Search

This study examines the influence of social welfare and tax policies on rates of chronic and transient poverty in the United States for the full population and subgroups. I use longitudinal data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (n = 10,210) over a recent 11-year time frame (1998-2008), with individuals categorized as poor using the Supplemental Poverty Measure. Results show that including government transfers in family resources reduces the overall transient poverty rate by more than one-sixth and the chronic poverty rate by nearly four-fifths, with a greater influence on the chronic rate in part because some individuals shift from chronic into transient poverty. Income and payroll tax liabilities have negligible influence on poverty rates net of tax credits. Medical expenses are largely associated with an increase in the transient poverty rate. Results imply that there is value to examining the effects of social policy on poverty from more than just the traditional cross-sectional perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This article examines whether disability is a correlate of poverty when poverty is measured using (1) the official poverty measure; (2) the supplemental poverty measure (SPM); and (3) two multidimensional poverty measures created by the authors. Methods Data from the Current Population Survey are used to explore the relationship between poverty and disability for each measure. Differences across disability status were tested for statistical significance. Results Disability is associated with poverty, irrespective of the poverty measure under use. The gap in poverty rates between persons with and without disabilities is smaller when using the SPM as compared to the official poverty measure. The gap in poverty rates between persons with and without disabilities is highest when using multidimensional poverty measures. Conclusion Working-age persons with disabilities are more likely to be poor whatever the measure under use. They are a disadvantaged group in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper assesses the Alkire and Foster (AF) approach to measure multidimensional poverty and proposes a 'dimensional' approach with economic resources, inner capabilities, and relational resources to account for its conceptual deficits. By measuring poverty in the United States using data from General Social Survey, it shows that, compared to the AF approach, the two-step process of the dimensional approach can provide greater insights into the form and structure of poverty, helping to analyze issues more comprehensively and inform policy decisions better. The relevance of the specific poverty dimensions and indicators and their operationalization are discussed and carried further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We discuss poverty measurement, focusing on two alternatives to the current official measure: consumption poverty, and the Census Bureau's new Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) that was released for the first time last year. The SPM has advantages over the official poverty measure, including a more defensible adjustment for family size and composition, an expanded definition of the family unit that includes cohabitors, and a definition of income that is conceptually closer to resources available for consumption. The SPM's definition of income, though conceptually broader than pre-tax money income, is difficult to implement given available data and their accuracy. Furthermore, income data do not capture consumption out of savings and tangible assets such as houses and cars. A consumption-based measure has similar advantages but fewer disadvantages. We compare those added to and dropped from the poverty rolls by the alternative measures relative to the current official measure. We find that the SPM adds to poverty individuals who are more likely to be college graduates, own a home and a car, live in a larger housing unit, have air conditioning, health insurance, and substantial assets, and have other more favorable characteristics than those who are dropped from poverty. Meanwhile, we find that a consumption measure compared to the official measure or the SPM adds to the poverty rolls individuals who are more disadvantaged than those who are dropped. We decompose the differences between the SPM and official poverty and find that the most problematic aspect of the SPM is the subtraction of medical out-of-pocket expenses from SPM income. Also, because the SPM poverty thresholds change in an odd way over time, it will be hard to determine if changes in poverty are due to changes in income or changes in thresholds. Our results present strong evidence that a consumption-based poverty measure is preferable to both the official income-based poverty measure and to the Supplemental Poverty Measure for determining who are the most disadvantaged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a discussion on a paper by Douglas Besharov and Douglas Call featured in the issue that examined poverty in Western Europe and the United States and explored ways to address and reduce this problem from a policy standpoint. The author focuses on the conditions in the U.S. for working class families. The author argues that an effective antipoverty movement hinges on policies that would increase earnings and reduce single and unwed parenthood in addition to selective improvements in income transfers. The author discusses differences between absolute poverty and relative poverty and argues that policies aimed at addressing absolute poverty in the U.S. are unnecessary due to the small number of people in this group.

In this paper, we revisit two pieces of conventional wisdom in the current debate about poverty, paying close attention to the price data underlying these findings: that the poor pay more than households of higher income for the goods and services they purchase; and that poverty rates, at least as measured by the U.S. Census, have remained essentially flat since the late 1960s, raising questions about the success of the policies implemented to reduce poverty. By examining scanner data on thousands of household purchases, we find that the poor pay less—not more—for the goods they purchase. And by extending the advances on price measurement in the recent decade back to the 1970s, we find that current poverty rates are less than half of the official numbers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research suggests that community-level poverty is associated with access to health care net of individual-level characteristics, but no research investigates whether this association differs by individual-level income. Using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys, the U.S. Census Bureau and the Health Resource and Services Administration, I find that the negative relationship between the prevalence of poverty in communities and access to health care is much stronger for middle- and high-income individuals than for those in lower-income groups. I suggest that individuals may benefit from living among those in similar economic circumstances because they face similar obstacles to obtaining medical are. For poor individuals, the collective knowledge and experience embedded in poor communities may compensate for the otherwise negative influence of community-level poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]