NPR interviewed Princeton sociologist Matthew Desmond about his new book, Poverty, by America. Desmond says that we can afford to eliminate poverty, if we want to. Income inequality is a driving force behind disinvestment in public services, he says.
Over 11% of the U.S. population — about one in nine people — lived below the federal poverty line in 2021. But Princeton sociologist Matthew Desmond says neither that statistic, nor the federal poverty line itself, encapsulate the full picture of economic insecurity in America.
“There’s plenty of poverty above the poverty line as a lived experience,” Desmond says. “About one in three Americans live in a household that’s making $55,000 or less, and many of those folks aren’t officially considered poor. But what else do you call trying to raise three kids in Portland on $55,000?”
Growing up in a small town in Arizona, Desmond learned firsthand how economic insecurity could impact a family’s stress level. He remembers the gas being shut off and his family home being foreclosed on. Those hardships would later drive his research — specifically the question of how so much poverty could exist within a country as wealthy as the U.S….
His new book, Poverty, by America, studies various factors that contribute to economic inequality in the U.S., including housing segregation, predatory lending, the decline of unions and tax policies that favor the wealthy. Desmond says that affluent Americans, including many with progressive political views, benefit from corporate and government policies that keep people poor.
“Most government aid goes to families that need it the least,” Desmond says. “If you add up the amount that the government is dedicating to tax breaks — mortgage interest deduction, wealth transfer tax breaks, tax breaks we get on our retirement accounts, our health insurance, our college savings accounts — you learn that we are doing so much more to subsidize affluence than to alleviate poverty.”
Desmond says that the growing affluence of those at the top drives it’s unwillingness to invest in public services:
If you are a family of means, you have the incentive to rely less and less on the public sector. So we used to want to be free of bosses, but now we want to be free of bus drivers. We don’t want to take the bus. We don’t want to often enroll our kids in the public school system. We don’t need to play in the public park or swim in the public pool. We have our own clubs, our own schools. We have our own cars. And as we withdraw into the private opulence, we have less and less incentive to invest in public services…
This one statistic that I calculated just blew me away. So a recent study was published and it showed that if the top 1% of Americans just paid the taxes they owed, not paid more taxes, … we as a nation could raise an additional $175 billion every year. That is just about enough to pull everyone out of poverty, every parent, every child, every grandparent. So we clearly have the resources to do this. It is not hard.

Matthew Desmond is a MacArthur Fellow and a principal investigator of the Eviction Lab, a research project focusing on poverty, city life, housing insecurity, public policy, racial inequality and ethnography. (Barron Bixler/Penguin Random House)
This is a rough estimate. I arrive at this number by looking at everyone under the poverty line, calculating the average it would take to just bring them over the poverty line and adding that all up. It’s pretty equivalent to what we could earn by just enforcing fair taxes at the very top of the market. What else could we do with $175 billion? We could more than double our investment in affordable housing. We could reestablish the extended child tax credit that we rolled out during COVID. … [That]was basically a check for middle and low-income families with kids. That’s all it was. And that simple intervention cut child poverty almost in half in six months. We could bring that back again with $175 billion and still have money left over.
With a bit of sarcasm…if poverty were eliminated, the rich would have to clean their homes, etc. themselves.
A good laugh was had. I’ve heard people who work for rich people tell me about how the rich live. Apparently most of them are hideous slobs who can’t figure out how to do anything for themselves.
…a.k.a. as the parasites of society.
The answer is already in the Nordic countries. Instead of Cutthroat Capitalism they have what’s known as Cuddly Capitalism. Nordic countries still have millionaires and billiaonres but their fortunes are not as malignant and bloated as Walton, Koch, Gates, Musk, et al.
The much maligned ‘social democracy’ where tax monies are used to benefit all.
Desmond was one of the non-historians who contributed to the 1619 project. Good to see he’s continuing to expand his area of expertise.
Who is the gatekeeper that determines whether a person is an historian or non-historian?
Duane,
Ever notice how certain people never get upset with economists giving so-called “expert” public health advice that they like (like economists professing to be absolutely certain covid isn’t spread in school based on their ‘evidence’ that EXCLUDED (!!) virtually all crowded urban schools filled with families who live in small apartments in multi-generational households with vulnerable grandparents?
I mean why would anyone be bothered by an economist giving advice that could lead to extremely strained hospitals and health care resources that would lead to excess mortality in the hundreds of thousands?
That’s not nearly as disturbing as the thought that rich people might be subjected to the extreme hardship of paying higher taxes, and maybe it will only cut poverty by 50% instead of eliminate it, and wouldn’t that be a real tragedy?
Almost as “tragic” as the thought that some white historians with implicit racism might feel offended that their views of America’s racist society were challenged by a Black reporter instead of by one of their respected white historian friends with the “right” cre3dentials, with whom the7 simply have civilized disagreements with.
