New York was the state with the greatest gap between rich and poor, with a Gini coefficient score of 0.52 in 2023. Although not a state, District of Columbia was among the highest Gini coefficients in the United States that year.

In the first quarter of 2024, almost two-thirds percent of the total wealth in the United States was owned by the top 10 percent of earners. In comparison, the lowest 50 percent of earners only owned 2.5 percent of the total wealth. Income inequality in the U.S. Despite the idea that the United States is a country where hard work and pulling yourself up by your bootstraps will inevitably lead to success, this is often not the case. In 2023, 7.4 percent of U.S. households had an annual income under 15,000 U.S. dollars. With such a small percentage of people in the United States owning such a vast majority of the country’s wealth, the gap between the rich and poor in America remains stark. The top one percent The United States follows closely behind China as the country with the most billionaires in the world. Elon Musk alone held around 219 billion U.S. dollars in 2022. Over the past 50 years, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio has exploded, causing the gap between rich and poor to grow, with some economists theorizing that this gap is the largest it has been since right before the Great Depression.

This dataset focuses on the black-white wage gap in the United States. It provides insights into the disparities in hourly wages between black and white workers, as well as different gender and subgroup breakdowns.

The data is derived from the Economic Policy Institute’s State of Working America Data Library, a reputable source for socio-economic research and analysis.

Previous version: "Gender, Economic Inequality, and Political Power". Abstract: Despite decades of research on women’s representation, we still know surprisingly little about the extent to which public policy responds unequally to the preferences of women and men. This article exploits two comparable datasets, one for the United States and one for Norway, together containing measures of gender-disaggregated public opinion, as well as public policy outcomes, on 2,650 specific proposals asked about in survey polls between 1964 and 2014. The data reveal a substantial gap in policy responsiveness to men and women (in favor of men) in both countries. However, in Norway, the gender-gap has virtually disappeared over time, a development that appears to be attributable to the increasing share of women in parliament. In the US, the gap has remained remarkably stable over time.

About this dataset

Context

The dataset presents median income data over a decade or more for males and females categorized by Total, Full-Time Year-Round (FT), and Part-Time (PT) employment in Social Circle. It showcases annual income, providing insights into gender-specific income distributions and the disparities between full-time and part-time work. The dataset can be utilized to gain insights into gender-based pay disparity trends and explore the variations in income for male and female individuals.

Key observations: Insights from 2023

Based on our analysis ACS 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates, we present the following observations: - All workers, aged 15 years and older: In Social Circle, the median income for all workers aged 15 years and older, regardless of work hours, was $47,132 for males and $34,389 for females.

These income figures indicate a substantial gender-based pay disparity, showcasing a gap of approximately 27% between the median incomes of males and females in Social Circle. With women, regardless of work hours, earning 73 cents to each dollar earned by men, this income disparity reveals a concerning trend toward wage inequality that demands attention in thecity of Social Circle.

- Full-time workers, aged 15 years and older: In Social Circle, among full-time, year-round workers aged 15 years and older, males earned a median income of $71,141, while females earned $40,432, leading to a 43% gender pay gap among full-time workers. This illustrates that women earn 57 cents for each dollar earned by men in full-time roles. This level of income gap emphasizes the urgency to address and rectify this ongoing disparity, where women, despite working full-time, face a more significant wage discrepancy compared to men in the same employment roles.

Remarkably, across all roles, including non-full-time employment, women displayed a lower gender pay gap percentage. This indicates that Social Circle offers better opportunities for women in non-full-time positions.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2019-2023 5-Year Estimates. All incomes have been adjusting for inflation and are presented in 2023-inflation-adjusted dollars.

Gender classifications include:

• Male
• Female

Employment type classifications include:

• Full-time, year-round: A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked full time (35 or more hours per week) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year.
• Part-time: A part-time worker is a person who worked less than 35 hours per week during the previous calendar year.

