TABLE 2.1.  Official Poverty Rates in the United States, by Race and Ethnicity,

1960–2011

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2006 2009 2007–2011

Overall 

Non-Hispanic Whites 

Blacks 

All Hispanics 

Mexican Americans

22.2 12.6 13.0 13.5 11.3 12.3 14.3 14.3

17.8 9.9 10.2 10.7 9.5 10.3 12.3 9.9

55.1 33.3 32.5 31.9 22.5 24.3 25.8 25.8

— 22.8 (1972) 25.7 28.1 21.5 20.6 25.3 23.2

34.8 26.8 21.4 26.3 27.0 — 26.6 24.9

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, “Historical Poverty Tables,” www.census.gov, accessed July 20, 2009; Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2012, Table 711 (April 14, 2012); “Facts for Features, Cinco de Mayo” (April 14, 2012); “Poverty Rates for Selected Race and Hispanic Groups by State and Place: 2007–2009,” American Community Service Briefs (February 2013); Joan W. Moore, and Ralph C. Guzmán, The Mexican-American People:The Nation’s Second Largest Minority (New York: The Free Press, 1970), 197; and Frank D. Bean and Marta Tienda, The Hispanic Population of the United States (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1987), 354.

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 53

6/18/2015 8:29:59 AM

TABLE 2.2.  Percent of Mexico’s Population in Poverty, 1950–2010: Select Estimates

Year and Source

Overall Poverty1

Extreme Poverty2

Capacities Poverty3

Food Poverty4

1950, Székely5 1963, Székely5 1968, Székely5 1977, Hernández Laos-Bolt6 1984, Hernández Laos-Bolt6 1984, INEGI-CEPAL7 1984, Levy-Alarcón8 1984, Boltvinik (MMIP)9 1992, Hernández Laos-Bolt6 1992, CONEVAL10 1996, CONEVAL10 2000, CONEVAL10 2005, CONEVAL10 2012, CONEVAL11

88.4 75.2 69.4 58.0 58.5 42.5 81.2 69.8 66.0 53.1 69.0 53.6 47.0 52.3

— — — 34.0 29.9 15.4 19.5 40.3 — — — — — —

73.2 55.9 44.7 — — — — — — 29.7 46.9 31.8 24.7 28.0

61.8 45.6 24.3 — — — — — — 21.4 37.4 24.1 18.2 19.7

“Overall Poverty” is generally the equivalent of what SEDESOL (Comité Técnico para la Medición de la Pobreza en México, Secretaría de Desarrollo Social) defines as “Assets Poverty,” or “the proportion of persons whose income per-capita at the household level is below that which is necessary to cover the basic standard of consumption of food, clothing, housing, health, public transport, and education.”

1

2 “Extreme Poverty” means a lack of sufficient resources to cover basic needs, namely food, housing health, and other essentials. 3 “Capacities Poverty” refers to “the proportion of persons whose income per-capita at the household level is below that which is necessary to cover the basic standard of consumption of food, health, and education.” 4 “Food Poverty” refers to “the proportion of persons whose income per-capita at the household level is below that which is necessary to cover the food necessities corresponding to the requirements established by the INEGI-CEPAL food basket.”

Miguel Székely, “Pobreza y desigualdad en México entre 1950 y 2004,” El Trimestre Económico 72, no. 288 (4) (octubre–diciembre de 2005), 922.

5

6 Enrique Hernández-Laos, Crecimiento económico y pobreza en México: Una agenda para la investigación (México, D.F.: UNAM, 1992); Julio Boltvinik, “Evolución y magnitud de la pobreza en México,” Estudios Demográficos Urbanos, 11, no. 2 (mayo–agosto de 1996). Data cited in Julio Boltvinik y Enrique Hernández-Laos, Pobreza y distribución del ingreso en México (México, D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno, 1999), cuadro 2.1, 90. 7 INEGI-CEPAL, Magnitud y evolución de la pobreza en México 1984–1992. Informe metodológico (Aguascalientes, México: INEGI, 1993). Data cited in Boltvinik y Hernández-Laos, Pobreza y distribución, 90. 8 Santiago Levy, Poverty Alleviation in Mexico (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1994); Diana Alarcón, Changes in the Distribution of Income in Mexico and Trade Liberalization (Tijuana: El Colegio de La Frontera Norte, 1994). Data cited in Boltvinik y Hernández-Laos, Pobreza y distribución, 90. 9 Julio Boltvinik, draft of doctoral thesis (CIESAS-Occidente, 1998), chapter 7. Data cited in Boltvinik y Hernández-Laos, Pobreza y distribución, 90.

