone with just America’s holiday shopping money. But why don’t we? I believe it’s because poverty is out of sight, out of mind, and we believe that the problem will fix itself eventually. We also like to spoil ourselves, and in general, wouldn’t give up $646 to charity out of selfishness. However, poverty in feudalistic Europe is seen much differently than today in terms of the kind of poverty, as the type of work and pay was significantly diverse.

                Women living in 12^th century Europe were not always able to take care of their children, and as a consequence, these children were living in poverty and welfare for the rest of their lives. Instead of infanticide, the church accepted the anonymity of abandonment of their children in which they would be raised by nurses until the age of four, when they would move to a hospice where they could earn a living at age seven (Fuchs, 1984). These children would grow up to become nurses as well, or move out of the hospice to pursue jobs offered by nobles as a serf.

                For those children that were not abandoned and lived with their parents, it was often in poor living conditions with very little to sustain themselves. Many of these populaces were working with their numerous children trying to make ends meet to be able to pay the landlord’s rent, but harvest failures and bad weather could be a deciding factor on whether the children continued to live in welfare (Hatcher, 1994). As the Black Death made its way into Europe in 1350, the amount of poverty in Europe did not decline, but the amount of serfs available to work the field did. This lead to peasant revolts, kings taking back their land, and the establishment of a centralized government.

As the decline of feudalism took its course, it was interconnected to other social issues that arose among the Europeans. Poverty, crime, illness, and social disorder were products of the switch from feudalism to industrialism near the 17^th century (Penna, 2005). The social welfare of children was directly affected by this switch, as this brought about the English Poor Laws and the employment of children for cheap labour, which will be discussed in future blog posts.

References:

American Research Group, Inc. (2011). 2011 Christmas Gift Spending Plans Flat. Retrieved October 16, 2012, from the American Research Group Inc.’s website: http://americanresearchgroup.com/holiday/

Fuchs, R. (1984). Abandoned Children: Foundlings and Child Welfare in Nineteenth-Century France. Albany (NY): State University of New York Press.

Harack, B. (2011). How much would it cost to end extreme poverty in the world? Retrieved October 16, 2012, from the Vision of Earth website: http://www.visionofearth.org/economics/ending-poverty/how-much-would-it-cost-to-end-extreme-poverty-in-the-world/

Hatcher, J. (1994). England in the Aftermath of the Black Death. Past and Present, 144, 3-35.

Penna, S. (2011). The Children Act 2004: Child Protection and Social Surveillance. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 27(2), 143-157.

 By: Spencer Edgar

European Legislation and the Poor

       Today, social welfare is neither harsh nor kindly.  Numerous individuals choose to benefit from several forms of welfare, while others find it offensive and discriminative.  The concept of “being poor” generally means those who lack enough money to live comfortably within society (Boukaert, 2007).  Various elements of Europe’s English Poor Laws used in dealing with the “poor of society” are emphasized and modeled even today. 

       The origin of the English Poor Laws came from the rise of economic hardship and the paranoia of the poor.  It began with the Statute of Labourers issued in 1351 which allotted the prohibition of idleness, the payment of high wages, and the worker’s ability to cease work (Quigley, 1996).  Ownership of land became Europe’s main measure of wealth and status.  The poor lived off wealthy land, and were hired by the rich to tend to it.  The Black Plague was a large contribution to the European poor population.  It left many people unable to work, sick and dying.  Those who attempted to flee the disease in larger cities in turn spread it across rural lands.  Worker wages were frozen in attempt to prevent the poor from desperately searching for higher-paying jobs.

       By 1531, the English government enforced the order for all beggars to face imprisonment and punishment, while also limiting the mobility of able-bodied workers.  By enforcing this legislation, the government believed it would in turn force the idle to work.  It was thought that this would contribute to a greater working society (Lees, 1998).  Poor children were forced into child labour to aid their families, as governmental taxes were raised for those unable to work-including the disabled and elderly.     Under the Elizabethan Law of 1601 it was deemed allowed for individuals both elderly and disabled to remain poor because of their physical inability to work.  This meant that they were able to receive charity without facing punishment. Those caught travelling in search for better job opportunities without permission were dragged back to their previous jobs (Quigley, 1996).

