Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage ... - Census Bureau

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Income Inequality index is up 3.1 percent. (Table A-2 2. As family size increases, expenses The Census Bureau has traditionally lists historical money income inequality measures.) do not increase at the same rate. 20 used two methods to measure income 3. The increase in expenses is larger inequality: (1) the shares of aggregate Between 2008 and 2009, the changes for a first child of a single-parent household income received by quin- in the real household income at the family than the first child of a twotiles and (2) the Gini index. In addi- 50th (median), 10th, and 90th percen- adult family. 21 tion to these measures, the Census Bureau also produces estimates of the ratio of income percentiles, the Theil index, the mean logarithmic deviation of income (MLD), and the Atkinson 18 measures. The change in income inequality between 2008 and 2009 was not statistically significant as measured tiles were not statistically significant (Table A-2). However, comparing the change in household income between 1999, the year that household income peaked before the 2001 recession, and 2009 suggests income inequality is increasing. Income at the 50th and 10th percentiles declined—5.0 percent and 9.0 percent, respectively—while Table 3 shows several income inequality measures, including aggregate income shares and the Gini index, using both money income and equivalence-adjusted income for 2008 and 2009. For both 2008 and 2009, the Gini index is lower based on the equivalence-adjusted income estimate than under the traditional by the shares of aggregate household the change in income at the 90th per- money-income estimate, suggesting income by quintiles, the Gini index, centile was not statistically significant. a more equal income distribution. the MLD, or Atkinson measures. The Between 1999 and 2009, the 90th- Comparing the shares of aggregate Theil index was the only inequality to-the-10th-percentile income ratio household income received by quinmeasure to show a statistically signifi- increased from 10.42 to 11.36. tile historically shows higher shares cant change—a 1.3 percent increase (Tables 3 and A-2). In 2009, the share of aggregate income received by the Equivalence-Adjusted Income Inequality of income in the lower quintiles and lower shares in the higher quintiles for equivalence-adjusted income than bottom quintile was 3.4 percent; Another way to measure income for money income. This redistributhe second quintile, 8.6 percent; the inequality is using an equivalence- tion would be expected because at third, 14.6 percent; the fourth, 23.2 adjusted income estimate, which the lower end of the income distribupercent; and the highest quintile, 50.3 takes into consideration the number tion there is a higher concentration of percent. Households in the lowest of people living in the household and single-person households and smaller quintile had incomes of $20,453 or how these people share resources and family sizes in relation to those at the less; those in the second quintile had take advantage of economies of scale. upper end of the distribution. incomes ranging from $20,454 to $38,550; those in the third quintile had incomes ranging from $38,551 to $61,801; those in the fourth quintile had incomes ranging from $61,802 to $100,000; and those in the highest quintile had incomes of $100,001 or more. For example, the money-incomebased distribution treats income of $30,000 for a single-person household and a family household simi- larly, while the equivalence-adjusted income of $30,000 for a single-person household would be more than twice In 2009, the lowest quintile share of aggregate income for equivalenceadjusted income (3.4 percent) was not higher than the lowest quintile share of aggregate income for money income. This is the first time that shares of aggregate income in The Gini index was 0.468 in 2009. the equivalence-adjusted income of the lowest quintile for equivalence- Except for the 1.5 percent decline $30,000 for a family household with adjusted income and money income in the Gini index between 2006 and two adults and two children. The were not statistically different. 2007, there were no other statisti- equivalence adjustment used here is cally significant annual changes since based on a three-parameter scale that 1993, the earliest year available for reflects: 21 The three-parameter scale used here is the comparable measures of income 19 inequality. Since 1993, the Gini 1. On average, children consume less than adults. same as the one used in the report The Effect of Taxes and Transfers on Income and Poverty in the United States: 2005, Current Population Reports, P60-232, U.S. Census Bureau, March 2007, . The three-parameter scale was applied to the incomes of families and unrelated individuals and assigned to each family member or unrelated individual living within the household. For details on the derivation of the threeparameter scale, see Short, Kathleen, Experimen- tal Poverty Measures: 1999, Current Population Reports, P60-216, U.S. Census Bureau, October 2001, . U.S. Census Bureau Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2009 9
Table 3. Income Distribution Measures Using Money Income and Equivalence-Adjusted Income: 2008 and 2009 (For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/apsd/techdoc/cps/cpsmar10.pdf) 2008 2009 Percentage change Money Equivalence- Money Equivalence- Money Equivalenceincome adjusted income income adjusted income income adjusted income Measure 90 90 90 90 90 90 percent percent percent percent percent percent confi- confi- confi- confi- confi- confiEstidence interval dence dence dence dence dence 1 Esti- interval1 Esti- interval1 Esti- interval1 Esti- interval1 Esti- interval1 mate (±) mate (±) mate (±) mate (±) mate (±) mate (±) Shares of Aggregate Income by Percentile Lowest quintile 34 004 36 003 34 004 34 003 – 127 *–56 096 Second quintile 86 009 94 007 86 009 92 007 – 124 *–21 087 Middle quintile 147 016 151 011 146 016 150 011 –07 123 –07 085 Fourth quintile 233 025 229 017 232 025 229 017 –04 124 – 084 Highest quintile 500 054 490 036 503 055 494 036 06 125 08 083 Top 5 percent 215 049 214 031 217 049 217 033 09 261 14 176 Summary Measures Gini index of income inequality 0466 00045 0451 00028 0468 00046 0458 00028 04 111 *16 072 Mean logarithmic deviation of income 0541 00104 0614 00077 0550 00105 0665 00081 17 222 *83 152 Theil Atkinson: 0398 00002 0380 00001 0403 00002 0394 00001 *13 005 *37 004 e=025 0096 00018 0092 00012 0097 00018 0095 00012 11 216 *33 147 e=050 0188 00029 0183 00019 0190 00030 0190 00020 10 175 *38 122 e=075 – Represents or rounds to zero 0285 00038 0287 00026 0288 00039 0300 00026 10 155 *45 106 * Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level 1 A 90 percent confidence interval (CI) is a measure of an estimate’s variability The larger the confidence interval in relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate For more information, see “Standard Errors and Their Use” at Source: U S Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2009 and 2010 Annual Social and Economic Supplements (Table A-3 lists historical equivalence- equivalence-adjusted income distribu- parameter. 22 Between 2008 and 2009, adjusted inequality measures.) tion showed a statistically significant the Atkinson measure calculated with For equivalence-adjusted income, between 2008 and 2009, there was increase between 2008 and 2009 (Table 3). The Gini index increased from 0.451 in 2008 to 0.458 in an e=0.25 increased by 3.3 percent; and with e=0.75, it increased 4.5 percent. 23 an increase in the Gini index and the redistribution of aggregate income shares, suggesting an increase in income inequality. Specifically, 2009—the second annual significant increase. The MLD, which measures the gap between the median and aver- Table A-3 shows equivalence-adjusted measures of income distribution for income years 1967 to 2009. 24 between 2008 and 2009, for the lowest quintile, the aggregate share of income decreased from 3.6 percent to 3.4 percent; and for the second quintile, the aggregate share of income declined from 9.4 percent to 9.2 percent. The changes between 2008 and 2009 in the aggregate shares for the middle, fourth, and highest quintiles were not statistically significant. age income, increased 8.3 percent between 2008 and 2009. The Theil index is similar to the Gini index in that it is a single statistic that summarizes the dispersion of income across the entire income distribution. The Theil index increased from 0.380 to 0.394 between 2008 and 2009. The Atkinson measure, useful in determining which end of the distribution contributed most to inequality, increased Over the 1967-to-2009 period, all equivalence-adjusted inequality measures increased more than the 22 Higher values for the epsilon parameter (e) when calculating the Atkinson measure increases sensitivity of changes at the lower end of the distribution, while lower values increase sensitivity of changes at the upper end of the distribution. 23 The difference between the percentage changes in the Atkinson measure based on e=0.25 and e=0.75 was not statistically significant. Each income inequality summary measure based on the between 2008 and 2009 for both high and low values of the epsilon (e) 24 This is the first year a historical series of equivalence-adjusted income inequality has been produced back to 1967. 10 Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2009 U.S. Census Bureau
Page 1 and 2: Income, Poverty, and Health Insuran
Page 3 and 4: Income, Poverty, and Health Insuran
Page 5 and 6: Contents TEXT Income, Poverty, and
Page 7 and 8: APPENDIXES Appendix A. Estimates of
Page 9 and 10: statistically significant. 2 The po
Page 11 and 12: Program Participation (SIPP). Estim
Page 13 and 14: Table 1. Income and Earnings Summar
Page 15: Race and Hispanic Origin and non-Hi
Page 19 and 20: and 1.9 percent for women who • S
Page 21 and 22: POVERTY IN THE 24.7 percent to 25.8
Page 23 and 24: Table 5. Change in Poverty During I
Page 25 and 26: Table 6. People With Income Below S
Page 27 and 28: Table 7. Income Deficit or Surplus
Page 29 and 30: HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE IN THE UN
Page 31 and 32: 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 F
Page 33 and 34: Table 9. People Without Health Insu
Page 35 and 36: uninsured rate (11.3 percent) than
Page 37 and 38: APPENDIX A. ESTIMATES OF INCOME How
Page 39 and 40: Table A-1. Households by Total Mone
Page 47 and 48: Table A-2. Selected Measures of Hou
Page 49 and 50: Table A-2. Selected Measures of Hou
Page 51 and 52: Table A-3. Selected Measures of Equ
Page 53 and 54: Table A-3. Selected Measures of Equ
Page 55 and 56: 1 Data have been revised to reflect
Page 57 and 58: Table A-5. Number of Workers With E
Page 59 and 60: Table A-5. Number of Workers With E
Page 61 and 62: APPENDIX B. ESTIMATES OF POVERTY Ho
Page 63 and 64: Table B-1. Poverty Status of People
Page 65 and 66: Table B-1. Poverty Status of People
Page 67 and 68:
Table B-1. Poverty Status of People
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
APPENDIX C. ESTIMATES OF HEALTH INS
Page 77 and 78:
Table C-1 Health Insurance Coverage
Page 79 and 80:
Table C-2. Health Insurance Coverag
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85:
show all

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage ... - Census Bureau

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?