Consejo Nacional de Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social (CONEVAL), La pobreza por ingresos en México (Octubre de 2010), 10. www.coneval.gov.mx

10

CONEVAL, Informe de la evaluación de la política de desarrollo social en México (2012), 29. www. coneval.gob.mx; CONEVAL, “Evolución de pobreza por la dimensión de ingreso en México, 1992–2012.” http://www.coneval.gob.mx/Informe/Pobreza/Estatal2012/Evolución_dimensiones_ pobreza_1990-2012/AE_Indicadores_Pobreza_1990-2012.zip

11

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 54

6/18/2015 8:29:59 AM

TABLE 2.3.  Distribution of Household Income in Mexico. 1950–2008

Population Share

1950

1970

1989

2000

2008

2012

Bottom 20% Middle 40% Middle High 30% Top 10%

5.6 18.3 30.6 45.5

3.8 21.7 35.3 39.2

3.4 19.9 35.1 41.6

3.2 19.0 35.0 42.7

4.6 22.2 37.0 36.3

— — — —

Gini Coefficient1

51.6

49.6

46.9

54.2

49.8

49.0

As per this index, complete income equality is indicated by zero, whereas 100 indicates complete inequality. According to INEGI, if governmental assistance and private income transfers (such as remittances from abroad and gifts) are included, the Gini figures fall to 51.3 for 2000 and 48.2 for 2008.

1

Sources: Rolando Cordera y Carlos Tello, coordinadores, La desigualdad en México, segunda edición (Mexico, D.F.: Siglo Veintiuno, 1986), 268; Fernando Cortés, “El ingreso y la desigualdad en su distribución en México,” Papeles de Población, Número 35 (Enero–marzo, 2003), 142; INEGI, “Estadísticas históricas de México”; “Encuesta Nacional de ingresos y gastos de los hogares (ENIGH) 2006”; INEGI, “El INEGI da a conocer los resultados de la encuesta nacional de ingresos y gastos de los hogares (ENIGH) 2008,” www.inegi.gov.mx; Luis de la Calle and Luis Rubio, Mexico: A Middle Class Society, Poor No More, Developed Not Yet (Washington, D.C.: Mexico Institute, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, 2010), 72; Weisbrot, Mark, Stephen Lefevre, and Josepth Sammut (2014). “Did NAFTA Help Mexico? An Assessment after 20 Years.” Washington, D.C.: Center for Economic and Policy Research (February 2014).

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 55

6/18/2015 8:29:59 AM

TABLE 2.4.  Class Structure in Mexico, 1895–2013 (Estimates; Percent of Population)

Upper Class Middle Class Lower Class

1895

1940

1970

1996

20081

20132

1.5 7.8 90.7

2.9 12.6 74.5

5.7 27.9 66.4

10.0 30.0 60.0

7.2 31.9 60.8

2.5 42.4 55.1

1 Data from Mexican Association of Market Research and Public Opinion Agencies, as cited in Luis de la Calle and Luis Rubio, Mexico: A Middle Class Society, Poor No More, Developed Not Yet (Washington, D.C.: Mexico Institute, Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, 2010), 9.

Official estimate by Mexico’s Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geograf ía, or INEGI. See “Clases Medias en México,” Boletín de Investigación Núm. 256/13, 12 de junio de 2013.

2

Unofficial sources for pre-2013 estimates: José E. Iturriaga, La estructura social y cultural de México (Originally published in 1951; México, D.F.: Secretaría de Educación Pública, 1987), 28; Howard F. Cline, Mexico: Revolution to Evolution, 1940–1960 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), 124; Stephanie Granato and Aída Mostkoff, “The Class Structure of Mexico, 1895–1980,” in James W. Wilkie, ed., Society and Economy in Mexico (Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center Publications, 1990), 111; Tim L. Merrill and Ramón Miró, eds., Mexico: A Country Study (Washington, D.C.: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress [Electronic Resource], 1996), section on “Income Distribution”; for a summary of estimates of middle-class households in Mexico from 1895 to 2000 see Louise E. Walker, Waking from the Dream: Mexico’s Middle Classes After 1968 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2013), Table A.1, p. 213.

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 56

6/18/2015 8:29:59 AM

TABLE 3.1.  Population and GDP (Current Dollars) of Coastal States, Non-Coastal

States, and Top Ten Ocean-Proximate Metropolitan Areas and Top Ten Inland Metropolitan Areas in the United States, 2009–2010 (Percentages) Percent of Ntl. Territory

Percent of Ntl. Population (2010)

Percent of Ntl. GDP (2009)

COASTAL STATES (30)   Atlantic States + D.C.   Pacific Coast States   Gulf States   Great Lakes States

11.4 9.0 11.4 9.1

36.5 15.3 9.7 16.9

38.1 17.0 11.5 15.7

COASTAL STATES + D.C.

