What do you think?
Rate this book
Invisible Americans: The Tragic Cost of Child Poverty
A clarion call to address this most unjust blight upon the American landscape. Madrick has provided a valuable service in presenting a highly readable and cogent argument for change.--Mark R. Rank, The Washington Post
By official count, more than one out of every six American children live beneath the poverty line. But statistics alone tell little of the story. In Invisible Americans, Jeff Madrick brings to light the often invisible reality and irreparable damage of child poverty in America. Keeping his focus on the children, he examines the roots of the problem, including the toothless remnants of our social welfare system, entrenched racism, and a government unmotivated to help the most voiceless citizens. Backed by new and unambiguous research, he makes clear the devastating consequences of growing up poor: living in poverty, even temporarily, is detrimental to cognitive abilities, emotional control, and the overall health of children. The cost to society is incalculable. The inaction of politicians is unacceptable. Still, Madrick argues, there may be more reason to hope now than ever before. Rather than attempting to treat the symptoms of poverty, we might be able to ameliorate its worst effects through a single, simple, and politically feasible policy that he lays out in this impassioned and urgent call to arms.
By official count, more than one out of every six American children live beneath the poverty line. But statistics alone tell little of the story. In Invisible Americans, Jeff Madrick brings to light the often invisible reality and irreparable damage of child poverty in America. Keeping his focus on the children, he examines the roots of the problem, including the toothless remnants of our social welfare system, entrenched racism, and a government unmotivated to help the most voiceless citizens. Backed by new and unambiguous research, he makes clear the devastating consequences of growing up poor: living in poverty, even temporarily, is detrimental to cognitive abilities, emotional control, and the overall health of children. The cost to society is incalculable. The inaction of politicians is unacceptable. Still, Madrick argues, there may be more reason to hope now than ever before. Rather than attempting to treat the symptoms of poverty, we might be able to ameliorate its worst effects through a single, simple, and politically feasible policy that he lays out in this impassioned and urgent call to arms.
240 pages, Hardcover
First published January 28, 2020
16 people are currently reading
1587 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews
November 29, 2020
Incendiary insight into how poverty (even episodic) shapes futures. How low income leads to bad food to low health to lower IQ, worse performance in school, worse jobs, life of more difficulty.
I totally loved how the he author exposed parts of the The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life as racist in assumptions. It is.
The overview of all the programs for the poorer families was mindboggling but instructive. Seems that as a society we don't have the recipe to getting people out of the minefield of poverty. Not in chilhood, not in adulthood.
Q:
A higher proportion of children are poor than adults. (c) Why? Because in poor families there generally are more kids?
Q:
America has been transformed in the last generation into a nation where mothers almost universally work. Yet there is no federal paid leave program for new mothers in America, unlike in many other nations. Neither is there widely available free, high-quality public childcare in the United States. (с)
I totally loved how the he author exposed parts of the The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life as racist in assumptions. It is.
The overview of all the programs for the poorer families was mindboggling but instructive. Seems that as a society we don't have the recipe to getting people out of the minefield of poverty. Not in chilhood, not in adulthood.
Q:
A higher proportion of children are poor than adults. (c) Why? Because in poor families there generally are more kids?
Q:
America has been transformed in the last generation into a nation where mothers almost universally work. Yet there is no federal paid leave program for new mothers in America, unlike in many other nations. Neither is there widely available free, high-quality public childcare in the United States. (с)
April 27, 2020
Jeff Madrick's arguments for a universal child allowance are very convincing but Invisible Americans is so densely full of statistics and studies as to make for a laborious read. I can't imagine those who need convincing that it is our moral obligation to provide families equal opportunity, life choices, and health care will push through to the end of the book. That's too bad because all people in the U.S. need to hear this truth.
The quote from Invisible Americans that best summarizes his argument may be the following: "That the US refuses to raise those in poverty to a decent life reflects a mean-spirited and destructive prejudice against the poor, underlined by racism and a sense of class superiority. It's time to reeducate ourselves." I wish this were the book to do it.
