DOCSLIB.ORG

Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017 Issued September 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017 Issued September 2018 IncoIncomeme andand P Povertyoverty in in the theUn Unitedited State States:s: 2017 2017 CurrentCurrent Population Reports ByBy KaylaKayla Fontenot,Fontenot, JessicaJessica Semega,Semega, andand MelissaMelissa KollarKollar IssuedIssued SeptemberSeptember 20182018 P60-263P60-263 Jessica Semega and Melissa Kollar prepared the income sections of this report Acknowledgments under the direction of Jonathan L. Rothbaum, Chief of the Income Statistics Branch. Kayla Fontenot prepared the poverty section under the direction of Ashley N. Edwards, Chief of the Poverty Statistics Branch. Trudi J. Renwick, Assistant Division Chief for Economic Characteristics in the Social, Economic, and Housing Statistics Division, provided overall direction. Susan S. Gajewski and Nancy Hunter, Demographic Surveys Division, and Lisa P. Cheok, Associate Directorate Demographic Programs, processed the Current Population Survey 2018 Annual Social and Economic Supplement file. Kirk E. Davis, Raymond E. Dowdy, Shawna Evers, Ryan C. Fung, Lan N. Huynh, and Chandararith R. Phe programmed and produced the historical, detailed, and publication tables under the direction of Hung X. Pham, Chief of the Tabulation and Applications Branch, Demographic Surveys Division. Nghiep Huynh and Alfred G. Meier, under the supervision of KeTrena Farnham and David V. Hornick, all of the Demographic Statistical Methods Division, con- ducted statistical review. Tim J. Marshall, Assistant Survey Director of the Current Population Survey, provided overall direction for the survey implementation. Lisa P. Cheok and Aaron Cantu, Associate Directorate Demographic Programs, and Charlie Carter, Agatha Jung, and Johanna Rupp of the Application Development and Services Division prepared and programmed the computer-assisted interviewing instru- ment used to conduct the Annual Social and Economic Supplement. Additional people within the U.S. Census Bureau also made significant contribu- tions to the preparation of this report. Gloria G. Guzmán, Brian E. Glassman, Laryssa Mykyta, Bernadette D. Proctor, Bruce H. Webster, Jr., and Edward J. Welniak, Jr. reviewed the contents. Census Bureau field representatives and telephone interviewers collected the data. Without their dedication, the preparation of this report or any report from the Current Population Survey would be impossible. Anthony Richards, Amanda J. Perry, Christine E. Geter, and Janet S. Sweeney of the Public Information Office provided publication management, graph- ics design and composition, and editorial review for print and electronic media. William A. Burbano and George E. Williams of the Census Bureau’s Administrative and Customer Services Division provided printing management. Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017 Issued September 2018 P60-263 U.S. Department of Commerce Wilbur Ross, Secretary Karen Dunn Kelley, Performing the Nonexclusive Duties of the Deputy Secretary Economics and Statistics Administration Karen Dunn Kelley, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs U.S. CENSUS BUREAU Ron Jarmin, Performing the Nonexclusive Functions and Duties of the Director Suggested Citation Fontenot, Kayla, Jessica Semega, and Melissa Kollar, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, P60-263, Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2018. Economics and Statistics Administration Karen Dunn Kelley, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs U.S. CENSUS BUREAU Ron Jarmin, Performing the Nonexclusive Functions and Duties of the Director Enrique Lamas, Performing the Nonexclusive Functions and Duties of the Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer Eloise Parker, Acting Associate Director for Demographic Programs David G. Waddington, Chief, Social, Economic, and Housing Statistics Division Contents TEXT INTRODUCTION ............................................... 1 Summary of Findings ........................................... 1 INCOME IN THE UNITED STATES ................................ 1 Highlights ..................................................... 1 Caution for Historical Comparisons. 4 Household Income ............................................. 4 Type of Household ............................................. 4 Race and Hispanic Origin ....................................... 4 Age of Householder ............................................ 6 Nativity ....................................................... 6 Region ........................................................ 6 Residence ..................................................... 7 Income Inequality .............................................. 7 Equivalence-Adjusted Income Inequality .......................... 7 Earnings and Work Experience .................................. 9 POVERTY IN THE UNITED STATES ............................... 11 Highlights ..................................................... 11 Race and Hispanic Origin ....................................... 14 Sex ........................................................... 14 Age ........................................................... 14 Nativity ....................................................... 15 Region ........................................................ 16 Residence ..................................................... 16 Work Experience ............................................... 16 Disability Status ................................................ 16 Educational Attainment ......................................... 16 Families ....................................................... 17 Depth of Poverty ............................................... 17 Ratio of Income to Poverty ...................................... 