Recession Pushes U.S. Income Gap To All-Time High
Recession Pushes U.S. Income Gap To All-Time High
Earlier this month, the U.S. Census Bureau released poverty data for 2008, which showed that the poverty rate has risen to an eleven-year high of 13.2 percent, with 39.8 million people in poverty (including 14 million children). This the highest number of people living below the poverty line since 1960. (And for those keeping score, in 2008, the poverty line for a family of two adults and two children was $21,834; for a family of two adults and one child, it was $17,330.)
Yesterday, the Census Bureau put out more detailed data on poverty and incomes, which showed that the economic downturn has widened the gap between the richest and poorest Americans:
The wealthiest 10 percent of Americans — those making more than $138,000 each year — earned 11.4 times the roughly $12,000 made by those living near or below the poverty line in 2008, according to newly released census figures. That ratio was an increase from 11.2 in 2007 and the previous high of 11.22 in 2003.
Of course, this gap will likely narrow again in the next few years, as the richest Americans likely lost quite a bit of their income in 2009 (in terms of absolute dollars). But even before the economic crash, income inequality was at its highest level since 1928, showing that there is more than the recession causing such a disparity.
Thanks to the income hit that low- and moderate-income Americans have had to endure (in the form of layoffs or reduced hours), use of food stamps has jumped 13 percent, to nearly 9.8 million U.S. households, the data shows. And the increase “was most evident in households with two or more workers, highlighting the impact of the recession on both working families and unemployed single people.”
“There are lots of people who are using food stamps for the first time, because they don’t have any other options,” said Mark Mather, a demographer at the Population Reference Bureau, a nonprofit research group in Washington. And if nothing else, one thing these numbers do is make the case for a stronger social safety net, as it’s abundantly clear onto whom the brunt of the recession is falling. And this means not just upping the dollar amount, but modernizing the system to ensure that it’s accessible.
For instance, the Houston Chronicle pointed out that “Texas isn’t coming close to meeting federal requirements to process food stamp applications within a month.” “Last month, about 38,000 new applicants were left awaiting approval even though the federal deadline had passed. About one in six applications is processed incorrectly,” the Chronicle found. This is inexcusable at the best of times, and unforgivable in the recession we’ve been dealing with. The entire social safety net — unemployment benefits, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) — needs to be open to the people it is meant to serve, it it’s going to have a wide effect on mitigating economic downturns.
4 Responses to “Recession Pushes U.S. Income Gap To All-Time High”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Wonk RoomContact Us
Donate
Mr.G: “the case for a stronger social safety net,” really means a safety net that extends a safe, public disbursement, to very few folks.
Theory:
Health People get sick, and therefore need assistance until they get on their feet again;
Economy Transitional layoffs may aggregate, on occaission, to alarming levels and subside slowly, and an average family’s savings may become depleted, and families’ basic necessities are reduced.
Society Seniors’ lifestyles do not, generally, include income production, and they usually require income supplementation, added into their family’s retirees’ contribution.
IMO, the cart should stay behind the horse, whereas clearly, the quality of the safety net, always precedes the quantity of public disbursements; from this point of view, a universal public option would alleviate the only potential quid pro quo of an unbalanced social system, given the constants of economy, and of family.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:53 pmMore people welcome to start asking for a little more please from the goverment , please i’m all for helping people , but take the fraud out the system , and wasted tax dollars that could could go to a better use , and stop giving aid to other countries you have vets who fought for Americans that are living in the streets feed them first
September 30th, 2009 at 11:49 pmMr. G: Viewpoint II is, “the case for a stronger social safety net,” really means a safety net that extends a safe public disbursement, to very few folks, and disincentivises each group, both the ‘givers’ and also the ‘getters’, from acquiring notions of their counterpart reflecting a perception of: insularity, intra-corroboration, or intra-collaboration which are revealing of a group character similar to either stationary plants, or aggressive animals; this may sadly, be deemed an ‘undesireable social state’, or “strict racism”.
Theory
Group I is stationary, on a visible hill top. Not far away, is (moving)Group II, who have a clear view of Group I, but cannot be seen by Group I! Both Group(s) I & II have never group-inter-acted ; but importantly, Group II’s correct perception of Group I, is as follows:
A. Group II Testimony On Group I Insularity: “Our group has a chance, either for a successful escape, or for a triumphant victory, now that we are near that other (stationary) group!?
B. Group II Testimony On Group I’s Intra-Corroboration: “It appears that members of that remote, stationary group, are disagreeing about events, and other things; yet it is extremely probable that they are coming to agreement on all of those issues and purposes, furthered by staying there!”
C. Group II Testimony On Group I’s Intra-Collaboration: “Oh! I can detect certain(human) aspects of that hill-top group, which came from group efforts! So, they must have used skilled inter-personal interactions, together with well-organized trades of economic goods and servides plus outstanding individual achievenments!”
D. Group II’s Testimony As To Self-Effect, Within Some Small Proximity To (Stationary) Group II: “My group may indeed, be an effective, healthy group; however, now I can doubt that we are the best group of all, or at least we are not the best group we could be? (I) am compelled to wonder whether it is possible, that our two groups could get along better somehow, together?! We might: share linguistics-or-meanings-responsibilites, and also our safety concerns? (smiles) (trusting)
Therefore, given the fact of consistent, stable group- interactions, based upon inalienable rights(a.k.a. families), and also the fact of a mandated social safety net including appropriate health care disbursements(Medicare(A,B,C,D), Medicaid, and Social Security), the absence of an economic ’social honesty’ constitues the only quid pro quo likely to condemn society into a decent from its happiness, and into an unstable, system of “strict racism!”
September 30th, 2009 at 11:56 pmMr. G: Viewpoint III is: “the case for a stronger social safety net,” really means a safety net that extends a safe public disbursment, to very few folks, but supports healthier, stronger, families!
Theory
It is the job of families to protect information, which always sums up to being a description, or perception of the world. At the end of each day, the economy and the safety net have ensured our survival, and yet once in place, this requires four family ‘jobs’:
1) how to deal with acquiring those, economic goods and services offered;
2) what to do, or how to live, with the projection of having enough;
3) how to say no to charity, that is not needed;
4) how to accept help, when we are delayed in our goals.
Therefore, given an economy which ‘tries hard’, and an agreement on minimum inter-group charity, absence of laws which ensure the health of all families, and the safety of adults and children, is the only quid pro quo that will prevent society from squandering its resources!
October 2nd, 2009 at 11:58 am