The quote from Invisible Americans that best summarizes his argument may be the following: "That the US refuses to raise those in poverty to a decent life reflects a mean-spirited and destructive prejudice against the poor, underlined by racism and a sense of class superiority. It's time to reeducate ourselves." I wish this were the book to do it.
March 9, 2020
Such an important topic, such a poorly organized approach. Charts from the 1990s with little context, sometimes reads like the first draft of a dissertation.
Upshot: give no-strings cash payments to the poor, working or not, to improve the lives of children. Wish there's been more devoted to ACEs, the work of Nadine Burke-Harris, studies of First Nations families benefiting from casino profits, etc.
Upshot: give no-strings cash payments to the poor, working or not, to improve the lives of children. Wish there's been more devoted to ACEs, the work of Nadine Burke-Harris, studies of First Nations families benefiting from casino profits, etc.
December 11, 2021
Poverty in the richest country in history is a crime. Childhood poverty in the richest country in history is a bigger crime. $1 Trillion in GDP/year thrown away and countless lives lost and damaged. Excellent writing and a very clear message.
July 29, 2020
Good information, but phew, a dry read.
October 21, 2021
UNICEF, the United Nations organization dedicated to child welfare, uses a relative poverty measure based on median family incomes to compare child poverty by nation. The agency found in 2012 that the typical (median) poor child in America has an annual income 37.5 percent below the poverty line. A typical poor child in France is only 15 percent below the poverty line. In Finland, the typical child in poverty is only 11 percent below the poor line. Clearly, a much higher proportion of poor American children are living on incomes well below the poverty line compared to the rest of our peers. If the poverty line is a subsistence level, many children are living in destitution. (116)
In Invisible Americans, Madrick discusses the widespread problem of child poverty in the US—how it is measured; the flaws in how it is measured; what the consequences can be; and what can be done about it. His solution (which he returns to again and again throughout the book; this is no spoiler) is straightforward: cash stipends to all families with children, taxable such that families earning more money—who are less likely to need support in order to adequately feed and house their children—would ultimately keep little of it, and families earning less money would have fewer hoops to jump through in order to get that support.
The book is chock full of interesting statistics (and I do love me some statistics), but I worry that it's preaching to the choir. The US falls far behind many other developed countries in the number of children living under the poverty line—and what the above quote doesn't say is that the official US poverty line is already at a much lower income level, relative to the rest of the population, than other countries (for reasons I'll let you read in the book)—but conservative politics tend to lean hard on a blame game, taking the stance that the poor are only poor because they're lazy (and that non-white groups are more likely to be lazy...). Madrick is good about calling out and breaking down these racist, classist stereotypes, but I doubt the book is going to change the minds of many who are opposed to universal cash allowances for families with children. It's too easy to imagine someone reading this and thinking 'yes, but what about the cost' (because...obviously it makes sense to spend billions of dollars on senseless war, but we can't spend money to make sure that kids don't go hungry...). To mitigate that, I'd have liked to see longer-term statistics: not just 'increased income is proven to be connected to doing better in school' but 'the financial cost would be mitigated by X expected long-term boost to the economy because families/children are able to do Y and Z'. (I assume this can be measured, anyway, and again—it's not that I think that proof should be necessary but that I suspect it would go further to convince a certain *cough*republican*cough* population than 'it'll improve children's welfare'.)
In Invisible Americans, Madrick discusses the widespread problem of child poverty in the US—how it is measured; the flaws in how it is measured; what the consequences can be; and what can be done about it. His solution (which he returns to again and again throughout the book; this is no spoiler) is straightforward: cash stipends to all families with children, taxable such that families earning more money—who are less likely to need support in order to adequately feed and house their children—would ultimately keep little of it, and families earning less money would have fewer hoops to jump through in order to get that support.