17 Income Deficit ................................................. 17 Shared Households ............................................. 19 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON INCOME AND POVERTY ......... 21 State and Local Estimates of Income and Poverty ................. 21 Longitudinal Estimates .......................................... 21 The Supplemental Poverty Measure .............................. 21 SOURCE AND ACCURACY OF THE ESTIMATES ................... 22 Redesigned CPS ASEC .......................................... 23 U.S. Census Bureau Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017 iii FIGURES Figure 1. Real Median Household Income by Race and Hispanic Origin: 1967 to 2017 ..................... 5 Figure 2. Female-to-Male Earnings Ratio and Median Earnings of Full-Time, Year-Round Workers 15 Years and Older by Sex: 1960 to 2017 ................................................... 9 Figure 3. Total and Full-Time, Year-Round Workers With Earnings by Sex: 1967 to 2017 ................... 10 Figure 4. Number in Poverty and Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2017 ........................................... 11 Figure 5. Poverty Rates by Age and Sex: 2017 ........................................................ 14 Figure 6. Poverty Rates by Age: 1959 to 2017 ......................................................... 15 Figure 7. Demographic Makeup of the Population at Varying Degrees of Poverty: 2017 ................... 19 TABLES Table 1. Income and Earnings Summary Measures by Selected Characteristics: 2016 and 2017 ............. 2 Table 2. Income Distribution Measures Using Money Income and Equivalence–Adjusted Income: 2016 and 2017 ........................................................................... 8 Table 3. People in Poverty by Selected Characteristics: 2016 and 2017 ................................... 12 Table 4. Families and People in Poverty by Type of Family: 2016 and 2017 ............................... 13 Table 5. People With Income Below Specified Ratios of Their Poverty Thresholds by Selected Characteristics: 2017 ............................................................. 18 Table 6. Income Deficit or Surplus of Families and Unrelated Individuals by Poverty Status: 2017 ........... 20 iv Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017 U.S. Census Bureau APPENDIXES Appendix A. Estimates of Income ................................................................... 25 How Income Is Measured ......................................................................... 25 Business Cycles .................................................................................. 25 Annual Average Consumer Price Index Research Series (CPI-U-RS) Using Current Methods All Items: 1947 to 2017 ........................................................................ 26 Cost-of-Living Adjustment ........................................................................ 26 Poverty Threshold Adjustment .................................................................... 26 Appendix B. Estimates of Poverty ................................................................... 47 How Poverty Is Calculated ........................................................................ 47 Poverty Thresholds for 2017 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years ......... 47 Weighted Average Poverty Thresholds in 2017 by Size of Family ..................................... 47 Appendix C. Replicate Weights ..................................................................... 61 References ...................................................................................... 61 Appendix D. Additional Data and Contacts ........................................................... 63 Customized Tables .............................................................................. 63 The CPS Table Creator ........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • India's Imperative for Jobs, Growth, and Effective Basic Services
    McKinsey Global Institute McKinsey Global Institute From poverty imperativeFrom for jobs, growth, empowerment: and to effective India’s basic services February 2014 From poverty to empowerment: India’s imperative for jobs, growth, and effective basic services The McKinsey Global Institute The McKinsey Global Institute (MGI), the business and economics research arm of McKinsey & Company, was established in 1990 to develop a deeper understanding of the evolving global economy. Our goal is to provide leaders in the commercial, public, and social sectors with the facts and insights on which to base management and policy decisions. MGI research combines the disciplines of economics and management, employing the analytical tools of economics with the insights of business leaders. Our “micro-to-macro” methodology examines microeconomic industry trends to better understand the broad macroeconomic forces affecting business strategy and public policy. MGI’s in-depth reports have covered more than 20 countries and 30 industries. Current research focuses on six themes: productivity and growth; natural resources; labor markets; the evolution of global financial markets; the economic impact of technology and innovation; and urbanization. Recent reports have assessed job creation, resource productivity, cities of the future, the economic impact of the Internet, and the future of manufacturing. MGI is led by three McKinsey & Company directors: Richard Dobbs, James Manyika, and Jonathan Woetzel. Michael Chui, Susan Lund, and Jaana Remes serve as MGI partners. Project teams are led by the MGI partners and a group of senior fellows, and include consultants from McKinsey & Company’s offices around the world. These teams draw on McKinsey & Company’s global network of partners and industry and management experts.