       By the 1800’s the term “poor” was divided into two categories.  This included the worthy poor-those who were independent and refused to accept assistance, and the undeserving poor-those who were dependent, lazy and accepting of relief (Quigley, 1996).  Many people began to face the harsh punishment of abuse, whippings and imprisonment.  Individuals without proper housing forcefully inhabited filthy workhouses teeming with crowded, unsanitary conditions.  These workhouses restricted socialization, family relations, warmth and movement making the concept of aid psychologically shocking-only the truly needy would request it (Quigley 1996).  Workhouses ensured a flowing supply of cheap, forced labour for the benefit of English kingdoms.  It was apparent that welfare and relief walked hand in hand with production and punishment in purpose to create a stable economy. 

       The Poor Laws of 1834 called for reform.  It was decreed that “all relief provided to able-bodied persons or their families, otherwise than in well-regulated workhouses shall be declared unlawful, and shall cease” (Quigley, 1996).  This ensured that the non-working, able-bodied poor received far less assistance than the city’s lowest paid workers (Lees, 1998). The law stated that poverty was not possibly a societal problem, but lay in the individual.  Poverty would be punished, as it caused increase in laziness and dependency towards others.   However, the issue of poverty increased as European government’s raised its taxes for the poor.  It was declared that individuals could in turn lift themselves out of poverty through discipline and hard work (Boukaert, 2007).

       Throughout modern day society we see poverty persist as a degraded element of society.  Individual idleness and inability to work is stereotypically linked to crime related activity.  Discrimination evolves, asserted by those particularly of higher middle class.  It is still believed that those able-bodied for work should do so, as the jobless are viewed as indolent, sluggish characters.  Even today, governmental laws and policies tend to favour the idea of the employer and the economic need for more workers.  The welfare of society’s people is most often ignored. 

Kara

Lees, Lynn H.  (1998). The Solidarities of Strangers:  The English Poor Laws and the People, 1700-1948.  New York:  Cambridge University Press.

Quigley, William P.  (1996).  “Five Hundred Years of English Poor Laws, 1349-1834: Regulating the Working and Non-Working Poor.”  Akron Law Review, (Vol. 30).  Retrieved October 18, 2012 from http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/aklr30&div=11&g_sent=1&collection=journals#83.

Bouckaert, Boudewijn R.  (2007). “The Roots of Our Liberties:  On the Rise of Civil Society in the Medieval West.”  New Perspectives on Political Economy, (Vol. 3).  Retrieved October 17, 2012 from http://pcpe.libinst.cz/nppe/3_2/nppe3_2_2.pdf.

 

Aboriginal People and Their Life Style: Pre-Contact Era

                Before the Europeans came to Canada, Aboriginal people were in charge of their land. They benefited from the land in many different ways. For instance, they took advantage of the land’s natural resources and treasures for making fire and clothes, for creating hunting tools, and for food.  

                Aboriginal people knew how to adapt with their environment and to the change in seasons. According to Higgins (2009), “To better exploit a wide range of natural resources, Beothuk bands lived in different areas of the island at different times of the year”, and “[t]hey employed a seasonal round of activities to satisfy their needs and also gathered edible roots, berries, and fruit when in season as well”. Another example, they knew the edible plants and fruits from the bad ones. The article states that “They recognized which plants and berries were edible and which were poisonous” (Higgins, 2009).

                First Nations people were very skilled and knowledgeable hunters. For instance, they had always improved their ways in providing food and had developed their strategies in finding and hunting animals. They used to hunt different kinds of animals which allowed them to have a better access to food’s vitamins. As reported by Higgins (2009), “They ate seabirds, salmon, seals, caribou and other animals”. It allowed them also to generate a diversity of protein, iron, and other nutrients the body need to maintain strengths and remain healthy.

                Anishnaabek people valued  Mother Earth, viewing her as the center of their lives and personal healing.According to Wilson (2003), The “Anishinabek have with the land in the image of Mother Earth. Relationships to the land also include a spiritual element in that Anishinabek believe that the land is alive and contains spirits”(p.91). Aboriginal people had a healthy life style: they used to farm, to grow seeds and plants, and to change their stay, moving from one place to another. They had various activities that included working and connecting with the Earth. “Individuals have physical, symbolic and spiritual relationships to the land. Physically, individuals connect with the land by putting down tobacco, hunting, trapping, fishing, harvesting food and medicines, and taking part in ceremonies” (Wilson, 2003, p.91). Moreover, they did not only focus on having a strong connection with nature, but they also paid a lot of attention to the outcomes of being one with nature. “Activities such as hunting and harvesting are not only of nutritional benefit, which supports physical health, they also allow individuals to connect spiritually with Mother Earth, the Creator and spirits while being on the land” (Wilson, 2003, p.89).