The book is chock full of interesting statistics (and I do love me some statistics), but I worry that it's preaching to the choir. The US falls far behind many other developed countries in the number of children living under the poverty line—and what the above quote doesn't say is that the official US poverty line is already at a much lower income level, relative to the rest of the population, than other countries (for reasons I'll let you read in the book)—but conservative politics tend to lean hard on a blame game, taking the stance that the poor are only poor because they're lazy (and that non-white groups are more likely to be lazy...). Madrick is good about calling out and breaking down these racist, classist stereotypes, but I doubt the book is going to change the minds of many who are opposed to universal cash allowances for families with children. It's too easy to imagine someone reading this and thinking 'yes, but what about the cost' (because...obviously it makes sense to spend billions of dollars on senseless war, but we can't spend money to make sure that kids don't go hungry...). To mitigate that, I'd have liked to see longer-term statistics: not just 'increased income is proven to be connected to doing better in school' but 'the financial cost would be mitigated by X expected long-term boost to the economy because families/children are able to do Y and Z'. (I assume this can be measured, anyway, and again—it's not that I think that proof should be necessary but that I suspect it would go further to convince a certain *cough*republican*cough* population than 'it'll improve children's welfare'.)
March 11, 2020
Madrick looks at child poverty in the United States and the tragic effects our unwillingness to ensure that children don't live in poverty has on them, their future, and our country. I didn't really learn much reading this book as it referenced a lot of material I'm already familiar with. It is a nice little primer for those who aren't familiar with the topic though.
February 15, 2021
This book largely misses the mark. I did listen to this on audiobook, so did not see the charts/graphs that were used.
This book is aimed at those on the left, and is exceedingly critical of those on the right, and somewhat critical of those in the political center. His primary view is that the only way to alleviate poverty is through political action, specifically direct cash subsidies, which people will likely very much agree, or disagree, with. I will do a quick recap of what stood out that is less politically divisive.
The premise of the book is solid. Child poverty exists in the US, and the cost of fixing child poverty at the source will actually save money compared to the costs of allowing it to continue. If improving the health of children can happen early they can grow up to be healthy fully functional adults, where if they grow up malnourished and unstable households it is much harder to do that, and they will require government services later in life.
The use of numbers, however, is suspect. Sometimes numbers are used in percentages, while other times they are used in absolutes, depending on which would better fit his argument. One set of numbers early in the book that just seemed off had a "reasonable estimate" of transportation costs for a family at $1,000 / month (specifically for car ownership), and renting a 2 bedroom apartment at $850 a month, in order to demonstrate how it is not possible to live on the poverty line. The cost of car ownership is generally not greater than that of housing. That made me more skeptical of his future estimations. He also proposes using a flat poverty line for the country when some areas have vastly different costs of living, and does not get into what should be done in places like US territories. What is proposed as an absolute minimum for US households to avoid poverty would have everyone above that line in the top 5% of global income. The $50,000 a year figure he mentioned would still not be enough to get by on in some locations, and be well more than needed in others. There is the problem then of trying to figure out how to decide the poverty line if not doing it nationally. Would it be by state, county, or city?
Chapter 7 was probably the strongest in making the case that the cost of ending child poverty would have a net savings, by reducing irreversible damage that exists by growing up malnourished and in extreme poverty.
Two of the more controversial viewpoints he posits are that people should not have to work in order to avoid poverty, and that general economic growth does not alleviate poverty (only the government does). I will avoid discussion on those so this does not become political, but people will likely have a strong opinion one way or the other.
Overall the premise of the book is strong, but then feels like it largely misses the mark, and is unlikely to change any minds.
This book is aimed at those on the left, and is exceedingly critical of those on the right, and somewhat critical of those in the political center. His primary view is that the only way to alleviate poverty is through political action, specifically direct cash subsidies, which people will likely very much agree, or disagree, with. I will do a quick recap of what stood out that is less politically divisive.
The premise of the book is solid. Child poverty exists in the US, and the cost of fixing child poverty at the source will actually save money compared to the costs of allowing it to continue. If improving the health of children can happen early they can grow up to be healthy fully functional adults, where if they grow up malnourished and unstable households it is much harder to do that, and they will require government services later in life.