    [Show full text]
  • India in Figures
    CONTENTS SL Chapter Page No. 1 Demographic Profile 1-2 2 Economic Development 3-5 3 Poverty Eradication and Social Protection 6-7 4 Infrastructure Development & Housing for all 8-10 5 Agricultural Development 11-12 6 Energy 13 7 Environment and Climate Change 14-16 8 Education for All 17-18 9 Health, Hygiene and Sanitation 19-20 10 Work and Employment 21 11 Millennium Development Goals 22-28 i Table Index Table Title Page No. No. 1.1 Statement on Vital Statistics during 2005 – 2016 1 1.2 Population by Gender, Schedule Caste (SCs) & Schedule 2 Tribe (STs), Sex Ratio and Decadal Population Growth as per Population Censuses A. Decennial population (in crore) by gender and Area during 1991-2011 B. Scheduled Castes (SCs) & Scheduled Tribes(STs) population and their percentage share during 1991 -2011 C. Sex Ratio (females/’000 males) by rural & urban during 1991 -2011 D. Percentage Decadal Population Growth during 1981-91 to 2001-11 2.1 Annual Growth Rate of GDP (adjusted to price changes) 3 per capita 2.2 Annual Estimates of GDP at Current Prices, 2011-12 3 Series 2.3 Annual Estimates of GDP at Constant Prices, 2011-12 4 Series 2.4 Progress made under Financial Inclusion Plans – as on 4 31st March 3.1 National Poverty Estimates (% below poverty line) (1993 6 – 2012) 3.2 Poverty Gap Ratio(MRP Consumption Distribution) 6 3.3 Employment generated under MGNREGA 6 4.1 Statement on Households and Population in India during 8 1991 -2011 4.2 Road Network by Categories (in kilometers) 8 iii 4.3 Freight and Passenger Movement 9-10 (A) By Road Transport:
    [Show full text]
  • Rural Poverty in India: Structure, Determinants and Suggestions for Policy Reform
    Rural Poverty in India: Structure, determinants and suggestions for policy reform Raghbendra Jha ABSTRACT Poverty, particularly rural poverty, has been one of the enduring policy challenges in India. Surely the most important objective of the reforms process would have been to make a significant dent on rural poverty. It is from this that a program of accelerated growth must draw its rationale. In this paper, I discuss the evolution of poverty in India – particularly during the reform period. Then I analyze the structure and determinants of this poverty. The rate of decline of poverty declined during the 1990s as compared to the 1980s. I advance some reasons for this. Policy prescriptions for a more effective anti poverty strategy are discussed. All correspondence to: Raghbendra Jha, Australia South Asia Research Centre, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200 Fax: + 61 2 61250443 Phone: + 61 2 6125 2683 Email: [email protected] 1 I. Introduction This paper addresses the important issue of anti-poverty policy in India. In analyzing poverty I use the well-known NSS data set; hence concentrating on consumption measures of poverty. The poverty measures used in this paper are all drawn from the popular Foster-Greer- Thorbecke class of functions written as: = − α Yα ∑[(z yi ) / z] / n (1) < yi z where Y is the measure of poverty, yi is the consumption of the ith household or the ith class of household, z is the poverty line1, n is the population size, and α is a non-negative parameter. The headcount ratio, HC, given by the percentage of the population who are poor is obtained when α=0.
