Search

Poverty is among the most challenging social problems in the United States today, and beliefs about the government's role in reducing inequality and raising living standards for the poor are critical to alleviating poverty and its consequences. Du Bois recognized the complex challenges associated with poverty and was ahead of his time in pointing to ethnicity and religion as fundamental to creating change and alleviating poverty. Du Bois' ideas continue to be relevant today, including for understanding ethnic differences among Catholics in attitudes toward poverty, which are likely changing given the growth of the Latino population. In the spirit of Du Bois' seminal research, I compare Latino and non‐Latino Catholic attitudes toward poverty and inequality using the 2021 General Social Survey. Findings document critical differences among Catholics in beliefs about poverty and inequality and highlight the interdependent role of religion, ethnicity, and demographics (e.g., age, gender, socioeconomic status [SES]) in shaping attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent decades, the financial elite have seen their economic resources grow significantly, while the income and wealth of other households have stagnated. The financial elite includes couples who are super-rich (top one percent), rich (the 90th–99th percentile), and upper-middle class (the 80th–89th percentile). Gendered work–family arrangements in top economic groups may contribute to inequality—particularly to wealth accumulation among the elite—but relatively little is known about how these couples divide paid and unpaid work or the extent to which their arrangements differ from other couples. In this study, we uncover novel work and family patterns and trends in the most economically powerful families in the United States. We use the Survey of Consumer Finances (1989–2019) to compare the household division of labor across income and wealth groups and over time, with a focus on financial elites. We find stark contrasts between super-rich couples and other couples in the division of labor. Specifically, super-rich couples are much more likely than all other couples, including rich and upper-middle class couples, to have a traditional male breadwinner–female homemaker/caregiver arrangement. Importantly, the striking patterns of traditional arrangements in the top one percent have not changed in 30 years and, as we uncover, appear to be driven by a couple's wealth rather than income. These findings suggest that work–family arrangements may be an integral component of economic and gender inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study is the first to examine net worth poverty, and its intersection with income poverty, by race and ethnicity among child households in the United States. Background: Scholarship on economic scarcity for children has largely concentrated on income deficits and thus leaves open important questions about wealth deficits. Method: Data come from the 1989–2019 waves of the Survey of Consumer Finances, on households with at least one resident child under the age of 18. Net worth poverty is measured as household net worth, defined as total assets minus total debts, that is less than one‐fourth of the federal poverty line. Results: In 2019, 57% of Black and 50% of Latino child households were net worth poor. The majority of these households were not income poor. Racial and ethnic differences in net worth poverty (unlike those for income poverty) persist even when sociodemographic variation predicting income poverty is controlled for. Conclusion: Net worth poverty is so prevalent in the lives of non‐White children that, after sociodemographic characteristics are controlled for, Black and Latino child households have about the same probability of not being poor as they do of being net worth poor. Implications: A focus on income deprivation alone will overlook the precarious economic conditions related to family net worth and ignore growing disparities by race and ethnicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ties that immigrants maintain across national borders are important indicators of both patterns of global interconnectedness and the incorporation of immigrants in their host countries. Scholars acknowledge that cross-border ties are extensive but debate the persistence of these ties following migration. We propose that simultaneously studying the home and host country financial investments of three large immigrant groups in the United States may provide unique insight into these important questions. Specifically, we study the home and host country investments of Mexican, Chinese, and Indian immigrants to the United States. We propose that home country financial ties are likely to decline over time but that host country financial ties will become stronger. However, significant and meaningful differences in these patterns are likely across the three groups we study. Using data from the New Immigrant Survey – a nationally representative multicohort longitudinal study of adult immigrants who are U.S. legal permanent residents – we find that cross-border investments are considerably less enduring than previous literature has found. However, portfolio composition and the location of critical assets vary in significant and informative ways by country of origin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Economic inequality in the United States is extreme, but little is known about the national origin of affluent households. Households in the top one percent by total wealth own vastly disproportionate quantities of household assets and have correspondingly high levels of economic, social, and political influence. The overrepresentation of white natives (i.e., those born in the U.S.) among high-wealth households is well-documented, but changing migration dynamics suggest that a growing portion of top households may be immigrants. Methods: Because no single survey dataset contains top wealth holders and data about country of origin, this paper uses two publicly-available data sets: the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) and the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). Multiple imputation is used to impute country of birth from the SIPP into the SCF. Descriptive statistics are used to demonstrate reliability of the method, to estimate the prevalence of immigrants among top wealth holders, and to document patterns of asset ownership among affluent immigrants. Results: Significant numbers of top wealth holders who are usually classified as white natives may be immigrants. Many top wealth holders appear to be European and Canadian immigrants, and increasing numbers of top wealth holders are likely from Asia and Latin America as well. Results suggest that of those in the top one percent of wealth holders, approximately 3% are European and Canadian immigrants, .5% are from Mexico or Cuban, and 1.7% are from Asia (especially Hong Kong, Taiwan, Mainland China, and India). Ownership of key assets varies considerably across affluent immigrant groups. Conclusion: Although the percentage of top wealth holders who are immigrants is relatively small, these percentages represent large numbers of households with considerable resources and corresponding social and political influence. Evidence that the propensity to allocate wealth to real and financial assets varies across immigrant groups suggests that wealth ownership is more global than previous research suggests and that immigrant groups are likely to become more prevalent in top wealth positions in the U.S. As the representation of immigrants in top wealth positions grows, their economic, social, and political influence is likely to increase as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mexican