# data[].attributes.body
Such a small percentage of people own most of the world's wealth, raising the topic of economic mobility. Wealthy individuals can use their wealth to invest in assets and businesses, which keeps them rich. However, this limits opportunities for the rest of the population and puts them at a disadvantage. If more wealthy people invested in projects that helped the middle class, working class, and people living in poverty, then we would see the wealth gap start to close, and economic growth would rise.

# data[].attributes.body
This video touches on the idea that the rich keep the poor at a disadvantage so that they can benefit in their own lives. The focus need not be on 'Why are they poor?' but instead, 'How did this happen? What can we do to make a change and prevent people from living in poverty?'

# data[].attributes.body
There is a huge gap between education and income inequality. Our society is stuck in a vicious circle: Poor education limits job opportunities, which leads to low-paying jobs or unemployment. This keeps families impoverished and widens the gap between education and income inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
This chart represents the systemic inequalities and disparities in wealth distribution between racial groups. The difference between the average and median wealth of White and Black households highlights the long-standing effects of historical injustices, such as slavery, segregation, and discriminatory policies that have contributed to economic disadvantages for Black communities. The significant wealth gap indicates differences in income and a lack of access to resources, opportunities for wealth, and social mobility.

# data[].attributes.body
To me, this photo illustrates the political power held by the elite and the fact that wealthy people don't see or understand the wealth imbalances in our society. The rich man is saying, "What?" as if he doesn't understand why the other people are upset.

# data[].attributes.body
Some people are born into wealthy families, while others are born into poverty. Those born into poverty are immediately at a disadvantage and do not have access to nearly as many resources as others. Understanding this concept and working towards correcting it will ensure a healthy and equally high quality of life for all.

# data[].attributes.body
The chart displays a significant wealth disparity between White, non-Hispanic, and Black householders in 2021. It compares the distribution of net worth between White, non-Hispanic, and Black householders across various net worth brackets and consistently shows a higher percentage of Black householders in lower net worth brackets and a higher percentage of White, non-Hispanic householders in higher net worth brackets. The chart highlights a significant inequality in wealth distribution between the two racial groups and shows a vast difference in the concentration of wealth.

# data[].attributes.body
This image illustrates health inequality worldwide. Income and social status affect people's access to healthcare and nutrition. If you are wealthy, you can afford nutritious foods and get proper healthcare. However, if you are living in poverty, you likely live in a food desert, have little to no access to nutritious foods, and have a difficult time receiving healthcare. The images show the vast differences between the poor and wealthy people, and the inequality that they face when needing basic human care.

# data[].attributes.body
Purchasing power has gone down for the younger generation. Prices and rates are going up, and assets are being kept under the belt of the older generation who bought when prices were fair. Now, the younger generation is struggling to make ends meet, even with a college degree, and even opting out of having children because they can not take on the financial responsibility.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo represents the different challenges people face depending on their socioeconomic status. The upper class has the privilege of expensive clothing and pets and luxuries like nice food and drinks. Meanwhile, those living in poverty are forced to work with minimum resources to provide for themselves and their families, often restricting them from things such as food, clothing, healthcare, or transportation.

# data[].attributes.body
This CNN chart shows the percentage difference between rich and poor in regard to education and life expectancy. Socioeconomic status can impact access to higher education, which contributes to better job opportunities and higher income. Socioeconomic factors affect education, as well as overall health and longevity. This type of inequality persists throughout generations.

# data[].attributes.body
Some people are so out of touch with reality and what some people must go through to survive. While some people were rich and sad that they didn't receive a designer brand until they were teenagers, a much larger percentage of people are unaware of... They are unaware of the large percentage of people who will never be able to buy a house, even if they are working 40+ hours a week. They are unaware that even a chance at affordable housing programs takes years. The world is not built to support people who are making less than a specific dollar amount.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo represents the upper and lower classes. In today's world, many people live in poverty and struggle to make ends meet. Meanwhile, an entire upper-class community is unaware of what others are dealing with or chooses to ignore it.

# data[].attributes.body
The lack of food access and security disparities across the United States are continuous issues. The map reflects the underlying socioeconomic factors, such as poverty levels, unemployment rates, and access to resources like transportation and grocery stores. Areas with high food insecurity often correlate with marginalized communities that face barriers such as racial and economic inequalities.

# data[].attributes.body
Financial illiteracy is a huge issue that, if taught in schools, could change the future for many people. Living in poverty or making a low paycheck may at times be inevitable, but if people have access to knowledge of things such as high-yield savings accounts and investments, it could put them on a path to a more financially secure future.

# data[].attributes.body
Generational wealth can be a considerable disadvantage or advantage many people must endure. Suppose someone is born into a family living in poverty. In that case, they automatically will have less access to resources such as housing, food, healthcare, and education, which will likely lead them to a less fulfilling life. Others are born into a life of wealth that automatically grants them privileges in the form of money, healthcare, food, jobs, and housing.

# data[].attributes.body
It is mind-boggling to see the contrast between adults and their share of wealth. Wealth inequality in the U.S. has kept generations of families living in poverty and unable to climb the ladder to success. Making changes to policies to create equal access to education and job opportunities can be a great start to closing the wealth gap.

# data[].attributes.body
100% death tax?! It's not a bad idea. The idea of circulating your money back into the economy is empowering, especially if it can allow "a more even starting line" for individuals, especially if it keeps the money from going back into the hands of the government—aka, the rich!

# data[].attributes.body
Addressing food insecurity requires empathy, understanding, and a willingness to make a change. Advocating for affordable housing and increasing funding for food assistance programs can make a huge difference in closing the gap between all races/ethnicities and food insecurity.

# data[].attributes.body
Tupac says it bet! Understanding how money reaches people can completely change the way our society runs. The top 1% has more money than they know what to do with, yet they often won't help or even acknowledge someone in need.

# data[].attributes.body
Treating every individual as if they have come from the same background and have access to the same resources does not help our society grow. Instead, it holds people back from opportunities that could catapult them and their families into a successful life. Understanding that each individual has different strengths and not holding them back by their weaknesses or differences can result in a considerable turnover in success rates.

