United States Poverty in a Cross-National Context

Timothy M. Smeeding · Lee Rainwater · Gary Burtles

106 citations0/0 files storedSyracuse University Libraries (Syracuse University)

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Income, Poverty, and Inequality Social Policy and Reform Studies Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare

Abstract

In this paper we use cross-national comparisons made possible by the LIS to examine America's experience in maintaining a low poverty rate. We compare the effectiveness of United States antipoverty policies to that of similar polices elsewhere in the industrialized world. If lessons can be learned from cross-national comparisons, there is much that can be learned about antipoverty policy by American voters and policymakers. The United States has one of the highest poverty rates of all the countries participating in the LIS, whether poverty is measured using an absolute or a relative standard for determining who is poor. Although the high rate of relative poverty in the United States is no surprise, given the country's well-known tolerance of wide economic disparities, the lofty rate of absolute poverty is much more troubling. After Luxembourg, the United States has the highest average income in the industrialized world. Our analysis of absolute poverty rates provides poverty estimates for 11 industrialized countries. The paper is organized as follows. We begin by reviewing international concepts and measures of poverty as they relate to the main measures of income and poverty used in other chapters of this book. Next we present cross-national estimates of both absolute and relative poverty, concentrating on the latter measures. After examining the level and trend in these rates, we explore some of the factors that are correlated with national poverty rates and examine the antipoverty effectiveness of government programs aimed at reducing poverty. We conclude with a discussion of the policy differences and outcome differences we find, and we consider the implications of our analysis for antipoverty policy in the United States.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 106 citations exist upstream.

References

1991The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950-1988 1997Cross-National Comparisons of Earnings and Income Inequality 1995Income distribution in OECD countries: evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study 1977Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff. By Arthur M. Okun. (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1975. Pp. 124. $6.95.)1996Issues in Measuring and Modelling Poverty 1999Do Social-Welfare Policies Reduce Poverty? A Cross-National Assessment 1993POVERTY, TNEQUALTTY, AND FAMTLY LIVING STANDARDS IMPACTS ACROSS SEVEN NATIONS: THE EFFECT OF NONCASH SUBSIDIES FOR HEALTH, EDUCATION AND HOUSING 2002Does it pay to move from welfare to work?

Cited by

2003Histories of Poverty and Self-Rated Health Trajectories 2011Paying for positive group esteem: How inequity frames affect whites' responses to redistributive policies.2008Human Development Indicators 2011Globalization, Inequality, and the Rich Countries of the G-20: Evidence from the Luxembourg Income (LIS)2009Effectiveness of Poverty Reduction in the EU: A Descriptive Analysis

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.