Journal of Population Economics

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 261–286 | Cite as

Living conditions among the poor in four rich countries

  • Susan E. Mayer
Article

Abstract

The share of income going to the poorest 10% of Americans is much smaller than the share of income going to the poorest 10% of Canadians, Swedes, or Germans (before unification). However, comparisons across countries of the distribution of housing conditions, consumer durables, health, and visits to the doctor and dentist suggest that compared to the average person in their country, low-income Americans are no worse off than low-income residents of other countries. But these conclusions partly depend on how income is adjusted for family size. Americans whose incomes are low for a long time may suffer more material deprivation than Canadians whose incomes are low for a long time. Conclusions about economic well-being based on current income may not rank nations the same as comparisons based on deprivation in living conditions.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Coder J (1991) Exploring nonsampling errors in the wage and salary income data from the March Current Population Survey. Housing and Household Economic Statistics Division, US Bureau of the Census, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  2. Coleman RP, Rainwater L (1978) Social standing in America. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Duncan G, Gustafsson B, Hauser R, Hausman P, Jenkins S, Messinger H, Muffels R, Nolan B, Ray JC, Voges W (1992) Poverty and social assistance dynamics in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Paper presented at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  4. Engel E (1885) Die Lebenskosten belgischer Arbeiterfamilien früher und jetzt. Int Statist Institute Bull 9:1–74.Google Scholar
  5. Erikson R, Aberg R (1987) Welfare in transition: a survey of living conditions in Sweden 1968–1981. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  6. Eurostat (1988) Family budgets: comparative tables. Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  7. Glatzer W (1987) Living conditions and their assessment. Soc Indic Res 19:39–46.Google Scholar
  8. Institutet for Social Forskning (1984) Variabler och kodr for LNU81. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  9. Lazear EP, Michael RT (1980) Family size and the distribution of real per capita income. Am Econ Rev 70:91–107.Google Scholar
  10. Mayer SE (1992a) Are there economic barriers to visiting the doctor? Harris School of Public Policy Studies Working Paper 92-6, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  11. Mayer SE (1992b) A Comparison of poverty and living conditions in the US, Sweden, Canada and Germany. Harris School of Public Policy Studies Working Paper 92-3, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  12. Mayer SE, Jencks CS (1989) Poverty and distribution of material hardship. J Human Resources 24 (1):88–1140.Google Scholar
  13. Mayer SE, Jencks CS (1993) Recent trends in economic inequality in the United States: income vs. expenditure vs. material well-being. In: Popadimitriou D, Wolff E (eds) Poverty and prosperity in America at the close of the Twentieth Century. St. Martin Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. OECD (1990) Main economic indicators. Paris.Google Scholar
  15. Palmer JL, Smeeding TM, Jencks C (1988) The uses and limits of income comparisons. In: Palmer JL, Smeeding TM, Torrey BB (eds) The vulnerable. Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  16. Rainwater L (1974) What money buys: inequality and the social meaning of money. Basic books, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Rainwater L (1991) Poverty in American eyes. Department of Sociology, Harvard University (unpublished manuscript).Google Scholar
  18. Ringen S (1987) Poverty in the welfare state? In: Erikson R, Hansen EJ, Ringen S, Uusitalo H (eds) The Scandinavian model. M. E. Sharpe, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Smeeding TM, Torrey BB, Rein M (1988) Patterns of income and poverty: the economic status of children and the elderly in eight countries. In: Palmer JL, Smeeding TM, Torrey BB (eds) The vulnerable. Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  20. Statistics Canada (1981) The health of Canadians: report of the Canadian health survey. Minister of Supply and Services, Ottawa, Canada.Google Scholar
  21. Townsend P (1979) Poverty in the United Kingdom: a survey of household resources and standards of living. University of California Press, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  22. Travers P, Richardson S (1989) Averages and tails: the tenuous link between poverty status and standard of living. Working Paper ≠ 89–3, Department of Economics, University of Adelaide, Australia.Google Scholar
  23. US Bureau of the Census (1987) Statistical abstract of the United States: 1987. (107th Edition). US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  24. US Bureau of the Census (1991) Statistical abstract of the United States: 1991. (111th Edition). US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  25. Universität Frankfurt am Main (1988) Das Sozio-ökonomische Panel. Sonderforschungsbereich 3 (Mikroanalytische Grundlagen der Gesellschaftspolitik). Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
  26. Van der Gaag J, Smolensky E (1981) True household equivalence scales and characteristics of the poor in the United States. Rev Income Wealth 28 (1):17–28.Google Scholar
  27. Vaughn D (1984) Using subjective assessments of income to estimate family equivalence scales: a report of work in progress. Social Security Administration. Offset, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan E. Mayer
    • 1
  1. 1.Harris School of Public Policy StudiesUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations