Search

Objective: To examine the distributional effects of the 2008 recession and subsequent recovery across generational cohorts., Methods: Using data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (2007-2016), we constructed a measure of economic well-being accounting for income, household size, and annuitized value of assets. We examine trajectories of adjusted income and inequality, using Gini coefficients and income shares by decile, for the overall population and by cohort during the recession and recovery., Results: Inequality declined temporarily during the recession, but reached new highs during the recovery. During recovery, population-level increases in economic resources were not reflected among below-median households, as the more concentrated financial assets rose while broader-based home equity and employment fell or remained stagnant. Inequality measures increased for cohorts in their primary working years (Generation-X and Baby Boomers), but not among the younger Millennials, who were at early stages of education, workforce entry, and household formation., Discussion: The study illustrates an integrative approach to analyzing cumulative dis/advantage by considering interactions between historically consistent macrolevel events, such as economic shocks or policy choices affecting all cohorts, and the persistent life-course processes that tend to increase heterogeneity and inequality as cohorts age over time. Although recovery policies led to rapid recovery of financial asset values, they did not proportionately reach those below the median or their economic resource types. Results suggest that in a high-inequality environment, recovery policies from economic shocks may need tailoring to all levels of resources in order to achieve more equitable recovery outcomes and prevent exacerbating cohort inequality trajectories., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The centrality of home equity to the balance sheets of American households, and the oppressive legacy of racial exclusion from mortgage markets, compel the design of intentionally anti-racist housing policy capable of building lasting wealth for Black families. In this study, we compare the home-mortgage terms offered to middle-income Whites in the New Deal era, with a contemporary New York City policy offered in formerly redlined districts. The city's Housing Development Fund Corporation policy is for limited-income households but does not limit down payments nor qualify for federal home loans. Using mined listing data and the 2017 Panel Study of Income Dynamics, we find more than 80% of income-eligible urban Black households lack the wealth to purchase the median listing, versus 51% of Whites. Moreover, the policy's market exclusions preclude access to what is now substantial accumulated equity. Unit owners face wide-scale housing-code violations and property seizure, highlighting the limitations of "limited equity" ownership, which counteracts wealth creation. We draw two primary lessons. First, anti-racist policy cannot demand substantial financial assets. Second, financing schemes for building improvement or climate-responsive adaptation, in addition to initial purchase, should be well-tailored to family budgets and designed to deliver equity to the formerly excluded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medicaid provides virtually no-cost coverage to millions of low-income Americans. This study examines whether its beneficiaries realize similar health care access as their counterparts with private insurance. We draw on the 2014–2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and control for observable confounding factors across coverage types by estimating and applying entropy weights. Medicaid beneficiaries were moderately more likely to report a usual source of care (74.5% vs 68.1%, p<.01) and approximately equally as likely to report a checkup in the past year as the privately insured (43.5% vs 44.5%, p>.1), each significantly more likely than the uninsured. Medicaid beneficiaries had significantly more prescription fills (12.6 vs 8.2) and emergency-care visits (.26 vs.15) annually than the privately-insured on average, with similar numbers of physician visits. On balance, we did not find evidence that Medicaid was associated with diminished access or utilization relative to private insurance, while both had more access than the uninsured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]