Americans are a large group whose mobility patterns can provide important insight into immigrant assimilation processes. It is well known that Mexicans have not attained economic parity with whites, but there is considerable debate about the degree to which Mexican immigrants and their American-born children experience mobility over their lives. We contribute to this literature by studying Mexican American wealth ownership, focusing on three interrelated processes. First, we examine childhood poverty and inheritances to establish financial starting points and to identify the degree to which resources from prior generations affect wealth ownership. Second, we study impediments to mobility in young adulthood to understand how childhood conditions create early adult obstacles to well-being. Third, we study midlife net worth and homeownership to better understand whether childhood and young adult impediments necessarily reduce adult wealth ownership. We find high levels of early life disadvantage among Mexican Americans, but these disadvantages are least pronounced in the second and third generations compared to the first generation. Consistent with prior research, we also find high levels of young adult impediments to mobility for Mexican Americans. However, we find that these early roadblocks do not necessarily translate into lower adult wealth: we show that Mexican Americans have less total wealth than whites but more than African Americans, even when early life impediments are controlled. Our results suggest that Mexican Americans are establishing a solid financial foundation that is likely to lead to long-term class stability. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Recent protest movements brought attention to the one percent, a segment of the population that is critical to understanding inequality and social mobility but that attracts relatively little research attention. In this article, I survey current research on the one percent in the United States. I distinguish income from wealth and show that both are very concentrated but that the concentration of wealth, particularly financial wealth, is extremely high. I describe the demographic traits and finances of households who are in the one percent and discuss how these have changed in the past decade. I review literature that explains rising top incomes, and I propose that future research will usefully concentrate more on top wealth owners and on the demographic and life course processes that underlie income and wealth concentration. I conclude by speculating about why Americans are so tolerant of resource concentration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Temporary employment in the United States has increased considerably in recent decades, but the financial well-being of temporary employees is not well understood. This article examines the effect of both recent and past temporary employment on asset accumulation and portfolio behavior. The authors find that temporary work reduces workers' assets and that this negative effect remains even after a worker has left the temporary position. The authors also show that suppressed or delayed homeownership substantially contributes to the reduction of assets among temporary workers. These results provide insight into the role that work status plays in creating and maintaining wealth inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wealth inequality is among tile most extreme forms of stratification in the United States, and upward wealth mobility is not common. Yet mobility is possible, and this paper takes advantage of trends among a unique group to explore the processes that generate mobility. I show that non-Hispanic whites raised in Roman Catholic families have been upwardly mobile in the wealth distribution in recent decades, and I find that unique fertility, marriage and education patterns contributed to this change. I also show that Catholic values related to work and money contributed to relatively high saving and portfolio behavior that facilitated mobility. The results provide important insight into the process by which childhood experiences shape adult well-being, particularly adult wealth ownership. The findings also contribute to understanding of social inequality by identifying important behaviors and processes that facilitate mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial differences in wealth ownership are among the most extreme and persistent forms of stratification in the United States, but the factors that contribute to this inequality are unclear. One potentially important contributing factor is family background. it is a critical determinant of attainment, and both childhood family resources and family structure vary racially. This article reports that family size during childhood contributes significantly to racial differences in adult wealth. I find that siblings strain material and nonmaterial resources during childhood and decrease adult home ownership, stock ownership, and total assets. Having extended family in the home also decreases wealth for those from intact families, but an extended family minimizes the negative effect of divorce and separation and increases wealth in disrupted families. I also find that childhood family size and family structure are related to racial differences in adult wealth accumulation trajectories, allowing whites to begin accumulating high-yield assets earlier in life. The results provide insight into the role of family background in creating and maintaining inequality, particularly racial stratification in wealth ownership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the impact of racial differences and asset ownership on wealth distribution in the United States. Racial inequality in socioeconomic well-being has been documented extensively in the social sciences. Research has demonstrated that Blacks, in particular, have not kept pace with whites on indicators such as earnings, labor force participation, labor force outcomes, and quality of living conditions. In 1983, the correlation between total household income and household net worth was 0.49; and when asset income was removed from total income, the correlation dropped to 0.26. This suggests that many of the truly wealthy have rather low earnings, probably because they are able to support current consumption with income derived from assets. A micro-simulation model has been used to explore the relationship between racial differences in asset ownership and wealth inequality. Wealth inequality is still an unresolved issue in America. Levels of wealth inequality are so extreme that most people hardly register any wealth at all, yet wealth is one of the most central indicators of financial well-being and security. Racial differences in wealth ownership are particularly acute and have been relatively persistent in recent decades.

Wealth ownership in the United States has long been concentrated in the hands of a small minority of the population, yet researchers have paid relatively little attention to the causes and consequences of this inequality. In this essay, we review the literature that does exist on wealth accumulation and distribution. We begin with an examination of the reasons that wealth inequality has received little empirical attention. We then discuss methods of creating empirical estimates of wealth accumulation and distribution, and we present some estimates of recent trends in wealth inequality. We explore a diverse collection of research that explains these trends, covering treatments of aggregate influences and individual and household factors. We conclude the chapter with a review of research on intergenerational processes and wealth mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]