    [Show full text]
  • Burning Injustice a Rights Advocacy Manual for Lawyers, Activists & Survivors on Acid Violence in India
    BURNING INJUSTICE A RIGHTS ADVOCACY MANUAL FOR LAWYERS, ACTIVISTS & SURVIVORS ON ACID VIOLENCE IN INDIA EDITED BY KERRY MCBROOM AND SALINA WILSON Human Rights Law Network BURNING INJUSTICE: A Rights Advocacy Manual for Lawyers, Activists and Survivors on Acid Violence in India © Socio Legal Information Centre* ISBN: 81-89479-88-1 August 2014 Edited by Kerry McBroom and Salina Wilson Copy-editing Andrew Kirtley and Gilli Paveley Cover photograph Salina Wilson Cover Design Unnikrishnan Manikoth Book Design Ritu Aggarwal Published by Human Rights Law Network (HRLN) A division of Socio Legal Information Centre 576 Masjid Road, Jangpura- 110014 Ph: +91 1124379855 Website: www.hrln.org Supported by Designed Printed by Kalpana Printographics Shakarpur, Delhi-110092 *Any section of this volume may be reproduced without prior permission from the Human Rights Law Network for the interest of the public with appropriate acknowledgement. To all survivors, victims and their families For their undying spirit and Courage to fight Acknowledgements HRLN would sincerely like to thank Eileen Fisher for her support of our Women’ Justice Initiative. Her contributions have bolstered our advocacy on acid attacks and made it possible to ensure justice for survivors and their families. We would also like to thank Adv. Colin Gonsalves for his continued support to our legal and advocacy work related to acid attacks. HRLN also extends its gratitude to our interns Pious Pavi Ahuja, Caroline Pierrey, Nitika Khaitan, Osama Salman, Jennifer Li, Andrew Kirtley, and Gilli Paveley whose research, fact-findings, and legal drafting have made immense contributions to HRLN’s acid attack work. The activists who assist acid attack survivors and bring cases make justice a reality.
    [Show full text]
  • African Development Report 2015 Growth, Poverty and Inequality Nexus
    African Development Report 2015 African Despite earlier periods of limited growth, African economies Sustaining recent growth successes while making future growth have grown substantially over the past decade. However, poverty more inclusive requires smart policies to diversify the sources African Development and inequality reduction has remained less responsive to growth of growth and to ensure broad-based participation across successes across the continent. How does growth affect poverty segments of society. Africa needs to adopt a new development and inequality? How can Africa overcome contemporary and trajectory that focuses on effective structural transformation. Report 2015 future sustainable development challenges? This 2015 edition Workers need to move from low productivity sectors to those of the African Development Report (ADR) offers analysis, where both productivity and earnings are higher. Key poverty- Growth, Poverty and Inequality Nexus: synthesis and recommendations that are relevant to these reducing sectors, such as agriculture and manufacturing, should Overcoming Barriers to Sustainable Development questions. The objective of this Report is to guide policy be targeted and accorded high priority for public and private Growth, Poverty Growth, Development and Inequality Sustainable to Nexus: Overcoming Barriers processes by contributing to the debate analysing what has investment. Adding value to many of Africa’s primary exports happened during recent years, what has worked well, what may earn the continent a competitive margin in international hasn’t worked well, and what needs to be done to address markets, while also meeting domestic market needs, especially further barriers to sustainable development in Africa? Africa’s with regard to food security. Apart from the need to prioritise recent economic growth has not been accompanied by a real certain sectors, other policy recommendations emanating from structural transformation.
    [Show full text]
  • Income and Poverty in the United States: 2018 Current Population Reports
    Income and Poverty in the United States: 2018 Current Population Reports By Jessica Semega, Melissa Kollar, John Creamer, and Abinash Mohanty Issued September 2019 Revised June 2020 P60-266(RV) Jessica Semega and Melissa Kollar prepared the income section of this report Acknowledgments under the direction of Jonathan L. Rothbaum, Chief of the Income Statistics Branch. John Creamer and Abinash Mohanty prepared the poverty section under the direction of Ashley N. Edwards, Chief of the Poverty Statistics Branch. Trudi J. Renwick, Assistant Division Chief for Economic Characteristics in the Social, Economic, and Housing Statistics Division, provided overall direction. Vonda Ashton, David Watt, Susan S. Gajewski, Mallory Bane, and Nancy Hunter, of the Demographic Surveys Division, and Lisa P. Cheok of the Associate Directorate for Demographic Programs, processed the Current Population Survey 2019 Annual Social and Economic Supplement file. Andy Chen, Kirk E. Davis, Raymond E. Dowdy, Lan N. Huynh, Chandararith R. Phe, and Adam W. Reilly programmed and produced the historical, detailed, and publication tables under the direction of Hung X. Pham, Chief of the Tabulation and Applications Branch, Demographic Surveys Division. Nghiep Huynh and Alfred G. Meier, under the supervision of KeTrena Phipps and David V. Hornick, all of the Demographic Statistical Methods Division, conducted statistical review. Lisa P. Cheok of the Associate Directorate for Demographic Programs, provided overall direction for the survey implementation. Roberto Cases and Aaron Cantu of the Associate Directorate for Demographic Programs, and Charlie Carter and Agatha Jung of the Information Technology Directorate prepared and pro- grammed the computer-assisted interviewing instrument used to conduct the Annual Social and Economic Supplement.
