Site menu:

 

July 2014 - Volume 20, Number 3

   

Click Here for a pdf version.

   

 

The Surprising States That Have
Greater Income Inequality

By Stephen Moore and Richard Vedder
The Heritage Foundation

 

For those in Washington obsessed with reducing income inequality, the standard prescription involves raising taxes on the well-to-do, increasing the minimum wage, and generally expanding government benefits — the policies characterizing liberal, blue-state governance.

 

If only America took a more “progressive” approach, the thinking goes, leaving behind conservative, red-state priorities like keeping taxes low and encouraging business, fairness would sprout across the land.

 

Among the problems with that view, one is particularly surprising: The income gap between rich and poor tends to be wider in blue states than in red states.

 

Our state-by-state analysis finds that the more liberal states whose policies are supposed to promote fairness have a bigger gap between higher and lower incomes than do states that have more conservative, pro-growth policies.

 

The Gini coefficient, a standard measure of income inequality, calculates the ratio of income at the top of the income scale relative to the income of those at the bottom.

 

The higher the ratio, the more inequality. A Gini coefficient of zero means perfect equality of income and a Gini coefficient of one represents perfect inequality, such as if one person has all the income.

 

Retro MomThe measure has some obvious flaws: If everyone is doing better but some get richer at a faster pace, the Gini coefficient will increase, and so rising prosperity and economic progress will look like retrogression.

 

Still, we used it in our analysis, since it is the favorite measure among advocates of greater equality and the stick used to beat free markets. Conveniently, the U.S. Census Bureau annually calculates the Gini coefficient.

 

According to 2012 Census Bureau data (the latest available figures), the District of Columbia, New York, Connecticut, Mississippi, and Louisiana have the highest measure of income inequality of all the states; Wyoming, Alaska, Utah, Hawaii, and New Hampshire have the lowest Gini coefficients.

 

The three places that are most unequal — Washington, D.C., New York, and Connecticut — are dominated by liberal policies and politicians.

 

Four of the five states with the lowest Gini coefficients — Wyoming, Alaska, Utah, and New Hampshire — are generally red states.

 

Income Equality Facts

 

In the Northeast, the state with the lowest Gini coefficient is New Hampshire (.43), which has no income tax and a lower overall state tax burden than that of its much more liberal neighbors Massachusetts (Gini coefficient .48) and Vermont (.44).

 

Texas is often regarded as an unregulated Wild West of winner-take-all capitalism, while California is held up as the model of progressive government. Yet Texas has a lower Gini coefficient (.477) and a lower poverty rate (20.5 percent) than California (Gini coefficient .482, poverty rate 25.8 percent).

 

Do the 19 states with minimum wages above the $7.25 federal minimum have lower income inequality? Sorry, no. States with a super minimum wage like Connecticut ($8.70), California ($8), New York ($8), and Vermont ($8.73) have significantly wider gaps between rich and poor than those states that don’t.

 

What about welfare benefits? A Cato Institute report, The Work Versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013, measured the value of all welfare benefits by state in 2012. In general, the higher the benefit package, the higher the Gini coefficient. States with high income-tax rates aren’t any more equal than states with no income tax.

 

The Gini coefficient measures pretax, not after-tax income, and it does not count most sources of noncash welfare benefits. Still, there is little evidence over time that progressive policies reduce income inequality.

 

To be clear, our findings do not show that state redistributionist policies cause more income inequality. But they do suggest that raising tax rates or the minimum wage fail to achieve greater equality and may make income gaps wider.

 

Here is why we believe these income redistribution policies fail. The two of us have spent more than 25 years examining why some states grow much faster than others. The conclusion is nearly inescapable that liberal policy prescriptions — especially high income-tax rates and the lack of a right-to-work law — make states less prosperous because they chase away workers, businesses, and capital.

 

Northeastern states and now California are being economically bled to death by their pro-growth rivals, especially in the South. Toyota didn’t leave California for Texas for the weather. The latest IRS report on interstate migration provides further confirmation: The states that lost the most taxpayers (as a percent of their population) were Illinois, New York, Rhode Island, and New Jersey.

 

Texas vs. California

 

When politicians get fixated on closing income gaps rather than creating an overall climate conducive to prosperity, middle- and lower-income groups suffer most and income inequality rises. The past five years are a case in point.

 

Though a raft of President Obama’s policies — such as expanding the earned-income tax credit and food stamps, and extending unemployment benefits — have been designed to more fairly distribute wealth, inequality has unambiguously risen on his watch.

 

Those at the top have seen gains, especially from the booming stock market, while middle-class real incomes have fallen by about $1,800 since the recovery started in June 2009.

 

This is a reversal from the 1980s and ’90s when almost all income groups enjoyed gains.

 

The Gini coefficient for the United States has risen in each of the last three years and was higher in 2012 (.476) than when George W. Bush left office (.469 in 2008), though Mr. Bush was denounced for economic policies, especially on taxes, that allegedly favored “the rich.”

 

Our view is that John F. Kennedy had it right that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” It would be better for low- and middle-income Americans if growth and not equality became the driving policy goal in the states and in Washington, D.C.

 

“A rising tide lifts all the boats and as Arkansas becomes more prosperous so does the United States and as this section declines so does the United States.”
— President John F. Kennedy, Remarks in Heber Springs, Arkansas, at the Dedication of Greers Ferry Dam, October 3, 1963.

 

Reprinted with permission, originally published June 8, 2014, The Heritage Foundation, The Daily Signal, <http://dailysignal.com/2014/06/08/blue-state-path-inequality/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_content=DD140606&utm_campaign=dailydigest>.

 

Stephen Moore is the Chief Economist at The Heritage Foundation. Richard Vedder is a member of the Academic Board of Advisors for the Public Interest Institute, Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus at Ohio University, and Adjunct Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

 

FACTS & OPINIONS is one of our quarterly membership newsletters, arriving in January, April, July, and October. It consists of short articles of public interest with an emphasis on current issues.

 

FACTS & OPINIONS is published by Public Interest Institute at Iowa Wesleyan College, a nonpartisan, nonprofit, research and educational institute, whose activities are supported by contributions from private individuals, corporations, companies, and foundations. The Institute does not accept government grants.

 

Contributions are tax-deductible under sections 501(c)(3) and 170 of the Internal Revenue Code.

 

Permission to reprint or copy in whole or part is granted, provided a version of this credit line is used: "Reprinted by permission from FACTS & OPINIONS, a quarterly newsletter of Public Interest
Institute." The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Public Interest Institute.

 

If you have an article you believe is worth sharing, please send it to us. All or a portion of your article may be used. The articles in this publication are brought to you in the interest of a better-informed citizenry, because IDEAS DO MATTER.

   

 

All of our publications are available for sponsorship.  Sponsoring a publication is an excellent way for you to show your support of our efforts to defend liberty and define the proper role of government.  For more information, please contact Public Interest Institute at 319-385-3462 or e-mail us at Public.Interest.Institute@LimitedGovernment.org