In failing to fully render the views of the left wing of social work-welfare state theorists, the authors sacrifice intellectual substance and sophistication. But they expound the same conception of poverty as a deficient ""command over resources"" relative to the affluent norm. Hence their concern with ""narrowing the differences"" makes sense only insofar as their premise of ever-increasing comfort for most Americans holds true. Apart from the difficulties with their income redistribution emphasis, their discussion of inequalities in basic services, access to amenities, education and political power is flawed. Oversimplifications are contested in a simple-minded way: health care is ""a general problem in society,"" not just an unmet need of poor people; ""although education is very important it cannot solve all the problems which produce poverty. . . . "" The poor are presented primarily as indigent consumers: there are two paragraphs on ""the jobs of the poor"" and their working conditions, although the authors' relativistic definitions of poverty comprise working-class and, they note, even ""middle-class"" Americans. The section on social policies of the '70's continues the Sunday-think-piece tone, predicting increased social strife and shortages of professionals. Statistics are presented accessibly but too uncritically: the fact that 72.4% of the sons of higher white-collar Negroes enter manual occupations is striking, but what does ""higher white-collar"" mean? A general analysis of poverty for general readers could have been invaluable--this is the poor man's Titmuss or Schorr, rather than a substantive complement to Miller and Reismann's Social Class and Social Policy (1968).