The use of numbers, however, is suspect. Sometimes numbers are used in percentages, while other times they are used in absolutes, depending on which would better fit his argument. One set of numbers early in the book that just seemed off had a "reasonable estimate" of transportation costs for a family at $1,000 / month (specifically for car ownership), and renting a 2 bedroom apartment at $850 a month, in order to demonstrate how it is not possible to live on the poverty line. The cost of car ownership is generally not greater than that of housing. That made me more skeptical of his future estimations. He also proposes using a flat poverty line for the country when some areas have vastly different costs of living, and does not get into what should be done in places like US territories. What is proposed as an absolute minimum for US households to avoid poverty would have everyone above that line in the top 5% of global income. The $50,000 a year figure he mentioned would still not be enough to get by on in some locations, and be well more than needed in others. There is the problem then of trying to figure out how to decide the poverty line if not doing it nationally. Would it be by state, county, or city?
Chapter 7 was probably the strongest in making the case that the cost of ending child poverty would have a net savings, by reducing irreversible damage that exists by growing up malnourished and in extreme poverty.
Two of the more controversial viewpoints he posits are that people should not have to work in order to avoid poverty, and that general economic growth does not alleviate poverty (only the government does). I will avoid discussion on those so this does not become political, but people will likely have a strong opinion one way or the other.
Overall the premise of the book is strong, but then feels like it largely misses the mark, and is unlikely to change any minds.
April 8, 2020
This was a frustrating book, and not because I disagree with his general take.
The first problem is that it's short. Very short. The text is only 172 pages, and the book is smaller than average, and it tries to cover too much territory in that space. For example, health gets relatively little space and is primarily limited to access to health coverage. Second, while the subtitle is about child poverty, a lot of the book is devoted to the general topic and not specifically about child poverty. It told me very little that I didn't already know.
His general view is not wrong: We underestimate poverty by using flawed measures; we don't provide sufficient assistance to the poor; and we're consumed by an individualist philosophy that seeks to place all blame on the poor for their situation. Our national discourse also skews who is poor--the public overestimates the number of poor non-white, especially black, people. He also takes aim at "culture of poverty" thinkers, which is often a way of blaming people of color in particular: "poverty of culture" can be a thinly veiled euphemism for "black culture." This is untrue, though for those in long term, cyclical poverty (a much smaller percentage than people imagine), some patterns may repeat themselves.
He does himself a disservice here by dismissing family structure. Now, it's true that the Moynihan report became a tool for racism, and that the number of unmarried mothers has risen across all races since then. However, recent research is indicating that familial instability is linked to poverty. American family patterns are diverging, with wealthier families more likely to be stable. This needs to be accounted for--and without simply blaming single mothers. There are multiple social and economic reasons why this trend is occurring.
Madrick's solution is simple: cash transfers. To a point, I don't disagree. Poor people need money. The near-abolition of AFDC has left people to starve if they cannot work, and childless, non-disabled, non-elderly adults qualify for nothing. But money can only help when the good or service is available to be bought. He dismisses universal childcare "because it will take too long to implement." But his proposed $4,000 a year child allowance would pay for only a fraction of childcare. There isn't enough high quality childcare available for purchase. Similarly, in many cities, there aren't enough decent apartments--and if we simply gave people money to rent them, it would only result in price inflation. Further, at current tax rates, such a benefit would not be "largely taxed away" for higher income families.
I agree with a lot of what he said--but his solution isn't completely thought out, and there's much better work on the topic, even as an introduction.
The first problem is that it's short. Very short. The text is only 172 pages, and the book is smaller than average, and it tries to cover too much territory in that space. For example, health gets relatively little space and is primarily limited to access to health coverage. Second, while the subtitle is about child poverty, a lot of the book is devoted to the general topic and not specifically about child poverty. It told me very little that I didn't already know.
