Income growth and future poverty rates of the aged

This article estimates the effects of 50 years of steady growth in incomes on poverty rates among the elderly. It assumes that the poverty threshold continues to be adjusted for inflation but not for increases in real incomes. Simulations with the March 1998 Current Population Survey indicate that if the benefit rules for Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are not changed and if earnings and other sources of income in an otherwise unchanging population grow by 1 percent per year (the intermediate assumption about earnings growth used in the Social Security Trustees' Report), poverty among the elderly will decrease from 10.5 percent in 1997 to about 7.2 percent in 2020 and to 4.1 percent in 2047. These projected poverty rates are quite sensitive to both the assumption about earnings growth and the assumption that benefits are not further reduced to maintain solvency. This article quantifies the sensitivity of the results to these assumptions and discusses several other aspects that might affect future poverty rates--changes in other income components like SSI, earnings, and pensions; changes in longevity and marital patterns; and changes in the distribution of earnings.     

Social Security as Poverty's Guardian

Although social security programs were originally introduced as measures to reduce the poverty of needy groups, factors such as coverage, vestedness, administrative regulations and the so-called "wage stop" effectively prevent millions of people throughout the world from living decently when their only source of income is from social security. In the overwhelming majority of social security programs worldwide, including old-age pensions, illness and maternity programs, workers compensation, and family or children's allowances, coverage is open only to workers and usually excludes housewives, transient workers, agricultural laborers, new immigrants and part-time workers. Similarly, vestedness requirements effectively prevent many people from receiving benefits. Administrative regulations, including waiting times and proof of status, add to the difficulties many people have in getting social security benefits. Most importantly, the stipulation in almost every program that no one should be able to get from welfare programs that which he or she could get from wages or salaries keeps the level of payments far below the poverty line. This paper will document and demonstrate the influence of social security programs throughout the world in contributing to the maintenance of poverty and will propose some radical solutions for overcoming the problem.     

The impact of the introduction of premiums into a SCHIP program.

This paper examines the introduction of premiums into the SCHIP program in Kentucky. Kentucky introduced a $20 monthly premium for SCHIP coverage for children with family incomes between 151 percent and 200 percent of the federal poverty level in December 2003. Administrative data between 2001 and 2004 is used to estimate a Cox proportional hazard model that predicts enrollment duration in this premium-paying category. The results suggest that a premium reduces the length of enrollment, with the impact concentrated in the first three months after the introduction of the premium. Similar results are not found for the non-premium-paying category.     