Since that Aboriginal were connected to nature and were also well organized, I personally do not think that they were exposed to poverty as an issue that ruled their lives. They focused on what really matters, such as the individual’s spiritual healing, family, morals and ethics, and strengthening their relationships with each other. Therefore, I honestly think that they had a healthy lifestyle that concentrated on the well-being of people and on the unique relationship they had with Mother Earth.  

- Farah

References:

Higgins, J.(2009). Pre-Contact Beothuk Land Use Retrieved from   

            http://www.heritage.nf.ca/aboriginal/beo_land_use.html

Wilson,K. (June 2003). Therapeutic landscapes and First Nations peoples: an exploration of culture, health and place. Health and Place,9 (2). Pages (83 -93). Retrieved from

 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1353829202000163

European Society

In Europe between 1815 to 1914 there was an economic growth, technological change and economic development which was making the rich richer, and the poor poorer.

For the majority of the labouring class the result of this growth was inadequate wages, long work hours and work under terrible conditions. The large-scale employment of women and children destroyed body and soul. Such harsh conditions like the coal mills, the cotton houses affected the people of Europe, change had to be made with new policy put in place.

The English poor laws, beginning with the statute of laborers of 1349-1350 and proceeding to the reforms of 1834 regulated both the working and non-working poor. With the beginning of the industrial revolution. This drew a large number of poor into the cities to make a better life for themselves. Out of 500 years of English poor laws grew many legislative principles regulating the working and non-working.



Jennifer.

The Feudal Roots of Poverty

    First and foremost I would like to start out by saying that I have come to find that many ancient cultures around the world knew and understood how to sustain the needs of their people within their villages, cities, and towns. It only became something of forgotten knowledge when travelers from other continents decided to take ownership of the “new worlds”. They came to these new lands and took over the ways of the people they encountered, disregarding the wisdom of those who had maintained life there. This is what started the many failings of North American culture as we have had to suffer in the last several hundred years.

     Europeans had enough cultural issues before they came to Canada, these issues reach as far back as the early 10^th century. When kings and lords began to want higher status then all others and created a monetary system. It began with jewels and precious metal coins being offered to the local church for higher standings in society, as this was when the churches monasteries were the ultimate rulers (Lester K Little, 1983). Pressure arose for the common people to pay more to live in a specific area of land, in order to keep the rising needs of the kingdoms sustained. Those who could not pay for their land either had it taken from them, or were forced to give the ruling lords the majority of their produce grown on the land. Many people suffered through the early medieval era due to growing greed by the crowned lords and religious monastery, and this way of life began in the feudal ages.

     Nearing the end of the 12^th century, the state; being lords and kings, decided to separate them selves from the rulings of the church. They signed a document known as the “Concordat of Worms” in 1122, ensuring that the monastery was not to be the spiritual leader for the state (Steven Ozment, 1981). This did not however keep them fully separate, as there were many scandals through out the medieval ages. Having moved into a monetary system, many people found them selves moving into towns and cities in order to be more protected by the state, as well as to be considered higher class. The rise of scholarly universities also brought many people to urban civilization, but education also cost money and usually meant that person was of high status. This movement aided in growing the separation of the classes considerably, as farmers were uneducated and lived in lower standards of housing.

     Sadly, I feel we still carry many of these view points in today's society. The thought of someone not being able to provide for their family makes the wealthier people feel like its the fault of the one who suffers. The functioning system in place brings more profit to those who already had monetary wealth, and leaves those who struggle to push harder to try to get to an unattainable level of wealth. This system creates the constant need for more money, and essentially keeps those who work several jobs struggling to try to provide for their families, as we are still no more then slaves of the state.

Elizabeth

References:

Little L. K., “Religious Poverty and the Profit Economy in Medieval Europe” , Cornell University Press, 1983-03-01

Ozment S., “The Age of Reform, 1250-1550 : An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe”, Yale University Press, 1981-09-10

Traditional Anishnaabe Society & Poverty

 

Poverty is a big issue today, and it goes all the way back to the Anishnaabe peoples. The traditional Anishnaabe societies didn't really have poverty, as they lived off the resources of the land, mainly through sharing between their community and hunting game, (Anderson & Moratto, 1996). If the traditional Anishnaabe societies did have to face the issue of poverty, I think that they would have addressed the issue by increasing hunting and increasing trade between different tribes. Traditional Anishnaabe peoples relationship to the land was defined by the way their needs were met. They survived off of the land, and they treated the land, animals, and plants with respect, (Anderson & Moratto, 1996).