# data[].attributes.body
It is inhumane that only 1/3rd of households using housing vouchers are actually protected by non-discrimination laws. Bringing awareness to this issue so that people know such a large percentage is unprotected can make a huge difference. Advocating for stronger legislation that could push laws for better protection for those using housing vouchers could be a great way to ensure security.

# data[].attributes.body
"The billionaires are buying out the millionaires." People making a six-figure salary are even being put at a disadvantage due to the rich taking over areas and inflating the value of property and goods. As seen in the video, the median salary of this Wyoming town is $108,000, but as the even richer people begin to buy vacation homes in their town, the value of their dollar begins to drop, and the locals are forced to move to a more affordable area.

# data[].attributes.body
Corporate America profits from so much and often pays its employees minimum wage. Because its employees are paid minimum wage, it often turns to government assistance programs that use American tax dollars. Teachers also pay their employees an unlivable wage and allow them to claim government assistance while banking on profit.

# data[].attributes.body
Wealth disparities are constantly growing across different racial groups and income levels in the U.S., with income inequality being a huge contributing factor. Income inequality keeps the poor living in poverty because they can not access resources to bridge the gap to wealth., whereas the rich get richer. Policy needs to change more than ever before to ensure that Americans have equal access to resources and opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nine Charts about Wealth Inequality in America (Updated)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These nine charts illustrate what’s behind growing wealth disparities, particularly the racial wealth gap.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Gap Between Rich And Poor Americans' Health Is Widening

# data[].attributes.subject
The Gap Between Rich And Poor Americans' Health Is Widening

# data[].attributes.body
Systematic inequalities affect people's health without them even realizing it. Factors such as zip code, income, race, and job status shape health outcomes by providing or limiting access to resources. Even though we have advanced technology and public health resources, the health gap is growing, which implies systemic inequality at play. Not having health accessible to everyone is a social injustice!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Income inequality in the U.S. has grown over the past several decades. And as the gap between rich and poor yawns, so does the gap in their health, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open Friday.

The study drew from annual health survey data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1993 to 2017, including around 5.5 million Americans ages 18-64. The researchers focused on two questions from the survey recommended by the CDC as reliable indicators of health: 1. Over the last 30 days, how many healthy days have you had? 2. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate your overall health?

What they found: Across all groups, Americans' self-reported health has declined since 1993. And race, gender and income play a bigger role in predicting health outcomes now than they did in 1993. Overall, white men in the highest income bracket were the healthiest group.

"And actually, what's happening to the health of wealthier people is that it's remaining relatively stagnant, but the health of the lowest income group is declining substantially over time," says Frederick Zimmerman, the study's lead author and a professor at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health.

The researchers looked at differences in health between white and black people and between three income brackets. They assessed the degree to which race, income and gender influenced health outcomes over time, a measure they called "health justice."

Finally, they calculated the gap between people's health outcomes and that of the most privileged demographic: high-income white men.

"Results of this analysis suggest that there has been a clear lack of progress on health equity during the past 25 years in the United States," the researchers write.

Income was the biggest predictor of differences in health outcomes, according to Zimmerman. Health differences between the highest income group and lowest income group increased "really quite dramatically," he says.

Things weren't all negative. On one measure - disparity between health outcomes for black and white people - the gap between health outcomes narrowed significantly.

But gender and race still influenced health outcomes.

Lisa Cooper, a Bloomberg distinguished professor in health equity at Johns Hopkins University, called the study's conclusions "frustrating, but honestly not surprising."

She says that future research could do more to examine the context of these demographic factors - for instance, not just what race somebody is, but whether the person lives in a segregated neighborhood.

Limitations of the study include the fact that the authors were not able to look at factors like immigration status and sexual orientation.

"This study demonstrates a stunning lack of progress at the macro level," says Eileen Moore, a physician and associate professor of medicine at Georgetown University's School of Medicine and medical director of Georgetown University's Health Justice Alliance.

Vicki Girard, a professor of law at Georgetown and co-director of Georgetown University's Health Justice Alliance, says the study's large size and longevity make it significant. She says its findings should be a "call to action" on addressing broader societal inequality.

Research shows that health care accounts for only 10% to 20% of overall health outcomes. Social determinants, or our living conditions and the factors driving them, account for the rest.

For instance, studies have found that low education is attributable to the same number of deaths as heart attacks. One 2016 study showed that the average life expectancy of U.S. men in the bottom 1% of income distribution is roughly equivalent to the life expectancy of someone in Sudan or Pakistan, whereas men in the top 1% of income outlive the average man in all other countries.

To make real progress on health inequities, communities have to address life conditions that contribute to poor health, Moore says. In their own work, Moore and Girard use legal strategies to ease the stress of their patients' lives. For instance, when patients living in public housing have problems like pest infestations or lead paint, their team finds them attorneys to hold their landlords to account.

Such approaches, Moore says, can address social determinants on a local level. But they need to be implemented more widely.

Dr. Jesus Ramirez-Valles, director of the Health Equity Institute at San Francisco State University, says he would have liked to see the study include people under 18, because that's "when health inequities settle" and become entrenched. The study looked at people of "working age," between 18 and 64 years old.

But, Ramirez-Valles says, the study does a good job of showing that when it comes to health outcomes, "it's not always [immediately] about health." He says the study's findings indicate a need for two broad policy recommendations: a revision of the minimum wage and a rethinking of our current taxation system.

"Income inequality is at the bottom of this," he says. "We need to target and attack [it] aggressively. Not only in this country, but worldwide."

Susie Neilson is an intern on NPR's Science Desk. Find her on Twitter here: @susieneilson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Gap Between Rich And Poor Americans' Health Is Widening

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Health inequities are getting worse, according to new research. Factors like income, race and gender are playing a larger role in health outcomes than they did 25 years ago.

# data[].attributes.body
Good education is a resource that should be accessible to everyone. We have all been told that if we go to school and get good grades, we can become wealthy. However, that is not the case for people living in poverty. Unequal access to education and resources is a gap that has not been closed, keeping our youth at a disadvantage.