Social Security's special minimum benefit

Social Security's special minimum primary insurance amount (PIA) provision was enacted in 1972 to increase the adequacy of benefits for regular long-term, low-earning covered workers and their dependents or survivors. At the time, Social Security also had a regular minimum benefit provision for persons with low lifetime average earnings and their families. Concerns were rising that the low lifetime average earnings of many regular minimum beneficiaries resulted from sporadic attachment to the covered workforce rather than from low wages. The special minimum benefit was seen as a way to reward regular, low-earning workers without providing the windfalls that would have resulted from raising the regular minimum benefit to a much higher level. The regular minimum benefit was subsequently eliminated for workers reaching age 62, becoming disabled, or dying after 1981. Under current law, the special minimum benefit will phase out over time, although it is not clear from the legislative history that this was Congress's explicit intent. The phaseout results from two factors: (1) special minimum benefits are paid only if they are higher than benefits payable under the regular PIA formula, and (2) the value of the regular PIA formula, which is indexed to wages before benefit eligibility, has increased faster than that of the special minimum PIA, which is indexed to inflation. Under the Social Security Trustees' 2000 intermediate assumptions, the special minimum benefit will cease to be payable to retired workers attaining eligibility in 2013 and later. Their benefits will always be larger under the regular benefit formula. As policymakers consider Social Security solvency initiatives--particularly proposals that would reduce benefits or introduce investment risk--interest may increase in restoring some type of special minimum benefit as a targeted protection for long-term low earners. Two of the three reform proposals offered by the President's Commission to Strengthen Social Security would modify and strengthen the current-law special minimum benefit. Interest in the special minimum benefit may also increase because of labor force participation and marital trends that suggest that enhancing workers' benefits may be a more effective means of reducing older women's poverty rates than enhancing spousal or widow's benefits. By understanding the Social Security program's experience with the special minimum benefit, policymakers will be able to better anticipate the effectiveness of other initiatives to enhance benefits for long-term low earners. This article presents the most recent and comprehensive information available about the special minimum benefit in order to help policymakers make informed decisions about the provision's future. Highlights of the current special minimum benefit include the following: Very few persons receive the special minimum benefit. As of December 2001, about 134,000 workers and their dependents and survivors were entitled to a benefit based on the special minimum. Of those, only about 79,000 received a higher total benefit because of the special minimum; the other 55,000 were dually entitled. (In effect, when persons are eligible for more than one type of benefit--that is, they are dually eligible--the highest benefit payable determines total benefits. If the special minimum benefit is not the highest benefit payable, it does not increase total benefits paid.) As of February 2000, retired workers who were special minimum beneficiaries with unreduced benefits and were not dually entitled were receiving, on average, a monthly benefit of $510 per month. That amount is approximately $2,000 less than the annual poverty threshold for an aged individual. Special minimum benefits provide small increases in total benefits. For special minimum beneficiaries who were not dually entitled as of December 2001, the average special minimum monthly PIA was just $39 higher than the regular PIA. Most special minimum beneficiaries are female retired workers. About 90 percent of special minimum beneficiaries are retired workers, and 77 percent of those retired workers are women. The special minimum benefit has never provided poverty-level benefits. Maximum payable special minimum benefits (unreduced for early retirement) equal 85 percent of the poverty level for aged persons, down from 96 percent at the provision's inception. Major public policy considerations raised by this analysis include the following: Social Security benefits alone do not protect all long-term low earners from poverty. Low earners with 30 years of earnings equal to the annual full-time minimum wage who retired in selected years from 1982 to 2000 received benefits that were 3.9 percent to 20.1 percent below the poverty threshold, depending on the year they retired. For 40-year earners, the range was 3.9 percent to 15.3 percent below poverty. Furthermore, in 1993, 29.2 percent of retired-worker beneficiaries who were poor had 30 or more years of coverage. The size of the universe of persistently low earners with significant attachment to the covered workforce is unknown. Available research that examines two 28-month periods suggests that only 4 percent to 6 percent of full-time, full-period earners had below-minimum wages for more than 12 consecutive months. Targeting enhanced benefits only toward long-term, regular workers who are low earners is difficult under the current Social Security program. All else being equal, if total wage-indexed lifetime covered earnings are the same for both a full-career low earner and for a high earner who has worked only occasionally, then their Social Security benefits will be identical. Social Security has no information on number of hours worked, hourly wages, or other information that could distinguish between two such persons.     

Income and assets of Social Security beneficiaries by type of benefit

The SIPP data have provided a first look at the relative economic status of various types of Social Security beneficiaries. They have shown that the different types of Social Security beneficiaries face very different economic circumstances. Retired workers and wife beneficiaries have the highest family incomes adjusted for family size. Aged widows and minor children have the lowest family incomes, with high proportions of poor or near poor. And disabled workers are in between, but also have high proportions of poor or near poor. Retired-worker and wife beneficiary households also have considerably more asset holdings than disabled-worker or widow beneficiary households. Beneficiaries with high family incomes are very likely to live with relatives and to rely heavily on the relatives' income. The high-income families tend to have non-means-tested sources of family income other than Social Security amounting to substantial proportions of their total income and to have high asset holdings. Conversely, beneficiaries with low family incomes are very likely to live alone or with nonrelatives, to rely heavily on Social Security and means-tested benefits, and to have low asset holdings. A majority of ever-poor beneficiaries (with the exception of widow beneficiaries) are poor in only some months of a year. This situation is not consistent with the stereotype of beneficiaries living on fixed incomes. But the change in poverty status is often due to a change in the income of other family members rather than of the beneficiary. And in some cases, a change in poverty status occurs with little or no change in income as the cost of living rises.     

This is not your parents' retirement: comparing retirement income across generations

This article examines how retirement income at age 67 is likely to change for baby boomers and persons born in generation X (GenX) compared with current retirees. We use the Social Security Administration's Modeling Income in the Near Term (MINT) model to project retirement income and assets, poverty rates, and replacement rates for current and future retirees at age 67. We find that, in absolute terms, retirement incomes offuture cohorts will increase over time, and poverty rates will fall. However, projected income gains are larger for higher than for lower socioeconomic groups, leading to increased income inequality among future retirees. Finally, because postretirement incomes are not expected to rise as much as preretirement incomes, baby boomers and GenXers are less likely to have enough postretirement income to maintain their preretirement standard of living compared with current retirees.     

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE IN SURVEY AND ADMINISTRATIVE DATA

Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits were a central part of the social safety net during the COVID-19 recession. UI benefits, however, are severely understated in surveys. Using administrative tax data, we find that over half of UI benefits were missed in major survey data, with a greater understatement among low-income workers. As a result, 2020 official poverty rates were overstated by about 2 percentage points, and corrected poverty reached a six-decade low. We provide data to correct underreporting in surveys and show that, compared to UI benefits, the UI exclusion tax expenditure was less targeted at low incomes.     

