The California Poverty Measure (CPM) is released annually to document the overall poverty rate, demographic differences in poverty, county and regional differences in poverty, and the effects of government policies and programs on poverty. The CPM was first released with 2011 data by a team of researchers from the Public Policy Institute of California and the Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality. It will continue to be released annually and with a reduced time lag as the CPM protocol comes to be regularized. (Author introduction)
Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality
The purpose of this report is to describe recent trends in poverty in California. Throughout this report, we will feature a measure that is inspired by the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), as it improves on the Official Poverty Measure (OPM) in important ways. (Author abstract)
The federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is widely regarded as the country’s most effective antipoverty program. The federal EITC is quite substantial: It averaged nearly $2,400 for California filers who claimed it on their 2013 tax returns. But many states nonetheless augment it with a supplementary earned income tax credit. Starting in 2015, California became one of 25 states to include a state EITC in its mix of social safety net programs.
In recent years, much attention has been paid to the changing structure of U.S. income inequality, but somewhat less to the changing structure of U.S. poverty. Why has the discussion of "new poverty facts" been sidelined? It is certainly not because the changes have been minor or unimportant. To the contrary, the landscape of U.S. poverty appears to be changing rapidly, with many of the most popular proposals to reform the country's safety net motivated precisely by new empirical developments.
Some children are the blameless victims of poverty, while others are the lucky beneficiaries of affluence. We use the terms "blameless" or "lucky" because, as best we can tell, children do not choose their parents. It all depends on where the stork happens to drop them. However, the case against child poverty goes beyond this now-standard point that poor children do not deserve their fate. There is also a strong consequentialist case against poverty. In many countries, both rich and poor, child poverty threatens future national income growth and stability.
The number of adults on welfare has dropped dramatically since its reform in 1996. As of 2011, a little over 1 million adults remained on the welfare rolls in a typical month, down from about 4.6 million at the program’s peak in the early 1990s. As these numbers plummeted, the number of single mothers joining the workforce or returning to it grew at rates that were largely unexpected. For these reasons, welfare reform has been touted as a success. (author introduction)
Using a relative poverty standard for disposable household income, the U.S. poverty rate exceeds that reported in all of the other high-income countries in this study, with the sole exception of Israel. The well-known exceptionalism of American relative poverty extends only to rich countries. Most of the middle-income countries in this study report higher relative poverty rates than are seen in the United States. U.S. children are 30 percent more likely to live in relative poverty than is the U.S. population overall. This general pattern is not unusual.
It may be said with only a little exaggeration that policy analysts are happy describing the causes of problems while ignoring their solution, and politicians are happy proposing solutions to problems while ignoring their causes. At least, such is the case with poverty and income inequality. I fit the bill for the policy analyst, lacking any politically feasible solutions.
As the so-called "Great Recession" has unfolded, accounts in the mass media and in everyday life tell us that hardship and economic distress have been increasing dramatically; yet beyond journalistic and anecdotal evidence, official statistics have so far told us very little about exactly how much economic hardship and distress is increasing, and whether it shows any signs of abating.
In this paper I propose a class of measures of rank-order segregation, each of which may be used to measure segregation by a continuous (but not necessarily interval-scaled) variable, such as income. These rank-order segregation indices have several appealing features that remedy flaws in existing measures of income segregation. First, the measures are insensitive to rank-preserving changes in the income distribution.