Ehrenreich’s main point, as I see it, was to shed light on the misconceptions of Americans living in poverty. As she states in the reflective chapter “Evaluations”:
“In the rhetorical buildup to welfare reform, it was uniformly assumed that a job was the ticket out of poverty and that the only thing holding back welfare recipients was their reluctance to go out and get one.(196)”
Many upper/middle class people, who have little insight to the reality of life on minimum wage or government welfare, judge whose with low socioeconomic statuses who “dare” indulge in current technologies such as smartphones, cable TV, or even well-operating vehicles for that matter, without realizing these people may simply be doing whatever necessary to be available and competitive in the labor force.
As Ehrenreich points out in her afterword, the solution to poverty (including increased minimum wage, universal healthcare, affordable housing, good schools, and reliable public transportation) may be a long-shot as an achievable goal for this generation, let alone a single person, to tackle head on. As an educator, though, it is my duty to provide the highest quality education I can, and to continually advocate for the academic and cultural success of every student.
Discussion Question: Ehrenreich is while and middle class. She asserts that her experience would have been radically different had she been a person of color or a single parent. Do you think discrimination shaped Ehrenreich’s story? In what ways?
Had a person of color conducted this same experiment, I believe it would have been a distinctly different story. From my understanding, racial discrimination is much more prevalent in low socioeconomic situations. The challenges of securing housing and a job would have been greater, certainly. Less obviously, the relationships built with coworkers, customers, managers, and patients could have been affected for the worse, especially in the predominantly white cities.
If Ehrenreich had been a single mother through her experiment, there would have been an additional layer of problems to face. Finding childcare that is of acceptable quality, location, price and convenience is a daunting task even for middle-class families. Not to mention the health and nutritional needs of an additional person could affect (as it does for so many people in poverty) the jobs that the author was willing to take and maintain.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, I'd like to respond to some excellent pointed brought up by my classmates:
Gavin mentioned something very poignant in his comment below concerning childcare. Depending on the socioeconomic status of the students in an area, schools are cast to take the role of second homes, babysitters/supervisors, and in some cases, parent figures and are responsible for many of the duties that are implied. This is not to say that parents working in low-wage jobs care less about raising their children, but unlike working professionals, they may not have the information or resources to involve their students in any activities or supervised care beyond the classroom.
Something I found especially intriguing I read in Casey Diuguid's answer to the Nickel and Dimed discussion. In her passionate response, she notes how judgmental Ehrenreich initially was of her low-wages coworkers, and how damaging and prevalent this impression continues to be. Most importantly, she explains the value many families place on employment of any kind, and I felt she addressed this idea with sensitivity and grace.