Inequality and the Safety Net Throughout the Income Distribution, 1929-1940

The nation’s most precious asset is its people, but far too many are being left behind. As discussed in Chapter 9, widening income distribution, weak wage growth, and stagnant economic mobility have increased disparities between the rich and poor, made it harder for people to overcome their initial circumstances, and dragged the economy down. Cash-strapped government safety net and education programs are hard-pressed to keep up. Evidence shows that many programs that provide struggling individuals and families with cash, food, healthcare, childcare, education, jobs, and appropriate incentives help beneficiaries and can pay off for society as a whole. To exploit these opportunities, this chapter proposes to increase spending on social policies, focusing on five goals: investing in children, patching holes in the safety net, raising educational attainment, providing jobs and job training to people who need them, and making work pay better.

Download Full-text

The Great Recession and the Social Safety Net

The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science ◽

10.1177/0002716213499532 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 650 (1) ◽

pp. 143-166 ◽

Cited By ~ 41

Author(s):

Robert A. Moffitt

Keyword(s):

Income Distribution ◽

Low Income ◽

Great Recession ◽

Poverty Line ◽

Safety Net ◽

Social Safety Net ◽

Demographic Groups ◽

The Great Recession ◽

The Social ◽

Per Capita

The social safety net responded in significant and favorable ways during the Great Recession. Aggregate per capita expenditures in safety net programs grew significantly, with particularly strong growth in the SNAP, EITC, UI, and Medicaid programs. The increase in transfers was widely shared across demographic groups, including families with and without children, and single-parent and two-parent families. Transfers grew as well among families with more employed members and with fewer employed members. In the low-income population, however, the increase in transfer amounts was not strongly progressive across income classes, with transfers to those just below or above the poverty line increasing slightly, compared to those at the bottom of the income distribution. This was mainly because of the EITC program, which provides greater benefits to those with higher family earnings. The expansions of SNAP and UI benefitted those at the bottom of the income distribution to a greater extent.

Download Full-text