The purpose of this disclosure is to explain how we make money without charging you for our content.
Our mission is to help people at any stage of life make smart financial decisions through research, reporting, reviews, recommendations, and tools.
Earning your trust is essential to our success, and we believe transparency is critical to creating that trust. To that end, you should know that many or all of the companies featured here are partners who advertise with us.
Our content is free because our partners pay us a referral fee if you click on links or call any of the phone numbers on our site. If you choose to interact with the content on our site, we will likely receive compensation. If you don't, we will not be compensated. Ultimately the choice is yours.
Opinions are our own and our editors and staff writers are instructed to maintain editorial integrity, but compensation along with in-depth research will determine where, how, and in what order they appear on the page.
To find out more about our editorial process and how we make money, click here.
Over a lifetime, most Americans will experience at least a year of relative poverty, says a new study.
Between the ages of 25 and 60, over 60% of the population at some point sees an annual income that puts them in the bottom 20% of earners. About 40% will live for a year or more in the bottom 10%
The study’s co-authors, Thomas Hirschl of Cornell University and Mark Rank of Washington University in St. Louis, released a somewhat similar report earlier this year that looked at fluidity at the top of the income spectrum. It found that 70% of Americans will spend at least a year in the top 20% of income by the time they are 60.
Placing the two reports side-by-side shows that income inequality isn’t as static or simple as the haves and have-nots. There are also a lot of people who can be called the have-right-nows. “I think the real danger is that people feel insecurity at the top and bottom,” says Hirschl.
That insecurity, he argues, has helped fuel two seemingly disparate movements: Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party.
“Insecurity rules large in the human psyche,” he says. “People feel like ‘My problem is a serious problem, and I want the rules to change so I don’t have this problem anymore.'”
Acknowledging the fluidity between the upper and lower echelons of income distribution offers a more nuanced approach to conversations about inequality. “We see very clearly that people have periods of hardship,” Hirschl. “So having a way of distributing goods and services, and dealing with economic insecurity and social inequality, are real questions facing the majority,”
The study is based on data collected regularly by the University of Michigan’s Panel Study of Income Dynamics from 1968 to 2011. It’s measure of poverty isn’t the same as the government’s poverty threshold, an absolute measure based on the ability to meet basic needs. Instead, it’s a relative measure, which Hirschl says matters more “in the context of rising inequality.”