Deep Poverty on the Rise

Deep poverty — that is, the share of the population with incomes below half the poverty line — rose by a statistically significant amount in 40 states (including the District of Columbia) from 2007 to 2010 and fell in none, Census Bureau data released today show.

Deep Poverty Rose in 40 States Between 2007 and 2010

Half of the poverty line corresponds to an income of $5,570 for an individual and $11,157 for a family of four.

The number of people in deep poverty rose to 20.4 million in 2010, up 4 million (25 percent) since 2007.  The national poverty data that Census released last week, based on a different survey (see our analysis) showed that the deep poverty rate hit a record 6.7 percent in 2010, with data going back to 1975.

The states with the highest deep poverty rates in 2010 were Mississippi and New Mexico, at 9.7 percent and 8.7 percent, respectively.  (The District of Columbia, which — unlike a state — consists entirely of a central city, had a deep poverty rate of 10.7 percent.)  The largest increase in deep poverty since the start of the recession occurred in Nevada, where the rate rose from 4.6 percent in 2007 to 7.0 percent in 2010 — an increase of more than half.

Studies have found that deep poverty has a particularly strong negative effect on the education and development of young children.  Even relatively small changes in incomes among low-income young children have been found to trigger significant changes in school achievement.

The new deep poverty figures, based on the Census Bureau’s official poverty definition, are for pre-tax cash income.  They don’t include the value of tax credits or non-cash benefits such as SNAP (food stamps), which have increased in value since 1975.  Alternative poverty data that Census will release next month will account for these benefits, as well as work expenses; we expect them to show a substantially smaller increase in deep poverty during the downturn, thanks in large measure to SNAP’s effective response to the increase in need.

But even if one accounts for tax credits and non-cash benefits, economists have found an increase in deep poverty over the last two decades, as we have noted.  A major reason, they find, is that public safety-net expenditures have shifted away from those with the lowest incomes over the past two decades.  For example, average safety-net benefits for out-of-work low-income families fell by 41 percent in inflation-adjusted terms between 1984 and 2004.

Deep Poverty Rose in 40 States Between 2007 and 2010

Print Friendly

More About Arloc Sherman

Arloc Sherman

Sherman is a Senior Researcher focusing on family income trends, income support policies, and the causes and consequences of poverty.

Full bio | Blog Archive | Research archive at CBPP.org

1 Comments Add Yours ↓

Comments are listed in reverse chronological order.

  1. 1

    For two years, I’ve earned less than $10,000 annually. It’s the worst two years I can ever remember, and I know people in my community who have similarly struggled to make ends meet. Unfortunately, national budget priorities seem to focus more on defense and the 10-year war on terror than on re-building our infrastructures, re-tooling our industries, and creating new jobs. There’s plenty of work to be done here at home but there seems to be little national will power to make it happen. We can do better, much better. Numbers, unfortunately, don’t always tell the whole story. Here’s my story: http://bit.ly/nQMiPd.



Your Comment

Comment Policy:

Thank you for joining the conversation about important policy issues. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters and are subject to approval and moderation. We reserve the right to remove comments that:

  • are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate;
  • contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs;
  • solicit and/or advertise for personal blogs and websites or to sell products or services;
  • may infringe the copyright or intellectual property rights of others or other applicable laws or regulations; or
  • are otherwise inconsistent with the goals of this blog.

Posted comments do not necessarily represent the views of the CBPP and do not constitute official endorsement by CBPP. Please note that comments will be approved during the Center's business hours. If you have questions, please contact communications@cbpp.org.




four + = 12

 characters available