Variables / Data Columns

• Year: This column presents the data year. Expected values are 2010 to 2023
• Male Total Income: Annual median income, for males regardless of work hours
• Male FT Income: Annual median income, for males working full time, year-round
• Male PT Income: Annual median income, for males working part time
• Female Total Income: Annual median income, for females regardless of work hours
• Female FT Income: Annual median income, for females working full time, year-round
• Female PT Income: Annual median income, for females working part time

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Social Circle median household income by race. You can refer the same here

United States US: Poverty Gap at $6.85 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data was reported at 1.400 % in 2022. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.500 % for 2021. United States US: Poverty Gap at $6.85 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data is updated yearly, averaging 1.100 % from Dec 1963 (Median) to 2022, with 60 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.200 % in 1963 and a record low of 0.500 % in 2021. United States US: Poverty Gap at $6.85 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. Poverty gap at $6.85 a day (2017 PPP) is the mean shortfall in income or consumption from the poverty line $6.85 a day (counting the nonpoor as having zero shortfall), expressed as a percentage of the poverty line. This measure reflects the depth of poverty as well as its incidence.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

United States US: Poverty Gap at $2.15 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data was reported at 1.000 % in 2022. This records an increase from the previous number of 0.200 % for 2021. United States US: Poverty Gap at $2.15 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data is updated yearly, averaging 0.500 % from Dec 1963 (Median) to 2022, with 60 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 % in 2022 and a record low of 0.200 % in 2021. United States US: Poverty Gap at $2.15 a Day: 2017 PPP: % data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. Poverty gap at $2.15 a day (2017 PPP) is the mean shortfall in income or consumption from the poverty line $2.15 a day (counting the nonpoor as having zero shortfall), expressed as a percentage of the poverty line. This measure reflects the depth of poverty as well as its incidence.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

replication code (the dataset is available from the Roper Center at Cornell)

In 2023, **** percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to *** percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was **** percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year are considered to be below the poverty line. Women and children are more likely to suffer from poverty, due to women staying home more often than men to take care of children, and women suffering from the gender wage gap. Not only are women and children more likely to be affected, racial minorities are as well due to the discrimination they face. Poverty data Despite being one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the United States had the third highest poverty rate out of all OECD countries in 2019. However, the United States' poverty rate has been fluctuating since 1990, but has been decreasing since 2014. The average median household income in the U.S. has remained somewhat consistent since 1990, but has recently increased since 2014 until a slight decrease in 2020, potentially due to the pandemic. The state that had the highest number of people living below the poverty line in 2020 was California.

The data and programs replicating tables and figures from "Wealth of Two Nations: The U.S. Racial Wealth Gap, 1860-2020", by Derenoncourt, Kim, Kuhn, and Schularick are too large to host on the Harvard Dataverse. They are available for download here instead: https://hu.sharepoint.com/:f:/s/HarvardEconomicsDatasets/Eq4g3n5WstlBvdknSsAI_FYBVNFV2trgP1It-Wv0rb9G3w?e=axHfn0 They are also hosted by the authors on openICPSR: https://www.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/194203/version/V1/view Please see the ReadMe_DKKS_QJE_2023 file for additional details.

ObjectiveWe examined whether the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion reduced socioeconomic inequalities in health care utilization.MethodsWe used data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, covering the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, between 2011 and 2016. We selected outcome indicators, viz. ability to afford needed health care, having a personal doctor, use of health services in the past year (routine check-up, flu shot and dental visits), and attending screenings for breast, cervical, and colon cancers. Socioeconomic status was measured by household income. We calculated two indices of inequality by household income for each outcome: Slope Index of Inequality (SII) and Relative Index of Inequality (RII). We estimated difference-in-differences models to examine the impact of ACA Medicaid expansion on socioeconomic inequality in use of health care services.ResultsThe ACA Medicaid expansion appeared to reduce the socioeconomic gap in individuals reporting financial ability in accessing health care (difference-in-differences estimators, -0.045 for SII and RII), having a personal doctor (-0.037 for SII and RII), and receiving routine check-ups (-0.027 for SII and -0.039 for RII). However, the expansion was not associated with reduction in the socioeconomic gap for preventive health care visits or dental care.ConclusionsThe ACA Medicaid expansion had mixed effects on socioeconomic disparities in health care utilization. Medicaid expansion may not be sufficient to address socioeconomic disparities in preventive services uptake.