40.9

78.4

81.3

OTHER STATES (20)           Totals

59.1

21.6

18.7

100.0

100.0

100.0

25.1

33.2

9.1

11.0

TOP TEN (BY GDP) METRO AREAS WITH PROXIMATE OCEAN ACCESS (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston, Washington, D.C., Miami, Boston, San Francisco, Seattle) TOP TEN (BY GDP) INLAND METRO AREAS (Dallas-Fort Worth, Atlanta, Phoenix, Denver, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Orlando, Columbus, Las Vegas, Austin)

Sources: My calculations, based on population and economic data in U.S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2012, and U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, “Economic Growth Widespread Across Metropolitan Areas in 2010,” News Release, September 13, 2011.

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 57

6/18/2015 8:30:00 AM

TABLE 3.2.  Population (2010) of Twenty Largest U.S. Urban Areas and Physical

Location in Relation to Navigable Bodies of Water Urban Area/Population (millions)

Physical Location and Access to Ocean

New York City, 18.897 Los Angeles, 12.829 Chicago, 9.461 Dallas-Ft. Worth, 6.371 Philadelphia, 5.965 Houston, 5.947 Washington, D.C., 5.582 Miami, 5.565 Atlanta, 5.269 Boston, 4.552 San Francisco, 4.335 Detroit, 4.296 Riverside, CA, 4.225 Phoenix, 4.193 Seattle, 3.440 Minneapolis/St. Paul, 3.280 San Diego, 3.095 St. Louis, 2.813 Tampa, 2.783 Baltimore, 2.710

Coast, direct ocean access Coast, direct ocean access Lakeshore, lake access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Riverside, river access to ocean Near coast, canal access to ocean Riverside, river and land access to ocean Coast, direct ocean access Interior, no water access to ocean Coast, direct ocean access Coast, direct ocean access Lakeshore, lake access to ocean Near coast, direct ocean access Interior, no water access to ocean Coast, direct ocean access River, river access to ocean Coast, direct ocean access River, river access to ocean Coast, direct ocean access River, river access to ocean

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 58

6/18/2015 8:30:00 AM

TABLE 3.3.  Population (2010) of Twenty Largest Mexican Metropolitan Areas and

Physical Location in Relation to Navigable Bodies of Water Urban Area/Population (millions)

Physical Location and Access to Ocean

Mexico City area, 20.116 Guadalajara, 4.434 Monterrey, 4.090 Puebla/Tlaxcala, 2.668 Toluca, 1.846 Tijuana, 1.751 Leon, 1.609 Ciudad Juárez, 1.332 La Laguna (Torreón area), 1.215 Querétaro, 1.097 San Luis Potosí, 1.040 Mérida, .973 Mexicali, .937 Aguascalientes, .932 Cuernavaca, .876 Acapulco, .863 Tampico, .859 Chihuahua, .852 Saltillo, .823 Morelia, .808

Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Coast, immediate access to ocean (not a seaport) Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Coast, immediate access to ocean Coast, immediate access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean Interior, no water access to ocean

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 59

6/18/2015 8:30:00 AM

TABLE 3.4.  Population and GDP (Current Pesos) of Coastal States, Non-Coastal

States, and Top Ten Inland and Top Ten Metropolitan Coastal Areas in Mexico, 2009–2010 (Percentages) Percent of Ntl. Territory

Percent of Ntl. Population

Percent of Ntl. GDP (2010)

COASTAL STATES (30)   Pacific Coast States   Gulf and Caribbean States

39.6 16.3

30.5 15.4

22.2 19.5

COASTAL STATES

55.9

45.9

41.7

NON-COASTAL STATES AND D.F.

44.1

54.1

58.3

TOP TEN GDP INLAND METRO AREAS 36.2 (2009) (Mexico City, Monterrey, Guadalajara, Puebla, Toluca, Saltillo, La Laguna, Querétaro, San Luis Potosí, León)

49.8

TOP TEN GDP COASTAL METRO AREAS (2009) (Tampico, Coatzalcoalcos, Tijuana,Veracruz, Tehuantepec,Villahermosa, Mérida, Cancún, Poza Rica, Matamoros)

10.0

6.2

Sources: My calculations, based on data from INEGI, Censo de Poblacion 2010; INEGI, Sistema de Cuentas Nacionales de México, Producto Interno Bruto por Entidad Federativa, 2007–2011, Primera Versión, 2012, Cuadro 73; INEGI, Zonas Metropolitanas de los Estados Unido Mexicanos. Censos Económicos 2009 (2012), x; ONU/Habitat, Estado de las Ciudades de México, Anexo Estadístico (Rio de Janeiro, 2011), 90.

6241-1010-CW Tables.indd 60

6/18/2015 8:30:00 AM