# data[].attributes.body
This graph from the Pew Research Center shows survey results regarding the issues Americans perceive as "very big problems." Its lower ranking suggests that while economic inequality is recognized, it may not be prioritized as highly as personal issues such as healthcare costs and education. Overall, the chart reflects the current societal priorities and challenges that many Americans are facing.

# data[].attributes.body
Intersectionality in the context of food insecurity is seen in race, disability, and employment throughout the U.S. Structural barriers affect low-income neighborhoods' access to healthy food options, people with disabilities have a difficult time commuting to receive high-quality foods and affording foods due to their medical expenses, and even people who work have a hard time affording healthier food options. Intersectionality shows that there are overlapping issues of oppression and that there needs to be a change in our social system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Food Insecurity - Healthy People 2030 | odphp.health.gov

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Food insecurity is defined as a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food.1 In 2020, 13.8 million households were food insecure at some time during the year.2 Food insecurity does not necessarily cause hunger,i but hunger is a possible outcome of food insecurity.3

# data[].attributes.headline
Food Insecurity Has Economic Root Causes

# data[].attributes.subject
Food Insecurity Has Economic Root Causes

# data[].attributes.body
Food insecurity is seen throughout the U.S., mostly in female-headed households, households below the federal poverty level, and communities of color. This demonstrates social stratification as there is an unequal distribution of resources amongst different communities. Deep-rooted economic issues such as affordable housing and low wages must be addressed to close the food insecurity gap.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Food insecurity has economic root causes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To the Editor — Food insecurity is one predictor of ill health. Is food insecurity a consequence of policy decisions? Yes, in a way. Food insecurity has been linked to low wages, adverse social and economic conditions, limited access to healthy foods, residential segregation, lack of affordable housing and multiple indices of neighbourhood disadvantage. Huge racial, ethnic, economic and even geographic disparities in food insecurity were revealed and underscored by the COVID-19 pandemic. This year, the US Congress has authorized the White House to call a conference on food, nutrition, hunger and health1 to spark a national discussion of the root causes and social determinants of food insecurity, and the deepening socioeconomic divisions in health.

# data[].attributes.headline
Baby Boomers Nearly 9 Times Wealthier Than Millennials

# data[].attributes.subject
Baby Boomers Nearly 9 Times Wealthier Than Millennials

# data[].attributes.body
Inflation is at a high, making it difficult for younger generations to purchase homes and other assets. Someone working a full-time job and making minimum wage, and even a bit more, doesn't cover the cost of living in today's world. One thing that makes it even more difficult is that 'baby boomers' bought houses when they were affordable yet refuse to sell or downsize for a new generation of families. On top of that, we see more corporations buying over houses and renting them out, which takes home-buying options away from families.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Just two assets - home equity and retirement accounts - accounted for 65.2% of households' wealth in 2019.

Median home equity (the value of a home minus the mortgage balance) was $130,000, and the median household retirement account balance was $69,900.

While many households owned these assets, others did not: 38.7% of households did not own a home, and 41.2% of households did not have a retirement account.

Some commonly held assets made up a small portion of household wealth. In 2019, 95.4% of households had bank or credit union accounts. However, these accounts made up only 8.3% of total household wealth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
survey of income and program participation (sipp)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2019 Data Show Baby Boomers Nearly 9 Times Wealthier Than Millennials

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Just two assets - home equity and retirement accounts - accounted for 65.2% of households' wealth in 2019. Median home equity (the value of a home minus the mortgage balance) was $130,000, and the median household retirement account balance was $69,900.

# data[].attributes.headline
Racial Differences in Economic Security: Housing

# data[].attributes.subject
Racial Differences in Economic Security: Housing

# data[].attributes.body
There is a massive gap in homeownership rates due to a racial wealth divide. White family's homeowner rates are significantly higher than Black and Hispanic families, which suggests a mean of wealth accumulation. If minority groups have less access to homeownership, their overall economic security is affected, and generational wealth is at risk, which will keep younger generations at an automatic disadvantage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is the third installment in a series of blog posts on racial inequality produced by the Office of Economic Policy. The other posts can be found at these links: 1. Racial Inequality in the United States, 2. Racial Differences in Economic Security: The Racial Wealth Gap
In this blog post we discuss the stark differences in homeownership and housing wealth across racial and ethnic groups in the United States, which are key contributors to the persistence of the racial wealth gap and drive differences in economic security across groups.

In addition to the substantial sense of security that housing stability provides, homeownership imparts many economic benefits to households including unique access to leverage, a hedge against rising rents, tax deductions for mortgage interest and property taxes, low capital gains taxes relative to other investments, and, crucially, a vehicle for building wealth. Households outside the top wealth decile derive more wealth from housing equity than from financial assets, businesses, or other components of non-retirement wealth.

Homeownership can have some drawbacks, including high transaction costs, the lack of diversification compared to assets like index funds, the correlation of price risk with local labor market outcomes, and restricted mobility. Despite these costs to households and the macroeconomy, the benefits have largely been perceived to outweigh the costs. As such, government policy over the last century has been designed to promote homeownership by instilling additional economic benefits to homeowners in the form of the tax benefits discussed above and other policies such as tax credits for first-time homebuyers.

In this post, we begin by discussing racial disparities in rates of homeownership, their persistence over time and across the lifecycle, and their determinants. We then highlight differences in home values, housing returns, and distressed home sales across groups and conclude by showing how all of these factors combine to produce large disparities in housing equity wealth.

Homeownership

The benefits from homeownership have not been shared equally. In the second quarter of 2022, the homeownership rate for white households was 75 percent compared to 45 percent for Black households, 48 percent for Hispanic households, and 57 percent for non-Hispanic households of any other race. Like the overall racial wealth gaps, these gaps in homeownership rates have changed little over the last three decades (see Figure 1). In fact, the Black-white gap in homeownership rates was the same in 2020 as it was in 1970, just two years after the passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which sought to end racial discrimination in the housing market.