Unemployment rate gap changes (β) by Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), overall and by svi theme, among rapid riser counties† (N = 585) before and after¶ a rapid rise in COVID-19 incidence --- United States.

In an April 2020 online survey, ** percent of respondents said that they believed that those with less education, less money, and fewer resources in the United States were being unfairly burdened due to the global coronavirus pandemic.

Scholarship on women voters in the United States has focused on the gender gap showing that women are more likely to vote for Democratic Party candidates than men since the 1980s. The persistence of the gender gap has nurtured the conclusion that women are Democrats. This article presents evidence upending that conventional wisdom. Data from the American National Election Study are analyzed to demonstrate that white women are the only group of female voters who support Republican Party candidates for president. They have done so by a majority in all but 2 of the last 18 elections. The relevance of race for partisan choice among women voters is estimated with data collected in 2008, 2012, and 2016, and the significance of being white is identified after accounting for political party identification and other predictors.

In the first quarter of 2025, 51.4 percent of the total wealth in the United States was owned by members of the baby boomer generation. In comparison, millennials owned around 10.3 percent of total wealth in the U.S. In terms of population distribution, there was almost an equal share of millennials and baby boomers in the United States in 2024.

The data and programs replicate tables and figures from "How the 1963 Equal Pay Act and 1964 Civil Rights Act Shaped the Gender Gap in Pay", by Bailey, Helgerman, and Stuart. Please see the README file for additional details.

Despite ideological sorting among partisans, as of 2012, gender gaps over policy preferences persist within political parties—particularly among Republicans. Republican women report more moderate views than Republican men across a range of policy areas. These gaps are largely attributed to gender differences in beliefs about the appropriate scope of government and attitudes toward gender-based inequality. Nonetheless, we argue that gender became an even more salient feature of politics between the 2016 and 2012 elections. This raises questions about whether the within party gaps are stable over time. Using survey data from the 2012 and 2016 American National Election Study we evaluate whether gender gaps in policy preferences are stable across elections, or if the 2016 context affected the magnitude of gender differences in policy preferences. We find that despite the increased salience of gender in 2016, within party gender gaps are fairly stable across the two periods.

Inequality ratio (20:20) and inequality gap (20–20) of mean SRHS (range 0 “below average” to 1 “above average”) in years 2000 and 2013, by age groups.

This survey shows the attitude towards legalization of abortions in the U.S. in 2011 by generation. 56 percent of the Baby Boomers stated that abortion should be made legal.

Gender inequalities in the division of housework have persisted for decades and are threatened to increase due to COVID-19. Despite extensive research on the individual determinants of these gaps, we know less about the psycho-social mechanisms driving these unequal divisions of housework, such as fairness perceptions. Indeed, studies show that couples with unequal housework divisions tend to perceive their arrangement as fair, a finding which has long puzzled scholars.

To fill this gap, we conduct a multi-factorial vignette experiment in a nationally representative sample of the U.S. In particular, respondents will evaluate the fairness of the division of housework across hypothetical couples. Our main aim is to estimate the just gender housework gap. In other words, to what extent are husbands more likely to be perceived as unfairly doing too much housework compared to wives? Drawing on equity theory, we examine how hypothetical spouses' non-housework contributions shape fairness perceptions and if those assessments differ by spouses' gender. Lastly, we test to what extent these fairness beliefs about housework divisions vary by respondents' cohort, gender, and race.