The devil may be in the details: how the characteristics of SCHIP programs affect take-up.

In this paper, we explore whether the specific design of a state's program has contributed to its success in meeting two objectives of the Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP): increasing the health insurance coverage of children in lower income families and doing so with a minimum reduction in their private health insurance coverage (crowd-out). In our analysis, we use two years of Current Population Survey data, 2000 and 2001, matched with detailed data on state programs. We focus on two populations: the eligible population of children, broadly defined--those living in families with incomes below 300 percent of the federal poverty line (FPL)--and a narrower group of children, those who we estimate are eligible for Medicaid or SCHIP. Unique state program characteristics in the analysis include whether the state plan covers families; whether the state uses presumptive eligibility; the number of months without private coverage that are required for eligibility; whether there is an asset test; whether a face-to-face interview is required; and specific outreach activities. Our results provide evidence that state program characteristics are significant determinants of program success.     

The effect of health on retirement

Results from retirement research suggest the following conclusions about health, retirement, and the likely effects of the changes in retirement age made by the 1983 Social Security Amendments. First, after controlling for non-health-related factors, it is clear that older workers who are in poor health retire earlier than workers with similar economic circumstances who are in good health. Second, the research reviewed here tends to indicate that the response of the average worker to the changes made in the social security full retirement age by the 1983 amendments will be small. Estimates suggest than the average increase in the retirement age will be between zero and 3 months. Finally, while the evidence is much less certain, research results suggest that older workers in poor health may respond even less than the average worker. It is not possible to say precisely what will happen to lifetime incomes as a result of these changes. A small labor supply response suggests that not much of the lost social security benefits will be made up by additional earnings, either for workers on average or for workers in poor health. However, earnings are only part of the total income picture. Other than a brief mention, this article has not addressed how workers may adjust their savings behavior, or how private pensions may adjust, and particularly whether the potential for adjustment through these avenues is the same for workers in poor health as for the average worker.     

Nonpoor children in head start: Explanations and implications

According to the Head Start Act (1998), children are income‐eligible for the program if their “families' incomes are below the poverty line.” There are a number of statutory exceptions to this general rule and, according to the Head Start Bureau, the result is that about 6 percent of the children in the program are not poor. But the major national surveys of Head Start families report that 30 percent or more of Head Start children are not “poor.” This paper confirms and explains the high proportion of nonpoor children in Head Start: at enrollment, at least 28 percent are not poor; at midyear, at least 32 percent are not poor; and by the end of the program year, at least 34 percent and perhaps more than 50 percent are not poor. Although the presence of some of these nonpoor children seems to be an appropriate or at least understandable aspect of running a national program with Head Start's current organizational structure, the presence of others seems much less warranted and raises substantial questions of horizontal equity. Moreover, taken together, the large number of nonpoor children suggests that the program is not well targeted to fulfill its mission of providing compensatory services to developmentally disadvantaged children—and reveals the essential ambiguity of Head Start's role in the wider world of early care and education. The income and program dynamics that have led to so many nonpoor children being in Head Start are also at work in many other programs, and, thus, our findings demonstrate the need to understand better how income eligibility is determined across various means‐tested programs.     

Whose shortage of affordable housing?

Abstract

Shortfalls of low‐rent units are repeatedly cited as the rationale for programs to expand the supply of affordable housing. But the poverty‐level rents studied fall well below those of major supply programs. To reassess whether HOME and the low‐income housing tax credit (LIHTC) address actual shortfalls, this article compares numbers of units with renters by measuring both affordability and incomes with the median‐income‐based metric used for all federal rental programs.

During the 1980s, there were growing surpluses of units affordable to renters with incomes between 50 and 80 percent of their area's median income, a “low‐income” range that includes most HOME and LIHTC rents. By contrast, shortages were severe and growing only at rents affordable to households with incomes below 30 percent of area median. Examination of these shortfalls and the problems they create implies that programs to expand supply are not widely needed.     

The embedded flexibility of Nordic labor market models under pressure from EU-induced dualization—The case of posted work in Denmark and Sweden

While many coordinated market economies have responded to internationalization by regulation that creates dualization between insiders and outsiders, the Nordic countries have opted for an embedded flexibilization in which strong unions and cooperative employers have combined flexibility and equality. However, in recent years, the Nordic countries have come under pressure from an EU-induced dualization that has institutionalized mobile low-wage workers as an outside group. This article presents case studies of how Denmark and Sweden have responded to these challenges. While political processes have been different in the two countries, pressure from EU regulation and changes in employers' incentive to compromise implies that there is now a specific category of low-wage workers in both countries' otherwise egalitarian labor markets. The article, thus, contributes to the literature on dualization by highlighting the pressure coming from EU regulation rather than national policy.     