Figure 1. Racial Homeownership Gaps Over Time

Notes: Figure displays the proportion of all households that are homeowners. Hispanic includes anyone of Hispanic ethnicity regardless of race. Other includes people who are Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and American Indian or Alaska Native and those who report two or more races. Source: U.S. Census Bureau data via the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
Racial disparities in homeownership emerge early in the lifecycle and persist throughout. In 2019, white households, no matter the age of the household head, had homeownership rates at least 10 percentage points higher than Black and Hispanic households (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Racial Homeownership Gaps Over the Lifecycle, 2019

Notes: Figure displays homeownership rates by age group and race/ethnicity. Other includes people who are Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska Native, or any other race. Source: Treasury calculations using data from the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances.
Home Values and Housing Returns

In addition to racial disparities in homeownership rates, there are also significant differences in home values and housing returns-defined as the difference between what the home is sold for and the all-in costs of buying and owning the home-across races and ethnic groups. Research suggests that the ratio of the average white household's home value to the average Black household's home value today is 2.5, the same as it was in 1970, and that housing returns are 3.7 and 2.0 percentage points lower for Black and Hispanic homeowners, respectively, than for white homeowners.

Differences in housing returns may be driven by differences in the costs of purchasing a home or in home appreciation. With respect to housing costs, there is evidence that Black and Hispanic homebuyers have paid more than white homebuyers for similar quality homes and bear a higher property tax burden than white homeowners within the same jurisdiction. At the same time, research suggests neighborhoods with higher shares of Black and Hispanic residents have experienced lower real housing appreciation, and homes in those neighborhoods are more likely than homes in majority non-Hispanic white neighborhoods to be appraised at values below contract prices, the latter of which could disproportionately burden Black and Hispanic refinancers. Appraisal bias is a form of discrimination which has only recently started to receive sufficient attention, and it could severely limit Black and Hispanic homeowner's ability to refinance. It is an important area for future research and policy action.

Distressed Home Sales

Racial differences in rates of distressed home sales also contribute to racial differences in housing wealth and the racial wealth gap. Distressed home sales tend to generate substantial wealth loss because most mortgage defaults occur among homeowners with positive home equity and most homes sold in foreclosure are sold at a considerable discount. Therefore, groups that are more likely to experience distressed sales have the potential to be disproportionately harmed, and, over the last three decades, rates of foreclosure have consistently been higher for Black or Hispanic households than for white households (see Figure 3).

Notably, just prior to and during the Great Recession, foreclosure rates skyrocketed for Hispanic and Black households and increased relatively modestly for white households. The preponderance of evidence that Black and Hispanic borrowers were offered higher-cost mortgage products than similarly qualified non-Hispanic white borrowers between 2004 to 2007 suggests that high-risk lending practices disproportionately directed at these groups may explain the relatively large differences in financial distress during this period. In addition, a recent study highlights the roles of higher rates of income instability and illiquidity among Black and Hispanic homeowners in explaining differences in financial distress across groups over the last several decades.

Figure 3. Racial Differences in the Quarterly Foreclosure Rate

Notes: The figure plots the quarterly foreclosure rate by race and ethnicity from a sample of homeowners with observed purchase prices in the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data. Source: Data provided by Amir Kermani. See the following paper for a detailed description of the data: Kermani, Amir, and Francis Wong. 2021. "Racial Disparities in Housing Returns." NBER Working Paper 29306.
The large increases in rates of foreclosure for Black and Hispanic households during the Great Recession led to larger losses of housing equity wealth during this period for these groups. From peak to trough prior to and during the Great Recession, total housing equity wealth for white households in the United States fell by 41 percent. In contrast, housing equity wealth fell by 51 percent for other race households, 53 percent for Black households, and over 70 percent for Hispanic households.

Overall Housing Wealth

Together, differences in the homeownership rates, home values, housing returns, and distressed home sales have contributed to large racial gaps in housing equity wealth that widen over the lifecycle (see Figure 4). The average white household and the average household of any other race possess more housing equity wealth than the average Black and Hispanic households, no matter the age of the household head. The average white household whose head is younger than 35 has $30,000 and $20,000 more in housing equity wealth than the average Black or Hispanic household in that same age group. By the time household heads are 55 or older, these gaps will have widened to $175,000 and $145,000, respectively.

Figure 4. Racial Differences in Housing Equity Wealth Over the Lifecycle, 2019

Notes: Figure displays average housing equity wealth by age group and race/ethnicity. Other includes people who are Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska native, or any other race. Source: Treasury calculations using data from the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances.
The Path Forward

The special role that homeownership plays in wealth building and economic security underscores the need to address the disparities outlined in this blog post. Owning a home continues to be the primary source of wealth for most Americans, and efforts must be made to extend the benefits of homeownership to people who have long been shut out of the market. In addition, increasing homeownership rates for Black and Hispanic households can have long-lasting effects that spread to other households and future generations as well.

Insights from economic research suggest paths forward for making homeownership more accessible, but more on the factors mentioned in this post-including discrimination in the mortgage market, disparities in down payment assistance, and appraisal bias-is needed to understand which of these paths are most relevant in our current housing market. Critically, a complete approach to addressing disparities in homeownership and housing wealth requires understanding how race interacts with fundamental outcomes in other sectors, such as the labor market and education, which we will explore in future blog posts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Racial Differences in Economic Security: Housing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the third installment in a series of blog posts on racial inequality produced by the Office of Economic Policy. The other posts can be found at these links: 1. Racial Inequality in the United States, 2.

# data[].attributes.body
Housing affordability, housing segregation, and housing quality are all factors that specifically people of color have to face. According to the website, particularly Black households are represented as low-income renters, which often puts them in segregated neighborhoods. These neighborhoods limit access to high-paying jobs, healthcare, and education, keeping them disadvantaged.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We know that people of color are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters and that people of color disproportionately struggle to pay rent compared to white households. In fact, 20% of Black households are extremely low-income renters as compared to just 6% of white households. A large part of this is persistent discrimination in the job market where, even as people of color climb the corporate ladder, they still make less than equally qualified whites. Lower wages, along with historical discrimination that prevented them from owning homes and building wealth, means that people of color are more likely to rent and are also more likely to struggle affording that rent. When people struggle to afford rent, they face greater risks of instability, eviction, and even homelessness, which research links to an array of negative life outcomes such as food insecurity, poor health, lower academic achievement, and lower economic mobility.

