COVID-19 Will Not Make Income Inequality Worse

Let’s assume that we beat COVID-19 over the next month or two and then reopen the economy. What happens next? Some economists believe the shock of the pandemic will produce a traditional recession and a traditional long recovery. Others think we can bounce back pretty quickly. I happen to be in the latter camp, but either way it’s worth pushing back on stuff like this:

“There will likely be some permanent damage inflicted on the economy,” says Greg Daco, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. “What this shock is doing is exacerbating preexisting inequality issues across the country. The individuals who have been hit the hardest are the individuals who were in the most precarious position to start with.”

This is just not true. The coronavirus rescue bill is immensely progressive, providing far more money to the poor than to the rich. Here’s a rough calculation of benefits at both ends of the income spectrum:

For the four months she’s out of work, a low-income worker would see her annualized income rise from $25,000 to $45,600. The high-income worker would see her annualized income drop from $80,000 to $57,350. This is due mostly to the flat $600 unemployment bonus that everyone gets regardless of previous income.

Whatever else you can say about this, it reduces income inequality. For a few months, anyway.

This doesn’t mean there are no low-income workers who will suffer economically from the COVID-19 pandemic. Of course there will be. But for the vast majority, their income will either stay the same (if they remain employed) or increase considerably (if they lose their jobs). This is one of the reasons I think we’ll be able to bounce back from our artificial recession fairly quickly.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate