Murray argues that a large number of young healthy males choose not to be employed, citing that the majority of them come from the inner city slum areas, belong to the lower social class, and that they have lost the will to work.
The increase in illegitimate births is concentrated in the lowest social class and welfare benefits allowed young single women to have a child with no regard to the cost (Lister, 1996).
It is found that those with a relative high risk of being on long-term low-income, remaining in the poverty bracket, are the elderly, lone parent families and also those in households where no one is in work.
Depending on the type of poverty, short-term, persistent or recurrent will dictate the type of benefit required and thus influence policy decisions on poverty.
Their choice not to work, along with high level of illegitimacy, indicates a deviant attitude to family values and parenthood.
This will lead to the underclass continuing to grow, as a new generation of children being brought up to live by the same standards, thus will perpetuate the cycle.The foremost viewpoints are right wing approach, supported by people like Charles Murray, who categorize the underclass as deviant behavioral patterns of the individual acting out with the norm.The opposing point of view is the left wing approach, by people like Frank Field, who say that the problem of the underclass is societies fault rather than the individuals.In conjunction with this we need to take into account the change in their real income and how much of their income rises or falls on average for the persistently low-income person.The dynamics perspective focuses on the length of time a person remains in poverty, it is a model within which you move in and out due to various factors such as economic recession, ill health, and focuses on the consequences of different durations and the factors that cause the duration (Leisering, 1998).Poverty needs to be defined not just by a snapshot picture but also over a long-term view incorporating the dynamics of poverty.The term underclass is not a new term, it has been about for hundreds of years, Macthus in 1890 explained it in terms of the “over-production of the lower classes” whilst Marx viewed them as “lumpen proletariat” an army of unemployed illiterate workers who were the “scum of the deprived element of all classes” (Morris, 1994).Murray only looks at the disadvantaged in society who fall into the persistent poverty bracket claiming that underclass does not refer to the degree of poverty but to a type of poverty.During the 1990’s the recession caused a cross-section of people to claim benefits, however the young, better educated and those without dependent children quickly returned to employment whilst the most disadvantaged stayed on long-term benefit (Leisering, 1998).Social scientists conducted research into the underclass but due to disagreement about the nature and source of exclusion, came to no consensus and made up their own conclusions (Lister, 1996).We now have a variety of different opinions on who make up the underclass and why they are in that situation depending on the persons politics.