Housing Segregation

Across the country, opportunity varies significantly neighborhood by neighborhood (i.e., employment rates, school quality, poverty levels, income, crime, infrastructure, services, transit, health care, groceries, banks, etc.). High-opportunity neighborhoods offer children the best chance for upward mobility, but due to pervasive housing segregation, families of color are disproportionately residing in lower-opportunity areas. According to research from the Institute for Child, Youth and Family Policy at Brandeis University, most white children live in high-opportunity neighborhoods while most Black and Hispanic children live in low-opportunity neighborhoods. Frequently, high-opportunity neighborhoods are located just a few blocks away from low-opportunity neighborhoods. Housing segregation did not happen by accident, but rather through intentional public policy, such as redlining in the 1930s where Black and Brown areas were labeled by the government as "hazardous," "subversive," "undesirable," "inharmonious," and "lower grade" populations. Take, for example, that throughout the New Deal, the Federal Housing Administration subsidized home builders that were mass-producing subdivisions for white people only. These federally supported homes were explicitly prohibited from being sold to minorities.

The spatial isolation of people of color enabled policymakers to devalue and disinvest in these communities, denying them equal access to quality housing, adequate school funding, good job opportunities, healthcare access, and nutritious food options. As Pulitzer Prize-winner, Nikole Hannah-Jones, explains, "Segregation in housing is the way you can accomplish segregation in every aspect of life. Housing segregation means that certain jobs are located in certain communities, that certain grocery stores are located in certain communities; it determines where parks are located, if streets are repaired, if toxic dump sites are built nearby. Segregation accomplishes so many other inequalities because you effectively contain a population to a geographic area and suddenly all the other civil rights law don't matter."

Housing Quality

Good housing is good health. Research shows that living in a home with inadequate heating and cooling, dirty drinking water, pests, mold, lead, second-hand smoke and other known environmental hazards are highly detrimental for health. Lead exposure‒currently found in an estimated 24 million homes nationwide‒during early childhood irreversibly damages a child's brain. Mold, pests, and second-hand smoke have been shown to exacerbate asthma and other respiratory conditions.Substandard housing quality is more likely to be experienced by people of color, which in turn exacerbates racial health disparities. Again, this is all linked to the legacy of disinvestment in communities of color. Studies show that formerly redlined neighborhoods see lower life expectancy and a higher prevalence of chronic diseases today. Take also, for example, decades of zoning practices that allowed the placement of toxic industries in close proximity to Black and Brown residential neighborhoods. Today, Black households, regardless of income, are 1.5 times more likely to be exposed to environmental hazards like poor air quality.

Homelessness

When you consider the totality of past injustices, it is unfortunately not surprising that people of color are far more likely to experience housing instability and homelessness. In fact, people of color are dramatically overrepresented among those experiencing homelessness. African Americans represent 13% of the general population but are 40% of people experiencing homelessness and more than 50% of homeless families with children. Similarly, American Indians/Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, and people who identify as two or more races make up a disproportionate share of the homeless population. Hispanics make up a share of the homeless population approximately equal to their share of the general population, while Whites and Asians are significantly underrepresented.

Wealth Building

Because of the legacy of racist housing policies, people of color have been denied wealth building opportunities that were given to whites. For example, Black veterans were systematically denied the benefits of the post-World War II GI Bill, which provided generous home loans, business loans, and educational and job-training benefits to white veterans and catapulted many on the "magic carpet" to the middle class. The GI Bill remains one of the largest national programs of support in American history. According to scholar Ira Katznelson, "at no other time in American history has so much money and so many resources been put at the service of the generation completing education, entering the work force, and forming families." But across the country, Veterans Administration counselors discouraged and denied these benefits to Black veterans. In fact, of the 3,229 GI Bill home, business, and farm loans made in Mississippi throughout 1947, only two were offered to Black veterans. Many banks would not even make loans for mortgages to Black veterans, and even if they did, they were primarily for homes located in disinvested areas which meant that the properties would not appreciate in value over time. Owning a home is a primary way to build wealth in America, but a generation of Blacks were denied that opportunity. Modern day homeownership disparities between whites and Blacks are shaped by this history of discrimination.

Multi-Sector Impacts

These many racial inequities in housing cause and exacerbate racial disparities in other sectors. Take education, for example. When parents cannot afford rent, that means cutting back on extracurricular activities and learning materials which support child enrichment. Because our neighborhoods are segregated by race and income, and most kids go to school based on their neighborhood, segregated housing means segregated schools, which bodies of research show harm student learning. When kids experience asthma due to dilapidated housing conditions, they take those health problems into the classroom which distracts them from learning. When students experience housing instability and homelessness, they bounce from school to school, which means constantly having different teachers and different content, which means falling academically behind. And because government policies have enabled white families to accumulate more wealth through homeownership, they are thus able to live in wealthier communities with high numbers of other homeowners; and because schools are largely funded through local property taxes, it means that these communities have better funded schools. These threads not only exist between the housing and education sectors. Racial disparities in housing also drive and exacerbate racial disparities in criminal justice outcomes, food security, health, upward mobility, and more.

Modern Day Policies & Practices

Some modern-day housing policies and practices, while not explicitly racist, in effect continue to exacerbate racial inequities. For example, in Minneapolis, Black families earning more than $167,000 per year are less likely to be given a home loan than white families earning $42,000. Evidence shows that real estate agents today sometimes " steer" prospective home buyers into certain neighborhoods based on their race. According to a landlord survey in Dallas, only 4% of landlords in majority white zip codes accept a housing voucher, while 46% of landlords in majority Black zip codes accept housing vouchers. Moreover, we know that Hispanic renters learn about fewer available units than equally qualified whites and are shown fewer units, and the same is true for Asian renters as well.