His general view is not wrong: We underestimate poverty by using flawed measures; we don't provide sufficient assistance to the poor; and we're consumed by an individualist philosophy that seeks to place all blame on the poor for their situation. Our national discourse also skews who is poor--the public overestimates the number of poor non-white, especially black, people. He also takes aim at "culture of poverty" thinkers, which is often a way of blaming people of color in particular: "poverty of culture" can be a thinly veiled euphemism for "black culture." This is untrue, though for those in long term, cyclical poverty (a much smaller percentage than people imagine), some patterns may repeat themselves.
He does himself a disservice here by dismissing family structure. Now, it's true that the Moynihan report became a tool for racism, and that the number of unmarried mothers has risen across all races since then. However, recent research is indicating that familial instability is linked to poverty. American family patterns are diverging, with wealthier families more likely to be stable. This needs to be accounted for--and without simply blaming single mothers. There are multiple social and economic reasons why this trend is occurring.
Madrick's solution is simple: cash transfers. To a point, I don't disagree. Poor people need money. The near-abolition of AFDC has left people to starve if they cannot work, and childless, non-disabled, non-elderly adults qualify for nothing. But money can only help when the good or service is available to be bought. He dismisses universal childcare "because it will take too long to implement." But his proposed $4,000 a year child allowance would pay for only a fraction of childcare. There isn't enough high quality childcare available for purchase. Similarly, in many cities, there aren't enough decent apartments--and if we simply gave people money to rent them, it would only result in price inflation. Further, at current tax rates, such a benefit would not be "largely taxed away" for higher income families.
I agree with a lot of what he said--but his solution isn't completely thought out, and there's much better work on the topic, even as an introduction.
February 16, 2020
(I won this in a goodreads giveaway.)
This was a concise, informative introduction to the issue of child poverty in the US. I knew nothing about the topic before reading this book, and Madrick lays out the facts and issues very clearly.
He discusses the history of various movements and programs to address (or not address) child poverty, and their effectiveness, and weaves that information into his discussion of the current situation.
He is frankly in favor of cash payments to alleviate child poverty (and I am, too, after reading this), but spends plenty of time addressing the various opinions on the issue.
There are a lot of statistics throughout the book, and the one blind spot is that he brushes off some of them without getting deep into the details of why. Now, that might be a plus if you just want the info quickly, or a downside if you want an in depth exploration of the various stats and why they do or don't hold up to scrutiny.
It's a quick read, and an important one.
This was a concise, informative introduction to the issue of child poverty in the US. I knew nothing about the topic before reading this book, and Madrick lays out the facts and issues very clearly.
He discusses the history of various movements and programs to address (or not address) child poverty, and their effectiveness, and weaves that information into his discussion of the current situation.
He is frankly in favor of cash payments to alleviate child poverty (and I am, too, after reading this), but spends plenty of time addressing the various opinions on the issue.
There are a lot of statistics throughout the book, and the one blind spot is that he brushes off some of them without getting deep into the details of why. Now, that might be a plus if you just want the info quickly, or a downside if you want an in depth exploration of the various stats and why they do or don't hold up to scrutiny.
It's a quick read, and an important one.
February 11, 2020
Throughout this book, Jeff Madrick, an economist, proposes that the solution to the very complex problem of child poverty is to give children and their families cash. While I am not going to go into why I completely disagree that we cannot simply throw a monthly cash allowance at a problem that is very much rooted in the history of racism, discrimination, and just plain bad government policy, I will critique the book itself.
Many of the arguments presented in this book are very compelling. Madrick explains why current measures of poverty are woefully out of date and inaccurate. He discusses the flawed political underpinnings of the notion of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor, as well as an extensive attack of the idea of the "culture of poverty" which often position Black and Latinx communities as hopeless victims instead of people who desire to lift their circumstances.
Despite all of these "right on target" themes, I must admit that this book is very dense and not very accessible to the masses. There are lots of statistics, heavy handed explanations, and acronyms that are intended more for policymakers than the typical curious reader who may stumble onto this book. While Madrick does present a compelling case for why child poverty is a moral failing and its devastating consequences, I would have liked to see this book's language a lot more readable for the masses.
