Poverty/Crime

Evidence on poverty, crime, addiction, public assistance, neighborhood conditions, and the pathways connecting disadvantage to health, education, work, and family outcomes. Coverage evaluates trends, causes, and policy responses.

AI Summary. Racial disparities in US crime, arrest, and prison admission rates have declined across offence types, driven by reductions among Black Americans. Black-White disparity in drug-offence prison admissions fell from 12x to 2.9x, attributable to a 75% drop in the Black drug admission rate, while declines for violent and property offences were smaller.

Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

From their respective recent peaks in 2000 and 2006 to 2019, prison admissions for violent crime fell 20% for Whites and 43% for Blacks. Race-specific NIBRS estimates suggest actual violent crime fell 18% and 47%, respectively.

Why are racial gaps in US arrests and imprisonment narrowing?

Core argument: Black–White disparity in drug-offence prison admission rates fell from 12 to 1 in 2000 to 2.9 to 1 in 2019, attributed almost entirely to a 75% drop in the Black prison admission rate for drug offences.

From their respective peaks [2000 for whites, 2006 for blacks], prison admission rates for violent crime fell 20% for Whites and 43% for Blacks. [Because UCR crime totals do not identify offender race, the authors use the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which records offender race as reported by victims, witnesses or police, to allocate national violent-crime totals by race. NIBRS contains about three times as many violent offenders as arrestees. As a check on crimes not reported to police, they use National Crime Victimization Survey victim reports; results are similar.] [Recorded violent crime fell 18% for Whites and 47% for Blacks See Table 2]. For Whites, the decline in prison admissions is primarily a function of a decline in crime and arrests, with case processing dampening the decline. For Blacks, the decline in violent prison admissions is exclusively attributed to a 47% reduction in violent crime, as policing and case processing trends worked against an otherwise larger decline. [Arrests per crime and prison admissions per arrest both rose slightly; See Table 2].

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Black–White disparity in drug-offence prison admission rates fell from 12 to 1 in 2000 to 2.9 to 1 in 2019, attributed almost entirely to a 75% drop in the Black prison admission rate for drug offences.
  2. Racial disparities in crime, arrest, and prison admission rates have declined across all offence types since about 2000, largely attributable to reductions in crime, arrests, and imprisonment among Blacks.
  3. Declining drug admissions accounted for 53% of the overall drop in Black prison admission rates, while for Whites 62% of the decline came from property offences, with violent (20%) and drug (19%) admissions contributing roughly equally.

AI Summary. The official U.S. poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2%, a third consecutive annual decline and among the lowest on record, with 34.5m people in poverty. Poverty rates hit historic lows for Hispanic individuals, down 1.2 points to 13.9%, and children under 18, down 1.0 point to 13.4%.

Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

According to the Census Bureau, the poverty rate in the US fell .5pp in 2025 to 10.2%, one of the lowest rates on record. The poverty rate for children fell to a historical low of 13.4%. Census’s income measure does not include taxes or non-cash government transfers.

Is the U.S. poverty rate falling to record lows?

Core argument: The official U.S. poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2% in 2025, the third consecutive annual decline and one of the lowest rates on record, with 34.5 million people in poverty.

In 2025, the official poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2%, the third consecutive annual decline and one of the lowest rates on record. There were 34.5 million people in poverty in 2025. Poverty rates for Hispanic individuals and children under age 18 both fell to historic lows in 2025. Between 2024 and 2025, the poverty rate for Hispanic individuals fell 1.2 percentage points to 13.9%. The child poverty rate fell 1 percentage point to 13.4%.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The official U.S. poverty rate fell 0.5 percentage points to 10.2% in 2025, the third consecutive annual decline and one of the lowest rates on record, with 34.5 million people in poverty.
  2. The poverty rate for Hispanic individuals fell 1.2 percentage points to 13.9% between 2024 and 2025, a historic low.
  3. The poverty rate for children under age 18 fell 1.0 percentage point to 13.4% in 2025, a historic low.

AI Summary. Comparing weighted survey estimates with targets built from published administrative totals, the authors find that household survey means of income received are systematically biased downward, with the understatement reaching 40% or more for nearly half the measures examined. Bias is under 15% for Social Security benefits but exceeds 40% for pensions, unemployment insurance, and food stamps.

Date Posted:

CPS reports of receipts in dollar terms are 40–60% below administrative benchmarks for income sources such as SNAP and pensions. Linked records show most of the gap comes from recipients reporting no receipt at all, not underestimating amounts.