Moreover, studies have shown that predatory lending aimed at people of color fueled the mass foreclosure crisis in 2008, which, in turn, widened the racial wealth gap. The Urban Institute estimated that Hispanic families lost 44% of their wealth between 2007 and 2010, Black families lost 31%, and White families lost 11%. Before the 2008 recession, white families were roughly four times as wealthy as nonwhite families, but by 2010, whites were roughly six times as wealthy.

Even up to present day, Black households are bearing the burden of COVID-related housing instability. In fact, according to May 2020 public opinion polling, over half (54%) of all Americans expressed concern that they will lose their housing during the pandemic if they don't get additional assistance to help cover the costs - and this concern is more acute among lower-income households and people of color (61% of households making below $40,000 say this is a concern; and 72% of African Americans and 76% of Latinos say this is a concern, compared to 43% of whites). Also, Black, Latino, and lower-income renters have been more likely to miss rent payments during the pandemic than white and higher-income renters.

Why We Need the Campaign's Policy Agenda

Our belief is that the campaign's Policy Agenda, if enacted, would mark a major leap forward in fulfilling the original goals of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 (FHA). The FHA has two main purposes: 1) to prevent discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing; and 2) to obligate the government to proactively promote housing integration. On the first goal, while there has been important progress in preventing discrimination in the housing market, there is still a long way to go. And on the second goal, when it comes to proactively promoting housing integration, few Congresses or White Houses have ever prioritized it and thus the nation has made virtually no progress at all.

To this day, race predicts one's likelihood of experiencing rental cost-burdens, homelessness, and living in low opportunity neighborhoods of concentrated poverty. Achieving genuine racial equity in housing means that race no longer predicts these outcomes. We believe that the campaign's policy agenda would help advance greater racial equity in housing, which would, in turn, help promote greater racial equity in other sectors. We acknowledge that we do not have all the answers and that the work of racial equity requires persistent, ongoing examination of the policies we push for, as well as a willingness to adjust course if necessary. We also acknowledge that our policy agenda cannot, on its own, achieve racial justice in every domain of American life - that will require large-scale concurrent change in an array of other areas too, from education to health to policing and more.

From the outset, the campaign has focused exclusively on helping households with the lowest incomes, for whom the housing crisis is most acute. Where we are pushing for the expansion of existing federal programs, such as Housing Choice Vouchers and the National Housing Trust Fund, these programs are already required to primarily serve extremely low income households. And where there are new innovations that we urge be created, such as a targeted renter's tax credit or the Emergency Assistance Fund, we always push for and embrace proposals that are specifically designed for the lowest-income people.

Explicitly Advancing Racial Equity Through Policy

Currently, federal housing policy does not prioritize extremely low-income people. In fact, quite the opposite - over the past several years, over half of federal resources for housing have gone to households making over $100,000 per year while only one-quarter have gone to households making under $40,000. As discussed earlier, due to a long legacy of racism, people of color are highly overrepresented among extremely low income renter households. Targeting more federal resources at this population could help advance racial equity (if implemented properly) and ensure that people most in need receive the most help.

But, this is not enough on its own. It is not necessarily true that reorienting federal housing resources to extremely low income households will automatically help people of color. Therefore, within each of our proposed policy solutions, we urge improvements to more intentionally advance racial equity. For example:

We are advocating for a major expansion of the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program. HCVs, as currently structured, are a proven, evidence-based model for ensuring housing stability, reducing childhood poverty, and eliminating homelessness. But, at the same time that we recommend taking the HCV program to full scale, we also recommend programmatic improvements to the existing model which would further improve effectiveness and help correct long-standing racial disparities. Most notably, as it stands today, few voucher holders live in low-poverty neighborhoods even though there are available units to them, and most families of color using vouchers live in "minority-concentrated" neighborhoods even though most voucher-affordable units are located elsewhere. Some voucher holders want to stay in their current neighborhoods to be close to family, child care, or current job, but others would like to use the voucher to move elsewhere. For those interested in moving, significant barriers stand in the way. For example, in many parts of the country, landlords routinely refuse to accept voucher holders, particularly in affluent white neighborhoods, and are often permitted by the law to do so. In Dallas, only 4% of apartment complexes in majority white zip codes accept vouchers, while 46% of complexes in majority Black zip codes accept vouchers - notably, nearly 9 in 10 Dallas voucher holders are Black. The HCV program can be improved to ensure that households are empowered to use their voucher in a neighborhood of their choosing. To that end, the OSAH campaign recently helped craft the bipartisan Family Stability and Opportunity Vouchers Act (S.3083), introduced by Senators Todd Young (R-IN) and Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). This bipartisan legislation, which should be enacted immediately, would create an additional 500,000 vouchers specifically designed for low-income families with young children who want to access neighborhoods of opportunity with high-performing schools, strong job prospects, and other resources. However, moving to a new neighborhood is not a solution for all families. Policymakers must also correct decades of historical wrongs and ensure that comprehensive revitalization plans are in place for all neighborhoods that have endured decades of intentional disinvestment. All neighborhoods should be neighborhoods of opportunity.

We are also advocating for a major expansion of the National Housing Trust Fund (HTF). As the HTF expands, we must work to ensure that newly built affordable units are located in ways that foster economically and racially inclusive communities. The HTF statute requires states to select a state agency (such as a housing finance agency or a housing department) to receive and administer HTF resources. Each state must prepare an annual Allocation Plan showing how it will distribute HTF resources and select potential recipients. Historically, other federal housing production programs have too often located units in high-poverty and minority communities, further exacerbating racial and economic segregation. This pattern cannot continue with new production programs like the HTF. Each state's HTF Allocation Plan must prioritize its statutory obligation to "affirmatively further fair housing" (AFFH) and make certain that the lowest income people have fair and affordable housing options in racially and economically integrated neighborhoods. More generally, states and localities should also work together to reduce barriers to housing development, such as restrictive zoning policies which constrain supply, increase costs, and exacerbate residential segregation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Racial Inequities in Housing - Opportunity Starts at Home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Decades of structural racism have created tremendous racial disparities in housing, and that legacy continues to shape the present landscape. Racial disparities in housing manifest in several ways: Housing Affordability We know that people of color are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters and that people of color disproportionately struggle to [...]