    [Show full text]
  • State Income Limits for 2021
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 (916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453 www.hcd.ca.gov April 26, 2021 MEMORANDUM FOR: Interested parties FROM: Megan Kirkeby, Deputy Director Division of Housing Policy Development SUBJECT: State Income Limits for 2021 Attached are briefing materials and State Income Limits for 2021 that are now in effect, replacing the 2020 State Income Limits. Income limits reflect updated median income and household income levels for extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households for California’s 58 counties. The 2021 State Income Limits are on the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/income- limits/state-and-federal-income-limits.shtml. State Income Limits apply to designated programs, are used to determine applicant eligibility (based on the level of household income) and may be used to calculate affordable housing costs for applicable housing assistance programs. Use of State Income Limits are subject to a particular program’s definition of income, family, family size, effective dates, and other factors. In addition, definitions applicable to income categories, criteria, and geographic areas sometimes differ depending on the funding source and program, resulting in some programs using other income limits. The attached briefing materials detail California’s 2021 Income Limits and were updated based on: (1) changes to income limits the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released on April 1, 2021 for its Public Housing, Section 8, Section 202 and Section 811 programs and (2) adjustments HCD made based on State statutory provisions and its 2013 Hold Harmless (HH) Policy.
    [Show full text]
  • As Below Poverty Line
    THE NEED FOR PARADIGM SHIFT TO SAMRUDDHI LINE (LINE OF PROSPERITY) from BELOW POVERTY LINE (BPL) Dr Aruna Sharma Additional Chief Secretary Government of Madhya Pradesh The concerns expressed by the Prime Minister of India Mr Narendra Modi's declaration, "Elimination of poverty is fundamental to me; this is at the core of my understanding of cohesive growth.” For that to be achieved it is important to have a relook at the way we intervene our efforts to eliminate the poverty. The very first step is identifying the household that are termed as Below the Poverty line. Thus, identification is based on ‘household’ but the parameters that define the performance of success of elimination of poverty is based on statistical understanding of the term poverty. Below Poverty Line is an economic benchmark and poverty threshold used by the Government of India to indicate economic disadvantage and to identify individuals and households in need of government assistance and aid. It is determined using various parameters which vary from state to state and within states. Poverty Calculation Methodology is much argued and debated, however for policy makers it is a threshold to enable special hand holding and devolution of entitlements to compensate for the basic human rights like food security, education, employment, health care etc. Thus, the challenge is to have clarity in defining the poverty. In India, both income-based and consumption-based poverty statistics are in use. At international platform, the World Bank and institutions of the United Nations have since May 2014 have come up with wider definition to its poverty calculation methodology and purchasing power parity(PPP).
    [Show full text]
  • Human Development Paper
    HUMAN DEVELOPMENT PAPER HUMAN DEVELOPMENT PAPER ON INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA 1 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT PAPER ON INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA Reduced inequality as part of the SDG agenda August 2018 2 HUMAN DEVELOPMENT PAPER ON INCOME INEQUALITY IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA FOREWORD “People are the real wealth of a nation. The basic objective of development is to create an enabling environment for people to enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. This may appear to be a simple truth. But it is often forgotten in the immediate concern with the accumulation of commodities and financial wealth.” (UNDP, Human Development Report, 1990). When the first Human Development Report was published in 1990, the UNDP firmly set out the concepts of dignity and a decent life as the essential to a broader meaning of human development. Ever since, the organization has been publishing reports on global, regional and national levels addressing the most pressing development challenges. In recent years, UNDP initiated a new product - Human Development Papers – that focus on a selected development issue with the aim to contribute to policy dialogue and policy-making processes. It is my pleasure to introduce the first Human Development Paper for Serbia, focusing on inequality. The Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development places a special emphasis on eradicating poverty worldwide while reducing inequality and exclusion, promoting peaceful, just and inclusive societies and leaving no one behind. The achievement of Sustainable Development Goals requires new approaches to how we understand and address inter-related challenges of poverty, inequality and exclusion. The paper analyses and sets a national baseline for SDG10 leading indicator 10.1.1 - Growth rates of household expenditure or income per capita among the bottom 40 per cent of the population and the total population and the related target 10.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Household Income and Wealth
    HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND WEALTH INCOME AND SAVINGS NATIONAL INCOME PER CAPITA HOUSEHOLD DISPOSABLE INCOME HOUSEHOLD SAVINGS INCOME INEQUALITY AND POVERTY INCOME INEQUALITY POVERTY RATES AND GAPS HOUSEHOLD WEALTH HOUSEHOLD FINANCIAL ASSETS HOUSEHOLD DEBT NON-FINANCIAL ASSETS BY HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND WEALTH • INCOME AND SAVINGS NATIONAL INCOME PER CAPITA While per capita gross domestic product is the indicator property income may never actually be returned to the most commonly used to compare income levels, two country but instead add to foreign direct investment. other measures are preferred, at least in theory, by many analysts. These are per capita Gross National Income Comparability (GNI) and Net National Income (NNI). Whereas GDP refers All countries compile data according to the 1993 SNA to the income generated by production activities on the “System of National Accounts, 1993” with the exception economic territory of the country, GNI measures the of Australia where data are compiled according to the income generated by the residents of a country, whether new 2008 SNA. It’s important to note however that earned on the domestic territory or abroad. differences between the 2008 SNA and the 1993 SNA do not have a significant impact of the comparability of the Definition indicators presented here and this implies that data are GNI is defined as GDP plus receipts from abroad less highly comparable across countries. payments to abroad of wages and salaries and of However, there are practical difficulties in the property income plus net taxes and subsidies receivable measurement both of international flows of wages and from abroad. NNI is equal to GNI net of depreciation.
    [Show full text]
  • Nber Working Paper Series Income Growth and Its
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES INCOME GROWTH AND ITS DISTRIBUTION FROM EISENHOWER TO OBAMA: THE GROWING IMPORTANCE OF IN-KIND TRANSFERS (1959-2016) James Elwell Kevin Corinth Richard V. Burkhauser Working Paper 26439 http://www.nber.org/papers/w26439 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 November 2019 The views in this paper reflect those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Council of Economic Advisers, their staffs, or the National Bureau of Economic Research. Elwell’s work on this research was funded by The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation while he was a graduate student at Cornell University. Part of this work was undertaken while Burkhauser was employed by the Council of Economic Advisers. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2019 by James Elwell, Kevin Corinth, and Richard V. Burkhauser. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Income Growth and its Distribution from Eisenhower to Obama: The Growing Importance of In-Kind Transfers (1959-2016) James Elwell, Kevin Corinth, and Richard V. Burkhauser NBER Working Paper No. 26439 November 2019 JEL No. D31,H24,J3 ABSTRACT Using Census Bureau estimates of the market value of in-kind transfers and Current Population Survey (ASEC-CPS) data over the period 1979 to 2007, Burkhauser et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty and Inequality Prof. Dr. Awudu Abdulai Department of Food Economics and Consumption Studies
    Poverty and Inequality Prof. Dr. Awudu Abdulai Department of Food Economics and Consumption studies Poverty and Inequality Poverty is the inability to achieve a minimum standard of living Inequality refers to the unequal distribution of material or immaterial resources in a society and as a result, different opportunities to participate in the society Poverty is not only a question of the absolute income, but also the relative income. For example: Although people in Germany earn higher incomes than those in Burkina Faso, there are still poor people in Germany and non-poor people in Burkina Faso -> Different places apply different standards -> The poor are socially disadvantaged compared to other members of a society in which they belong Measuring Poverty How to measure the standard of living? What is a "minimum standard of living"? How can poverty be expressed in an index? Ahead of the measurement of poverty there is the identification of poor households: ◦ Households are classified as poor or non-poor, depending on whether the household income is below a given poverty line or not. ◦ Poverty lines are cut-off points separating the poor from the non- poor. ◦ They can be monetary (e.g. a certain level of consumption) or non- monetary (e.g. a certain level of literacy). ◦ The use of multiple lines can help in distinguishing different levels of poverty. Determining the poverty line Determining the poverty line is usually done by finding the total cost of all the essential resources that an average human adult consumes in a year. The largest component of these expenses is typically the rent required to live in an apartment.
    [Show full text]