Income of new disabled-worker beneficiaries and their families: findings from the New Beneficiary Survey

In 1982, disabled workers who came on the social security disability insurance rolls from mid-1980 to mid-1981 had median monthly incomes of less than $500 if they were unmarried and less than $1,300 if they were married. These median monthly income levels, which include the income of a spouse and minor children if present, are roughly half those of the noninstitutionalized population aged 25-64. Social security benefits are the most important source of income for disabled workers and their families: They account for 40 percent of the total family income of married disabled workers and 65 percent of the total income of unmarried disabled workers. Social security benefits provide at least half of all income for more than 80 percent of unmarried disabled-worker beneficiaries and for 50 percent of the married beneficiaries. For married disabled-worker beneficiaries, earnings of the spouse are the second most important income source. Spousal earnings account for 28 percent of total income. Pensions and asset income each account for about 10 percent of total income for these married beneficiaries. Earnings are not an important source of income for unmarried disabled-worker beneficiaries for whom they amount to only about 3 percent of total income. Pensions, asset income, and public transfers each account for about 10 percent of total income of the unmarried beneficiaries.     

基于农民文化心理结构视角的“扶志扶智”路径规划

"扶志扶智"作为新时代文化精准扶贫的内生动力,是全面推进乡村振兴战略的重要举措之一。在"造血式扶贫"的过程中激发扶贫对象主动脱贫的内在驱动力,继而以内生文化带动外部经济发展。"扶志扶智"的路径规划应确立"以农民为中心"的视角,根据农民文化心理结构中的双层因子特质,通过道德建立表层"扶"的文化规范,继而在艺术调节机制的作用下提升农民深层审美能力,实现扶"志"与扶"智"路径规划下的真正内涵。     

WELFARE LIBERALISM, SOCIAL POLICY, AND POVERTY IN AMERICA

The conservative explanation for the persistence of poverty—that liberal social programs have created with disincentives-explains very little of the poverty that exists. It has gained acceptance because liberal anti-poverty efforts have been based on flawed understanding of the problem that insured their failure. Because of the oversupply of young adult workers in the 1970s, there was a proliferation of jobs paying low wages. Liberal programs that assumed that the poor simply needed training and education to lift themselves out of poverty, ignored the shortage of jobs paying above-poverty-level wages. Liberals also assumed that with the requisite training and jobs, all Americans have the capacity to gain the skills necessary to obtain those jobs. This neglects data showing that a larger proportion of individuals with low native ability have earnings beneath the poverty line than workers with normal ability, even when controlling for educational attainment. A new anti-poverty effort must take into account these realities.     

“Illegalizing” Families: State,Status, and Deportability NPS Christian Bay Best Paper Award Winner,APSA 2018, Boston

There is a paradox within United States immigration policy. Immigration policy separates families while also promising family unity. We address this paradox by arguing that state actors use “family” as a state-granted status. The state perceives some households as families and grants them benefits, while forcing other households to live as legal strangers. Individuals may form familial relationships, but the privileges and status of family are controlled by state actors and institutions. When state actors separate low-wage immigrant worker families, the state's family-status-granting power keeps these workers and their families in a state of “deportability”-a legally ambiguous limbo-satiating business interests and securing a captive low-wage workforce. Lacking legal legitimacy, but financially and socially tied to their families and communities in the U.S., these immigrants have few options but to accept off-the-radar work and to raise their children while living as “outlaws.”     

Retirement-age women and pensions: findings from the New Beneficiary Survey

This article examines the extent of employer-sponsored pension receipt and the amounts of pension benefits among a cohort of retirement-age women interviewed in the New Beneficiary Survey. These women reported relatively low levels of pension protection. Only 27 percent were receiving a pension in late 1982, either from their own employment or as survivors. This was one-half the rate of current pension receipt among a comparable cohort of men. An additional 17 percent of the women were expecting pensions of their own or had potential survivor protection through their husbands' pensions. Among those receiving a pension, women reported median monthly benefits of $250, compared with $460 among men. Pension benefits were a fairly important source of income for these women, particularly those who were unmarried. Almost one-half of the unmarried recipients depended on their pensions for one-third or more of their total incomes, and without their pension income 11 percent would have been below poverty income levels.     

