The relationship between capital accumulation, types of jobs, educational attainment, race, gender and urban poverty in the United States between 1968 and 2008

There has been a continuous debate as to the types of jobs available in a changing US labor market since the 1980s. On the one hand, there is the argument that the economy has produced predominantly good jobs. On the other, there is overwhelming evidence that posits polarization of the labor market into high and low status jobs. The problem with this debates is that both sides seem to accept variations in the labor market as an inevitable act of life. In this regard very little attention has been given to the cause of the inevitable fluctuations in the labor market. Other contributors to the debate have argued that oscillations in the labor market are the result of the wanton expansion of capital. The problem here is that while they have correctly linked the American economy to the global economy and have focused on the global effect of capitalism; they have not paid enough attention on the effect of capital accumulation on the local economy of the United States .;This study uses Marx's theory of Wage-Labor and Capital as the theoretical lens and time series regression analysis as the methodological tool to bridge the ensuing gap in the literature. In so doing it investigates the impact of types of jobs, educational attainment, capital accumulation on urban poverty in the United States between 1968 and 2008. This approach is, in essence, an attempt to answer the question of why are there fluctuations in the labor market.;The findings support the literature that there is polarization of the job market, between good jobs (managerial and professional) and bad jobs (service), from 1968 and 2008. Also, Service jobs contribute significantly to the historical increase in urban poverty. However, Educational attainment did not have a significant effect (negative or positive) on urban poverty. In relation to capital accumulation as a predictor of urban poverty, the result is not conclusive. Capital accumulation did not produce statistically significant results (p = 0.07). However, there is substantive significance (beta = 0.274, R 2 = .63) to confirm its influence on any explanation of variations in urban poverty.;Keywords: Junior Hopwood: Capital accumulation, types of jobs, educational attainment, urban poverty, and United States labor market...