{"title":"性身份、贫困和政府服务的利用情况","authors":"Cameron Deal, Shea Greenberg, Gilbert Gonzales","doi":"10.1007/s00148-024-01031-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Previous literature has established that lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people are at least as likely to be poor as heterosexual people, standing in contrast to myths of “gay affluence.” These findings have used datasets limited by either sample size or using partnership status to infer sexual orientation. Using U.S. data from the Household Pulse Survey, which allows us to identify large samples of individuals who self-identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, we find that bisexuals have lower incomes and are more likely to experience poverty, and bisexual individuals, gay men, and lesbian women are more likely to report financial hardship. Additionally, we find that LGB people utilize government assistance at higher rates than heterosexual people, even when allowing for selection into poverty status. We propose several explanations for these differentials, drawing on the program non-participation literature, and suggest that social network effects, lessened stigma, and increased reliance on public programs may explain these differences. Finally, we examine receipt of the enhanced child tax credit and find evidence that gay men and lesbian women with children were less likely to receive it than heterosexual men and women with children.</p>","PeriodicalId":48013,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Population Economics","volume":"113 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sexual identity, poverty, and utilization of government services\",\"authors\":\"Cameron Deal, Shea Greenberg, Gilbert Gonzales\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00148-024-01031-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Previous literature has established that lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people are at least as likely to be poor as heterosexual people, standing in contrast to myths of “gay affluence.” These findings have used datasets limited by either sample size or using partnership status to infer sexual orientation. Using U.S. data from the Household Pulse Survey, which allows us to identify large samples of individuals who self-identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, we find that bisexuals have lower incomes and are more likely to experience poverty, and bisexual individuals, gay men, and lesbian women are more likely to report financial hardship. Additionally, we find that LGB people utilize government assistance at higher rates than heterosexual people, even when allowing for selection into poverty status. We propose several explanations for these differentials, drawing on the program non-participation literature, and suggest that social network effects, lessened stigma, and increased reliance on public programs may explain these differences. Finally, we examine receipt of the enhanced child tax credit and find evidence that gay men and lesbian women with children were less likely to receive it than heterosexual men and women with children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Population Economics\",\"volume\":\"113 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Population Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-024-01031-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Population Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00148-024-01031-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Sexual identity, poverty, and utilization of government services
Previous literature has established that lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people are at least as likely to be poor as heterosexual people, standing in contrast to myths of “gay affluence.” These findings have used datasets limited by either sample size or using partnership status to infer sexual orientation. Using U.S. data from the Household Pulse Survey, which allows us to identify large samples of individuals who self-identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, we find that bisexuals have lower incomes and are more likely to experience poverty, and bisexual individuals, gay men, and lesbian women are more likely to report financial hardship. Additionally, we find that LGB people utilize government assistance at higher rates than heterosexual people, even when allowing for selection into poverty status. We propose several explanations for these differentials, drawing on the program non-participation literature, and suggest that social network effects, lessened stigma, and increased reliance on public programs may explain these differences. Finally, we examine receipt of the enhanced child tax credit and find evidence that gay men and lesbian women with children were less likely to receive it than heterosexual men and women with children.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Population Economics is an international quarterly that publishes original theoretical and applied research in all areas of population economics.
Micro-level topics examine individual, household or family behavior, including household formation, marriage, divorce, fertility choices, education, labor supply, migration, health, risky behavior and aging. Macro-level investigations may address such issues as economic growth with exogenous or endogenous population evolution, population policy, savings and pensions, social security, housing, and health care.
The journal also features research into economic approaches to human biology, the relationship between population dynamics and public choice, and the impact of population on the distribution of income and wealth. Lastly, readers will find papers dealing with policy issues and development problems that are relevant to population issues.The journal is published in collaboration with POP at UNU-MERIT, the Global Labor Organization (GLO) and the European Society for Population Economics (ESPE).Officially cited as: J Popul Econ Factor (RePEc): 13.576 (July 2018) Rank 69 of 2102 journals listed in RePEc