How large is the downward bias in household survey income estimates?

Core argument: Total survey error in the Current Population Survey from 1984 to 2022 is almost always negative for both recipients and dollars, indicating survey means are biased downward, with bias of 40% or more for nearly half the variables.

To directly measure bias in survey estimates, we calculate the difference between the weighted survey estimate and the survey target constructed from published totals [TSE or total survey error], using public-data adjustments for intentional coverage differences for average dollars received and the recipient share of the population across our income sources. Figures 1 and 2 summarize TSE in the CPS from 1984 to 2022, expressed as a share of the survey target for our measures of recipients (seven income sources) and dollars (eight income sources). In levels, TSE is almost always negative for both recipients and dollars (with SSI dollars an exception in recent years), indicating that survey means are systematically biased downward. For nearly half of the variables the bias is 40% or more. Yet, there is substantial heterogeneity across income sources. TSE tends to be more modest for SSA programs (specifically OASDI and OASI, for which the net bias is below 15% for recipients and dollars), while it is much larger for income sources such as pensions, UI, and SNAP (for which the net understatement exceeds 40%).

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Total survey error in the Current Population Survey from 1984 to 2022 is almost always negative for both recipients and dollars, indicating survey means are biased downward, with bias of 40% or more for nearly half the variables.
  2. Net understatement exceeds 40% for pensions, unemployment insurance, and SNAP, while net bias for the Social Security programs OASDI and OASI stays below 15% for both recipients and dollars.
  3. Bias is measured as the difference between the weighted survey estimate and a survey target built from published totals, with public-data adjustments for intentional coverage differences across seven income sources for recipients and eight for dollars.

AI Summary. A large survey found symptoms of cannabis use disorder rose to more than 9% of men and nearly 6% of women, up from about 7% and 5% three years earlier, as cannabis use increased among adults overall. About 30% of cannabis users showed disorder symptoms, versus under 20% of drinkers for alcohol.

Date Posted:

A study of 186,823 Americans found 26% of men and 21% of women reported using cannabis in 2024, up 4 and 3pp respectively from 2021; 9% of men and 6% of women reported symptoms of cannabis use disorder.

Is problem cannabis use rising as more Americans use the drug?

Core argument: More than 9% of men reported symptoms of cannabis use disorder in 2024, up from about 7% in 2021, while prevalence among women rose to nearly 6% from about 5%, according to a large study.

A growing number of Americans say their cannabis use is problematic, according to a large new study [which found] more than 9% of the men reported symptoms of cannabis use disorder in 2024, up from about 7% in 2021. The prevalence of cannabis use disorder also rose among women, increasing to nearly 6% in 2024, up from about 5% in 2021. Symptoms of the disorder include not being able to cut back or quit, or continuing to use the drug despite it leading to interpersonal problems. Overall, cannabis use rose among all adults during this time. In 2024, 26% of men reported using the drug, up from 22% in 2021. Among women, 21% said they used cannabis in 2024, up from nearly 18% in 2021. Of the survey participants who said they used cannabis, about 30% showed symptoms consistent with cannabis use disorder. Those findings suggested that those who used cannabis were at higher risk of developing problematic use than those who drank alcohol, as fewer than 20% of those who reported drinking in the survey showed symptoms of alcohol use disorder.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. More than 9% of men reported symptoms of cannabis use disorder in 2024, up from about 7% in 2021, while prevalence among women rose to nearly 6% from about 5%, according to a large study.
  2. Cannabis use rose among U.S. adults, with 26% of men reporting use in 2024 versus 22% in 2021, and 21% of women versus nearly 18%.
  3. About 30% of survey participants who used cannabis showed symptoms consistent with cannabis use disorder, compared with fewer than 20% of those who reported drinking showing symptoms of alcohol use disorder, suggesting higher risk of problematic use.

AI Summary. US communities more exposed to opioid marketing experienced lower population growth, driven mainly by out-migration of college-educated adults, alongside higher fertility among non-college-educated mothers that partially offset the decline. The authors attribute the selective migration response to eroded local quality of life, including addiction, homelessness, and strained public services.

Date Posted:

Commuting zones with high cancer mortality in 1996, and thus more exposed to Purdue’s OxyContin marketing, saw lower population growth via selective out‑migration of college‑educated adults, partially offset by higher fertility among non‑college mothers.