# data[].attributes.body
Freedom Writers is a powerful movie that follows a wealthy white teacher and her goal to improve students' lives in an impoverished area. The movie demonstrates themes of racism, poverty, crime, and discrimination. Conflict theory is seen as the teachers being wealthier and more privileged than their students; therefore, they see them as having no hope for their future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Freedom Writers (2007) Trailer #1 | Movieclips Classic Trailers

# data[].attributes.body
Healthcare in America seems to be treated as a privilege or commodity instead of a human right accessible to all citizens. Americans living in poverty and low-income households often have to choose whether to see a doctor for their illness, feed their family, or go into debt. This battle leads individuals to ignore their health and face the consequences later in life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Commonwealth Fund 2023 International Health Policy Survey collected data from nationally representative samples of noninstitutionalized adults age 18 and older in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Samples were generated using probability-based overlapping landline and mobile phone sampling designs in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the U.K. In the U.K., additional online interviews were completed via a nationally representative probabilistic panel. In Sweden and Switzerland, respondents were randomly selected from listed or nationwide population registries, and surveys were completed via landline and mobile phones, as well as online. In the U.S., three probability-based sample frames were used. Most of the interviews were conducted from address-based sample (ABS). Additional interviews were completed via a nationally representative probabilistic panel and from a sample of cell phone numbers connected to prepaid cell phones to reach populations who are typically underrepresented in ABS samples, including low-income and non-white adults. Respondents in the U.S. completed surveys via mobile phones as well as online.

International partners cosponsored surveys, and some supported expanded samples to enable within-country analyses. Final country samples ranged from 750 to 4,820 participants. The survey research firm SSRS was contracted to field the survey in the U.S. and six additional countries, as well as collaborate with fieldwork partners and oversee survey administration in the other three countries, from March to August 2023, though the field period for each country varied. SSRS also provided methodological oversight for the study as a whole, including supporting questionnaire development, consultation and design of sampling protocols, and managing the statistical weighting across countries. Response rates varied from 6 percent to 49 percent. Data were weighted using country-specific demographic variables to account for differences in sample design and probability of selection.

Because of data protection and privacy laws, data could not be provided on average annual household income in Sweden. Respondents from Sweden, therefore, were not included in this analysis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Cost of Not Getting Care: Income Disparities in the Affordability of Health Services Across High-Income Countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Survey findings from nine countries show those with below-average incomes are more likely to skip care and have medical bill problems and social service needs.

# data[].attributes.body
This website does a great job of highlighting how wealthy Americans are gaining much more money than our middle—and lower-class families. We live in a society structured to continuously give money and power to wealthy families and keep others disadvantaged from opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Guide to U.S. Economic Inequality | American Compass

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
American inequality is higher now than at any time since WWII. The gap is wide and getting wider. Read what the data show and why it matters.

# data[].attributes.headline
Income inequality affects our children’s educational opportunities

# data[].attributes.subject
Income inequality affects our children’s educational opportunities

# data[].attributes.body
Inequality will continue if social systems are not changed to favor everyone, not just the wealthy. Children who are born into poverty will likely stay in poverty as they get older because they will remain in a disadvantaged state of low income. School funding, safety, and housing are all factors that affect children's growth, well-being, and educational opportunities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
One of the clearest manifestations of growing economic inequality in our nation today is the widening educational achievement gap between the children of the wealthiest and the children of everyone else. At first glance, this sounds like an obvious outcome. After all, wealthier families are able to afford expensive private schools, or homes in wealthy public school districts with more educational resources.

But a closer look at this education achievement gap over the past 50 years or so shows that the gap only began to widen in the 1970s, right about the time that wealth and income inequality in our nation also began to grow. The past 30 years have seen a sustained rise in inequality in wages, incomes, and wealth, leading to more and more income and wealth accruing to those at the top of the economic ladder, pulling the rich further away from those on the other rungs.

At the same time, the growing educational gap became ever more apparent. In the 1980s, the gap between the reading and math skills of the wealthiest 10 percent of kids and poorest 10 percent was about 90 points on an 800-point SAT-type scale. Three decades later, the gap has grown to 125 points. This widening gap is largely due to differences in how well prepared children are for school before they enter kindergarten or even pre-kindergarten. In this era of economic inequality, wealthier parents have far more resources, both in terms of time and money, to better prepare their children to succeed in school and later in life.

This widening educational achievement gap may threaten our future economic growth. With only a select few individuals receiving the best education and enrichment, we are not effectively developing the economic potential of our future workforce. To grow our economy we must provide educational and enrichment opportunities for children across the income spectrum, rather than only a select few at the top.

Wealth and income largely define the educational gap today, more so than race and ethnicity. In the 1950s and 1960s, the opposite was true. Back then, racial discrimination in all aspects of life led to deep racial inequality. Economic inequality, in contrast, was lower than at any time in U.S. history, according to extensive research done by economists Thomas Piketty at the Paris School of Economics and Emmanuel Saez at the University of California, Berkeley. But anti-discrimination and civil rights legislation and school desegregation led to improved economic, social, and educational conditions for African Americans and other minorities beginning in the late 1960s. As a result, the gap today between white and black children is about 70 points on an 800-point SAT-type scale, 40 percent smaller than it was in the 1970s, and about half the size of the gap between rich and poor children, but still unacceptable.