Many of the arguments presented in this book are very compelling. Madrick explains why current measures of poverty are woefully out of date and inaccurate. He discusses the flawed political underpinnings of the notion of "deserving" and "undeserving" poor, as well as an extensive attack of the idea of the "culture of poverty" which often position Black and Latinx communities as hopeless victims instead of people who desire to lift their circumstances.
Despite all of these "right on target" themes, I must admit that this book is very dense and not very accessible to the masses. There are lots of statistics, heavy handed explanations, and acronyms that are intended more for policymakers than the typical curious reader who may stumble onto this book. While Madrick does present a compelling case for why child poverty is a moral failing and its devastating consequences, I would have liked to see this book's language a lot more readable for the masses.
November 16, 2020
I keep seeing reviews stating that Invisible Americans is a dry or difficult read. I did not find it so at all. Considering Madrick’s purpose is to convince readers of his suggestion, not just present information, I think the heavy amount of statistics and quotes are necessary and useful. Madrick isn’t content with just giving an opinion and hoping his readers agree—he provides the facts to support his claim. I appreciate this about his writing. Additionally, I actually found this a quick read. If you look past the data he provides, his syntax and word choice are not unnecessarily difficult. While he is writing an academic book, he writes concisely and with the intent of making his writing accessible.
December 12, 2020
3.5 stars. This book is extremely informative but also dense. It entails an analysis of past, current, and potential policies to address child poverty. There was a lot of interesting references to research that has been conducted in this area, along with a comparative analysis to other developed countries. It does not contain any personal examples or vignettes, which are sometimes helpful to see a public policy issue from a more personal viewpoint. Overall, I took a lot of notes and am happy I read it.
May 21, 2020
This book is concise, direct and incredibly significant. It should be required reading for anyone who cares or pretends to care about poverty. The author makes an extremely compelling case for the cause of poverty and the best way to combat it.
October 3, 2021
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Madrick's premise. The government can and should do more to alleviate child poverty. I am all for universal health care and I would like to see some thinking towards universal basic income (UBI). However, the book was not written or organized clearly.
December 5, 2023
I have read other books about poverty in the U.S. that had real life examples which made the reading less dry and more relatable. As a standard history of programs for the poor this book is useful, but I had trouble staying awake while reading it.
February 26, 2020
Excellent and easy to understand. I don't typically read books about economics. I am so glad I picked this up.
March 1, 2020
Interesting perspective on the tragedy of children in poverty. Statistically presented to provide cash payments to improve the. Problem.
March 16, 2020
This is the most important book on poverty to date. I highly recommend everyone in America to read it. However, I am a bit skeptical about the author's proposal, but the evidence is convincing.
April 1, 2020
Great focus and great policy proposals but there is nothing new in here.
April 26, 2020
A case for giving a determined amount for each child per year to reduce child poverty providing evidence to support this thesis.
February 3, 2021
It’s an interesting argument and convincing. It’s great for policy wonks. Lots of statistics to back up the thesis. Luckily it’s short.
May 30, 2021
A compelling argument on an important topic, but extremely dry and lacking a clear narrative. Could have been shorter and included more storytelling components to make a larger impact.
July 30, 2021
A very readable and essential book. It makes a solid case, morally and economically on providing unrestricted cash payments to families with children.
August 22, 2021
Important book! We need to do better for our most vulnerable people, for our society as a whole, and as a "powerful" nation.
June 5, 2022
Fast read. I felt that it was a bit repetitive and the book could have been much shorter.
August 29, 2023
Matthew Desmond sets the bar high for me.
February 15, 2025
This is a small book and a little dense with facts but gives a good overview on child poverty and the policies America has had before and how those policies have changed over time.
August 7, 2025
Good core ideas but fairly repetitive.
September 15, 2020
This is an amazing book. All government leaders should be required to read it. I think if we followed Madrick's recommendations, our country would be a lot better off and the poverty problem in America would be ameliorated.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 32 reviews