I mean, there are tragedies and there are tragedies, and obviously some people know that averting the tragedy of rich people paying higher taxes and their higher taxes not being able to completely eradicate poverty would certainly be a huge tragedy the likes of which are rarely seen (except for the tragic hurt feelings of white historians who didn’t like the 1619 Project and feared for our country if the people who support violent insurrection were unable to get their way and ban the 1619 Project completely). Not like some poor immigrant families who end up being last in line for healthcare which is just not relevant, says the economist who says she knows all about public health because she has the “data”. Just like she said she had the data in her acclaimed dissertation (whose findings – like her covid “data” – made some influential white men very happy) which turned out to be totally wrong, but that didn’t stop her denying it for years.
Oh yes, give me a sociologist making the “dangerous” point that rich people paying higher taxes is a good thing, instead of an “economist” claiming they are experts on public health using flawed and faulty “data” they falsely imply is irrefutable.
Or a right wing racist who claims that banning the 1619 Project is not censorship, but criticizing anything the right wing likes is “censorship” that needs to be banned.
NYC public school parent
Spot on but you could have stopped after the “Black reporter”. (smiley face. )
You left out his other favorite economist. Peter Orravan. with his reams of data on the the effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine, As well as proof of a Lab Leak and election fraud.
.
Joel,
sorry, I gotta be me : )
And also, economics with a documented history of using flawed data who are treated as experts in public health and do great harm outrages me.
^^^ECONOMISTS with a documented history
My favorite progressive Economist is Dean Baker. Baker actually got the Housing Bubble and collapse right in 2008,actually a few years before. He likes to say : Economics is one of the few fields where those who are constantly wrong get to keep their Jobs.
Yep, and those willing to admit when they are wrong, or who get it right, are marginalized like Paul Krugman.
I wouldn’t exactly say that Krugman is marginalized. He won a Nobel Prize.
The US needs to offer public, universal healthcare for all. We are the only industrialized nation that has failed to deliver it even though a majority are now in favor of it. We spend more for healthcare per capita than any other nation, and we often have worse outcomes. Big Insurance and Big Pharma are fleecing our people while healthcare CEOs make millions of dollars each year. Medical debt is the #1 cause of bankruptcy in this country. Politicians propose universal healthcare during election cycles. After elections the proposals go nowhere because the 1% oppose it, and they pull the politicians’ strings.
The poor in this country are largely ignored. The federal minimum wage has remained at $7.25 per hour because the corporations and 1% want that number to remain so low. Our economic policies for the last forty years have done nothing for the working class and poor. The rich have become richer, and the poor, poorer. The rich and powerful write the rules by which everyone else lives. Unless we can vote for political leaders that believe in progressive, inclusive economic policies that include all Americans, the poor and working class will continue to be ignored. We need to figure out a way to get the money out of politics. Only then can we truly be a democracy.
BTW, Michael Harrington’s book ‘The Other America’ literally “woke” me up in the 1960s. Perhaps Michael Desmond can have the same impact on a new generation.
Awful Lot Of Cash just blowing in the wind.
These Families of Means crash bank after bank.
And don’t pay taxes.
These 10 Funds Had Over $100 MILLION EACH!
In Credit Suisse High Risk Bonds.
Pimco Income Fund/First Trust Preferred Securities/Nuveen Preferred Securities/Vanguard High-Yield Corporate/Pimco Gis Capital Securities/Pimco Gis Income/Invesco At1/Algebris Financial/Principal Preferred Securities/Alliancebernstein.
The $100M Each Is Now Completely WORTHLESS!
PIMCO’s Income Fund Took The Biggest Hit.
Add on First Republic, SVB, Signature, Silvergate and I think we can fully fund every public school program in the USA.
Yes. How many yachts does one need? How many homes, cars, etc. When you add into the equation the amount we spend on what is called “defense,” you see where our wealth goes. Unfortunately, all our major media are owned by the folks with the multiple yachts, so we rarely get a glimpse of Desmond’s facts. Thank you, Diane, for this information.
The affluent need to really care about everyone else before this nation will ever have a taxing system that is fair for everyone. The affluent, many who are the elected leadership of this nation, need to walk the walk in taking care of people at all level of economic status and quit just talking the talk at election time.
Right now the affluent are more concerned about not allowing “wokeness” in this nation than they are helping to provide a nation where all individuals have an equal opportunity to an acceptable standard of living. They do not want the general population to know and understand what is going on in this nation now or in the passed. Keep people dumb and dumber so that they will stay quietly in their place and not cause trouble.
I have read Matthew Desmond’s “Evicted” and highly recommend it. Can’t wait to read this one. How he uncovers the brutal truth of poverty in America is simple and gut wrenching. I have recommended his work so often I should get a commission!
Thank you!
This is a profound article. Sure would like the author to be featured on 60 Minutes and more outlets. Our country is being destroyed by the 1% and Citizens United. Tragic for everyone and especially our democracy.