How does opioid exposure reshape local population growth and composition?

Core argument: Using 1996 cancer mortality as a proxy for where pharmaceutical companies initially concentrated OxyContin marketing, the authors find communities more exposed to the opioid epidemic experienced lower population growth, driven primarily by out-migration among college-educated adults.

To measure exposure to opioid shocks, we use 1996 cancer mortality as a proxy for local exposure to the opioid epidemic. The size of the cancer pain market in the mid-1990s was a key determinant of where pharmaceutical companies initially concentrated their marketing efforts for opioids. Using this quasi exogenous variation in local exposure to Purdue Pharma’s marketing of OxyContin, we show that communities more exposed to the epidemic experienced lower population growth, driven primarily by increased out-migration among college-educated adults. In the opposite direction, the opioid epidemic induced substantial increases in fertility, concentrated among non-college educated mothers, which by the end of our period partially offset these population declines. Mortality rises sharply in proportional terms [but] the modest absolute increase has only a minimal effect on population growth. These shifts reveal how the epidemic contributed to growing regional demographic divergence within the United States. Beyond disrupting labor-market opportunities, it eroded the amenity value of places. Communities most exposed to the crisis were characterized by rising addiction, homelessness, neighborhood disorder, and a strain on public services, reducing local quality of life. This deterioration in local amenities helps explain why the migration response we document is both sizable and selective.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Using 1996 cancer mortality as a proxy for where pharmaceutical companies initially concentrated OxyContin marketing, the authors find communities more exposed to the opioid epidemic experienced lower population growth, driven primarily by out-migration among college-educated adults.
  2. The opioid epidemic induced substantial fertility increases concentrated among non-college-educated mothers, which by the end of the study period partially offset population declines.
  3. Mortality rose sharply in proportional terms but the modest absolute increase had only minimal effect on population growth, and the authors attribute the sizable, selective migration response to eroded local amenities including rising addiction, homelessness, neighborhood disorder, and strained public services.

AI Summary. The share of the US population receiving food stamps doubled from 6% to 12% over roughly 25 years, with real costs per capita rising 179% to $279 a year, though both remain below their post-Great-Recession peak. Households with an elderly person now outnumber those with a child, reversing the early-2000s pattern.

Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

About 40mm Americans, 12% of the population, receive SNAP benefits, up from 6% in 2000. In 2023, only 34% of these households included children, down from 49% in 2010, while 36% contained an elderly person, up from 16% in FY2010.

How have food stamp enrollment, costs, and recipient households changed?

Core argument: The share of the U.S. population receiving SNAP doubled from 6% in FY2000 to 12% in FY2025, while real SNAP costs per capita rose 179%, from roughly $100 to $279 per year in 2024 dollars.

Comparing FY2000 with FY2025, the share of the population receiving SNAP doubled from 6% to 12%, while real SNAP costs per capita increased by 179%—from roughly $100 per year to $279 (in 2024 dollars). Despite this growth, per capita participation and costs in FY2025 remained below their pre-pandemic peak in 2013, which coincided with the aftermath of the Great Recession and changes in eligibility and other policies stemming from the 2008 Farm Bill. SNAP is countercyclical, meaning that all else equal, the number of people receiving SNAP should rise during recessions because of increased unemployment and decline as the economy recovers, [though] overall SNAP participation has grown faster than changes in the unemployment rate alone would predict. Over the long run, and especially since FY2020 (due to the Thrifty Food Plan’s increase in the maximum SNAP benefit), costs per capita have not returned to prerecession levels after a period of high unemployment. In FY2023, the share of SNAP households containing an elderly person (36%) exceeded the share containing a child (34%) for the first time. This was a sharp departure from the early 2000s, when more than half of SNAP households contained a child and less than 20% included an elderly person (Figure 2).

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The share of the U.S. population receiving SNAP doubled from 6% in FY2000 to 12% in FY2025, while real SNAP costs per capita rose 179%, from roughly $100 to $279 per year in 2024 dollars.
  2. In FY2023, the share of SNAP households containing an elderly person reached 36%, exceeding the 34% containing a child for the first time, against the early 2000s when over half contained a child and under 20% included an elderly person.

AI Summary. High school varsity athletes are absent about 1.37 percentage points less often than non-athletes over the school year, nearly 20% lower, after controlling for factors linked to both sports participation and attendance. Athletes' absence rates fall further while their sport is in season, which the authors argue suggests participation itself improves attendance.

Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database

The absentee rate of Indiana high school students, ~23% of whom played a varsity sport, was ~20% lower for those who participated in varsity athletics than for non-athletes. The effect was stronger when an athlete’s particular sport was in season.

Does playing high school varsity sports reduce student absenteeism?

Core argument: High school varsity athletes' absence rate across the school year was 1.37 points lower than non-athletes', a reduction of almost 20%, after controlling for factors that matter for both sports participation and attendance.

We find that varsity sports participation is strongly associated with better student attendance, and we argue it is plausible that varsity sports participation causes better attendance. When we control for a number of factors that we know matter for both sports participation and attendance, we continue to find that varsity athletes are absent less often than their peers across the entire year. Across the school year, athletes’ absence rate was 1.37 points lower than non-athletes’. That’s a reduction of almost 20%. The broad pattern shown in Table 1 is that students from more advantaged groups were more likely to participate in varsity sports and less likely to be absent from school. It’s thus no surprise that, in the raw data, there is an association between playing varsity sports and having good attendance (Figure 3). But is that because students who attend school more reliably are more likely to play sports or because playing sports leads to better attendance? One way to tease out the answer is to compare varsity athletes' attendance during their sports seasons with their attendance the rest of the year. Not only do varsity athletes have lower annual absence rates—especially unexcused absences—than non-athletes, but [Figure 3 and Figure 4] show that their absence rates fall further when their sport is in season, [which suggests at least some causal effect].

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. High school varsity athletes' absence rate across the school year was 1.37 points lower than non-athletes', a reduction of almost 20%, after controlling for factors that matter for both sports participation and attendance.
  2. Varsity athletes' absence rates fall further when their sport is in season, which the authors argue suggests at least some causal effect of participation on attendance.
  3. Students from more advantaged groups were more likely to play varsity sports and less likely to be absent, producing an association in the raw data between varsity participation and good attendance.

AI Summary. An analysis classifying $4.4tn of $7tn in federal spending by age finds retirees aged 65 and older receive $2.7tn, 38.6% of total outlays and 61.9% of age-assignable spending, versus $1.2tn for working-age adults and $449bn for those under 26. Social Security and Medicare account for 80% of age-assignable spending on older adults.

Date Posted:
Is Database:
Database
Is Important:
Important

In 2025, of the 62.5% of Federal spending that is age-assignable on a per-capita basis, US retirees aged 65+ were given $43,700, working-age adults 26–64 got $7,300, and children and young adults got $4,300.

How is federal spending distributed across age groups?

Core argument: Retirees aged 65 and older receive $2.7 trillion of federal spending in fiscal 2025, equal to 38.6% of total outlays and 61.9% of age-assignable spending, versus $1.2 trillion for working-age adults aged 26–64.

We trace spending items within 52 general spending categories, totalling $7T for the 2025 Fiscal Year. We are able to classify a total of $4.4T across three broad age categories and assign the remaining $2.6T to an all-ages residual. Retirees (adults age 65 and older) receive $2.7T, equal to 38.6% of total federal outlays and 61.9% of age-assignable spending. Working-age adults (ages 26-64) receive $1.2T (27.9% of age-assignable), and children and young adults (under age 26) receive $449B (10.3%). The dominance of the retiree category reflects two programs above all others: Social Security and Medicare. Social Security directs $1.3T to retirees, and Medicare sends $835B. Together, they account for 80% of all age-assignable spending on older adults. But the retiree total extends beyond these two entitlements. Federal employee retirement benefits ($169B), housing assistance for older households, Medicaid long-term-care spending, and VA medical care all contribute, making the federal budget more retiree-focused than a Social Security–only lens would suggest.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Retirees aged 65 and older receive $2.7 trillion of federal spending in fiscal 2025, equal to 38.6% of total outlays and 61.9% of age-assignable spending, versus $1.2 trillion for working-age adults aged 26–64.
  2. Children and young adults under age 26 receive $449 billion, or 10.3% of age-assignable federal spending, out of $4.4 trillion classified by age within a $7 trillion budget, with $2.6 trillion assigned to an all-ages residual.
  3. Social Security directs $1.3 trillion and Medicare $835 billion to retirees, together 80% of age-assignable spending on older adults, with federal employee retirement benefits ($169 billion), housing assistance, Medicaid long-term care, and VA medical care contributing further.