 

The traditional Anishnaabe societies didn't really face the issue of poverty because they lived off of the land and the resources that were available to them, (Fisher, 2002). They mainly hunted for food and they shared resources between all in their community. Traditional Anishnaabe societies were very self-sufficient. Native Americans "were sustained by hunting, fishing and trading," (Anderson & Moratto, 1996). This was necessary to "meet their requirements for firewood, fish and game, vegetal foods, craft supplies, and building materials," (Anderson & Moratto, 1996). They mainly hunted deer, elk, moose, rabbit, beaver, fish, bison and buffalo. They used this game for food to feed the community and their families. The women in the community gathered plants for food and seeds to garden (Fisher, 2002). They used the resources they had to build shelter, and they made their clothing out of pelts and fur. The traditional Anishnaabe societies moved around a lot throughout the year, as they moved with the herds of animals so they could make sure that they would always be able to find game to feed their community (Anderson & Moratto, 1996). Traditional Anishnaabe societies were very self sufficient, mainly through sharing between all in the community, and hunting game for food. Because of this, they didn't really ever have to address the issue of poverty.

 

I think that if the traditional Anishnaabe societies did have to face the issue of poverty, they would probably have many different ways to address it. Poverty for traditional Anishnaabe peoples would probably be defined as extremely scarce resources, because we all know that they lived off of the land and their needs were met through the resources from the land. If traditional Anishnaabe societies had to address the issue of poverty, I think that they would mainly increase their hunting, and start to increase trade between other tribes on the land. In the past, "artifact collectors frequently found that poverty made native people willing sellers," (Fisher, 2002). I think that the traditional Anishnaabe societies would have to involve everyone in their community in hunting game, to gain the necessary proteins needed to survive. All resources of the land weren't always available, as the different seasons affected what resources were available and when. For example, fish only spawn in certain rivers at certain times of the year, herds move around the land a lot, and berries are not always available throughout the year. Therefore, they would have to move around a lot more to find the resources that they would need for survival. The different seasons of the year affected the traditional Anishnaabe peoples health, amount of food, diet, and living conditions. The Anishnaabe peoples would have to increase hunting and gathering plants to store extra food to make sure they could survive the winter, when resources are scarce. Increased hunting would be essential to the traditional Anishnaabe peoples to gain the necessary proteins to survive, if they had to address the issue of poverty. If they had to address the issue of poverty, they would also probably start to increase trade between themselves and other tribes, to obtain the resources that they needed to survive. If one traditional Anishnaabe society was struggling with poverty, I would take a guess that other Anishnaabe societies living off the land would also be struggling to obtain the essential resources they needed to survive, so they would probably be willing to increase trade with other societies to gain those resources that they needed and others had. If traditional Anishnaabe societies did have to address the issue of poverty in the past, I would guess that they would of addressed it by increasing hunting and increasing trade between other tribes on the land.

 

For the traditional Anishnaabe societies, life was about worshipping the Creator, hunting game, gathering plants, building fires, travelling, building shelter, socializing, trading goods and obtaining resources. Fire was essential for the traditional Anishnaabe societies to survive, and knowledge about the environment and survival skills were passed down through generations. They learned to live off of the land, and use the resources that were available to them. Traditional Anishnaabe societies didn't really ever have to address the issue of poverty, except for the times that resources were very scarce.

 

 

 

References

Anderson, M. Moratto, M. (1996). Native American land-use practices and ecological impacts, (Vol. 2). Davis: University of California Press, p. 187. Retrieved from

http://nature.berkeley.edu/wfrg/main/lecture01/Anderson.pdf

Fisher, R. (2002). Contact and conflict: Indian-European relations in British Columbia, 1774-1890. University of British Columbia Press. Retrieved from

http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Is5199EdB0cC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=indian+poverty+in+pre-contact&ots=xcPm69Nhmj&sig=qF5RhXLbcH7txTyVM0oxceK_U1A#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

 

-Lyndsay