To the extent rising inequality is viewed as a failure in the performance of government, it may reduce confidence in key governmental institutions. Since 1972 the General Social Survey has regularly asked the following question about the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all?”
To the extent it increases people’s perceptions of separation or social distance in the country, income inequality may reduce general trust. The GSS also has asked respondents whether they feel “most people can be trusted” or “you can’t be too careful in life.”
Trust in the legislature
The share of American adults saying they have “a great deal” of confidence in the U.S. Congress has always been low; at its high point during these years it was just 24 percent. The over-time trend is shown in the first chart in figure 4.3.1. The share dropped sharply in the 1970s, reaching just 10 percent in 1980. Since then it has moved up and down depending on the state of the economy and on events such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Given that the bulk of the rise in income inequality in the United States has occurred since the 1970s, it is difficult to see any impact of changes in income inequality on trust in the national legislature.
The second chart in figure 4.3.1 shows the social gradient by education. Here we see the emergence of a “reverse gradient,” with less-educated Americans having the most confidence and the gap widening over time, particularly since the mid-1990s. It isn’t clear why this happened, but it does not seem consistent with a hypothesis that focuses on the impact of rising income inequality.
Figure 4.3.1 Confidence in the legislature
Percent saying they have a great deal of confidence in the legislature. Question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in Congress.” Data source: General Social Survey, variable conlegis. First chart: The dark line is a loess curve. The grey lines are two measures of income inequality (Gini’s) in business-cycle peak years (set equal to one another in the early 1970s). The inequality line that rises more includes the top 1%; the line that rises less does not (see figure 3.1.1 for sources). Second chart: Social gradient by education. The line labels (0-11, 12, 13-15, 16+) refer to years of schooling completed. The lines are loess curves.
Trust in the executive
The share of Americans saying they have a great deal of confidence in the executive branch of the federal government has varied between 10 percent and 30 percent since the early 1970s, with movement corresponding more to the business cycle than to the upward secular trend in income inequality. This is shown in the first chart in figure 4.3.2.
The second chart shows the social gradient by education. There is no indication of a systematic gradient; the best- and least-educated have tended to have the greatest confidence in the president.
Trust in the legal system
The GSS question here is specifically about the Supreme Court, rather than the courts or judicial system overall. The share expressing “a great deal” of support is shown in the first chart in figure 4.3.3. We see no shift over time.
The social gradient by education is shown in the second chart. Once more we see no clear gradient, nor a pattern over time consistent with the shift in income inequality.
Trust in other people
As the first chart in figure 4.3.4 indicates, in the early 1970s more than 45 percent of American adults agreed that most people can be trusted. Since then this share dropped steadily. Although this trend is broadly similar to that of income inequality, the fact that the decline in trust began in the 1970s calls into question the direction of causality. Robert Putnam and Anant Thaker (2010) argue that the causality runs from social capital/trust to income inequality.
There is a sharp social gradient by education, as shown in the second chart in figure 4.3.4. But it does not appear to have widened over time.
Figure 4.3.2 Confidence in the executive
Percent saying they have a great deal of confidence in the executive. Question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in the executive branch of the federal government.” Data source: General Social Survey, variable confed. First chart: The dark line is a loess curve. The grey lines are two measures of income inequality (Gini’s) in business-cycle peak years (set equal to one another in the early 1970s). The inequality line that rises more includes the top 1%; the line that rises less does not (see figure 3.1.1 for sources). Second chart: Social gradient by education. The line labels (0- 11, 12, 13-15, 16+) refer to years of schooling completed. The lines are loess curves.
Figure 4.3.3 Confidence in the courts
Percent saying they have a great deal of confidence in the Supreme Court. Question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in the U.S. Supreme Court.” Data source: General Social Survey, variable conjudge. First chart: The dark line is a loess curve. The grey lines are two measures of income inequality (Gini’s) in business-cycle peak years (set equal to one another in the early 1970s). The inequality line that rises more includes the top 1%; the line that rises less does not (see figure 3.1.1 for sources). Second chart: Social gradient by education. The line labels (0-11, 12, 13-15, 16+) refer to years of schooling completed. The lines are loess curves.
Figure 4.3.4 Trust in others
Percent saying most people can be trusted. Question: “Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you can’t be too careful in life?” Response options: can trust, cannot trust, depends. Data source: General Social Survey, variable trust. First chart: The dark line is a loess curve. The grey lines are two measures of income inequality (Gini’s) in business-cycle peak years (set equal to one another in the early 1970s). The inequality line that rises more includes the top 1%; the line that rises less does not (see figure 3.1.1 for sources). Second chart: Social gradient by education. The line labels (0-11, 12, 13-15, 16+) refer to years of schooling completed. The lines are loess curves.