The growth of the socioeconomic achievement gap appears to be largely because more affluent parents are increasingly investing more time and money in their kids' educational enrichment-and at earlier periods in their children's lives-than hard-pressed low-income and middle class families. Indeed, surveys show that the amount of time and money parents invest in their children has grown sharply over the past four decades among both affluent and non-affluent parents. But the increase in these investments has been two to three times greater among high-income families. Economists Richard Murnane of Harvard University and Greg Duncan at the University of California-Irvine find that between 1972 and 2006 the amount high-income families spent on their children's enrichment activities grew by 150 percent, while the amount spent by low-income families grew by 57 percent. In part, parents are spending more on their kids because they understand that educational success is increasingly important in today's uncertain economic times, a point that sociologist Marianne Cooper at the Clayman Institute makes in her recent book "Cut Adrift." But low- and middle-income families can't match the resources-both the money and flexible time-of the rich.

As a result, rich and poor children score very differently on school readiness tests before they enter kindergarten. Once they are in school, however, the gap grows very little-by less than 10 percent between kindergarten and high school. Thus, it appears that the academic gap is widening because rich students are increasingly entering kindergarten much better prepared to succeed in school than low- and middle-class students. To be sure, there are important differences in the quality of schools serving low- and high-income students, but these differences do not appear to be as salient as the differences in children's experiences prior to kindergarten.

The socioeconomic education gap is likely to affect us for decades to come. Think of it as a leading indicator of disparities in civic engagement, college enrollment, and adult success. Indeed, family income and wealth have become increasingly correlated with a variety of positive adolescent activities, such as sports participation, school leadership, extracurricular activities, and volunteer work, according to research conducted by Harvard University political scientist Robert D. Putnam and his colleagues.

Not only are the children of the rich doing better in elementary and high school than the children of the poor, they also are cornering the market on the seats in the best colleges. In a study that I conducted with several of my graduate students, we found that 15 percent of high-income students from the 2004 graduating class of high school enrolled in a highly selective college or university compared to only 5 percent of middle-income graduates and 2 percent of low-income graduates. Because these colleges provide educational opportunities and access to social networks that often lead to high-paying jobs, children from low-income families risk are being locked out of the upper end of the economic spectrum. For low-income children, the American Dream is further out of reach.

This is bad news for our future economy and society because we need well-educated workers in order to sustainably boost economic productivity and grow the economy. So how can we prepare every child, not just those most affluent ones, to be productive members of society? First of all, we must acknowledge that educational problems cannot be resolved by school alone. The achievement gap begins at an early age. To close it, we must invest in children's early childhood educational opportunities. This means investing not only in preschool but also in parents. Specifically, we need to:

Invest in high-quality early childhood education programs (pre-schools, day care) and make them affordable for all families.

Invest in programs that help parents become their children's first and best teacher.

Provide policy solutions to help all parents have the time to be teachers through paid leave, paid sick days, workplace flexibility, and income support programs that ensure that families can focus on their children even in hard economic times.

In short, we can narrow the socioeconomic education gap through public policies that help parents of all incomes provide enriching educational opportunities for their children in the way that only affluent parents can do today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Income inequality affects our children's educational opportunities - Equitable Growth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The educational gap between wealthy and poor children is one of the clearest manifestations of growing economic inequality in our nation. Wealth and income largely define the educational gap today, more so than race and ethnicity. What does this mean for the U.S. economy?

# data[].attributes.body
Privilege, naivety, and lack of awareness are seen throughout the United States as wealthy individuals believe that everyone has the same opportunity for success. If someone is raised with privilege, it is hard to understand that people face very different hardships than the society they surround themselves with. Poverty keeps the rich richer, so as long as rich people are in charge, poverty will not be fixed.

# data[].attributes.body
The boots theory is an excellent metaphor for how systemic inequality forces people to make a short-term cost-saving decision that will keep them in debt and poverty, as opposed to a one-time investment of a large amount that they can benefit from for an extended time.

# data[].attributes.body
The Pursuit of Happyness includes themes of social class, socioeconomic status, homelessness, and critical race theory. The film follows the story of a black parent trying to create a positive life for his son. Systems and institutions set up by society force his family to work against it to achieve a better life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pursuit of Happyness (2006) Official Trailer 1 - Will Smith Movie

# data[].attributes.body
In Gladiator 2, the main character, Lucius, is captured as a prisoner after the Romans take over his city. A life of solidarity was stolen from him, and he was sold as a fighter and then chosen to train as a Gladiator. Even though Lucius is still a slave, as a Gladiator, he is paid to fight and win. Those who earn the title of gladiator can buy their way to freedom and are nearly invincible, but until then, they are enslaved and must obey their captors. This main plot of the movie, along with other storylines within it, is an excellent example of wealth class and how socioeconomic status outweighs all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gladiator II | Official Trailer (2024 Movie) - Paul Mescal, Pedro Pascal, Denzel Washington

# data[].attributes.body
The Wolf of Wall Street demonstrates several sociological perspectives: Conflict theory is seen when wealthy people manipulate the system to gain more money. Symbolic interactionism is seen as wealthy parties using fancy cars, big houses, and nice clothes to symbolize wealth. Structural functionalism is seen when financial capitalism continues to thrive, even immorally, due to its ability to create jobs and profit for the company.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Wolf of Wall Street Official Trailer

# data[].attributes.body
This photo stood out to me as it represents greed in those who are elite. The photo shows two rich men sitting on top of their money bags while a gun pokes out towards the people, which to me implies that if they come for their money, they will do whatever it takes to keep them in poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
Sharing resources with the people in our community and working together can recycle money back into our community instead of big box stores! If we spread awareness about what resources there are to offer, we can help others with housing and food inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
This chart represents food insecurity among different racial groups over time. It highlights how socioeconomic status and access to resources contribute to varying levels of food insecurity. The trends shown in the graph reveals significant insights into the experiences of marginalized communities, particularly Black and Hispanic populations, who often face higher rates of food insecurity compared to the White population.

# data[].attributes.body
This image represents the wealthiest top 1% of the world vs everyone else. There is a clear division between the wealthy, with their space and luxury, vs the rest of the population who live crowded and impoverished, fighting to make a better life for themselves.

# data[].attributes.body
Annie is a classic film that demonstrates wealth inequality and social status. The movie portrays the rich vs. the poor and the struggles or benefits that come along with it. This includes theft, hunger, wealth, and privilege.