The COVID Cash Transfer Study: The Impacts of a One-Time Unconditional Cash Transfer on the Well-Being of Families Receiving SNAP in Twelve States

There is growing interest in the use of unconditional cash transfers as a means to alleviate poverty, yet little is known about the effects of such transfers in the U.S. This paper reports on the results of a randomized controlled study of a one-time $1,000 unconditional cash transfer in May 2020 to families with low incomes in 12 U.S. states. The families were receiving, or had recently received, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. We examine the impact of the cash transfer on five pre-registered outcomes (material hardship, mental health, parenting, child behavior, partner relationships) and several secondary outcomes (hardship avoidance, consumption, employment, benefit use). We find no statistically significant effects (powered to detect effects of 0.09 standard deviations) of the cash transfer on any outcomes for the full sample. In pre-specified exploratory analyses, we find significant reductions in material hardship (-0.17 standard deviations) among families with less than $500 of earnings in the previous month, roughly the bottom 50 percent of monthly earnings for the study sample.     

Incomes of the aged and nonaged, 1950-82

This article discusses the results of previous studies, both supportive and nonsupportive of the conclusion that the aged are as well-off as the nonaged, and then presents a range of figures from Bureau of the Census reports over the period 1950-82 that measure both the incomes of the aged and nonaged and those of subgroups within these populations. Census figures indicate that the aged and nonaged have about equal levels of average per capita family income and that about the same proportions of these groups have incomes below the poverty line. However, aged unrelated individuals, who account for about a third of all aged persons, have less than three-fifths the income of nonaged unrelated individuals. When the per capita family income of the aged is compared separately with that of families headed by persons aged 25-44 and 45-64, aged persons receive more than those under age 45 but less than those aged 45-64. Trends in the economic status of the aged and nonaged over the period 1950-82 indicate numerous fluctuations rather than a consistent improvement in the income of either group in relation to the other.     

Application of experimental poverty measures to the aged

The U.S. Census Bureau recently released new, experimental measures of poverty based on a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel's recommendations. This article examines the effects of the experimental measures on poverty rates among persons aged 65 or older in order to help inform policy debate. Policymakers and analysts use poverty rates to measure the successes and failures of existing programs and to create and defend new policy initiatives. The Census Bureau computes the official rates of poverty using poverty thresholds and definitions of countable income that have changed little since the official poverty measure was adopted in 1965. Amid growing concerns about the adequacy of the official poverty measure, a NAS panel undertook a study of the concepts, methodology, and data needed to measure poverty. The panel concluded in its 1995 report that the current measure no longer provides an accurate picture of relative rates of poverty for different groups in the population or of changes in poverty over time. The panel recommended changes in establishing the poverty thresholds, defining family resources, and obtaining the required data. The Census Bureau report shows how estimated levels of poverty would differ from the official level as specific recommendations of the NAS panel are implemented individually and how estimated trends would differ when many recommendations are implemented simultaneously. It computes nonstandardized and standardized poverty rates. (The latter constrains the overall poverty rate under the experimental measures to match the official rate.) This article reports poverty rates that have not been standardized and provides considerably more detail than the Census report about the effects of the experimental measures on poverty among the aged. It examines the effects of changing the poverty thresholds and the items included or excluded from the definition of available resources. It also explores the effects of the experimental measures on persons aged 65 or older by age group, gender, race and ethnicity, and marital status. Results indicate that: Poverty rates in 1997 for persons aged 65 or older under the experimental NAS poverty measure are 17.3 percent, compared with 10.5 percent under the official poverty measure. This 65-percent increase is largely driven by the NAS-based measure's subtraction of medical out-of-pocket (MOOP) expenses from resources. Under the NAS-based measures, poverty rates increase for all major groups of older persons, and increase the most for groups for whom the incidence of official poverty is the lowest. The experimental NAS poverty measure shows narrower differences between genders, racial and ethnic groups, and among persons of different marital statuses than the official poverty measure. For example, white Hispanic women aged 65 or older have poverty rates that are 450 percent higher than those for white non-Hispanic men under the official poverty measure and 181 percent higher under the NAS measure. The NAS-based measure's subtraction of MOOP expenses from resources has a disproportionate effect on poverty rates among non-Hispanic whites and men as compared with other groups. However, changes in relative poverty between groups appear to be most influenced by the NAS midpoint equivalence scale. Because this scale decreases poverty rates for persons who live alone or with unrelated individuals and increases them for persons who live with others, poverty rates differ meaningfully under the NAS and official measures among demographic groups. This article highlights issues concerning the elements of the experimental NAS poverty measure that are particularly important to the measurement of poverty among the aged population. Results suggest that the research community's future efforts to refine, enhance, and build upon the NAS panel's recommendations will yield important insights about poverty among the older population.