[big_rc]

This article really surprised me. I have heard rumors about US household income disparity but didn't think it was this large. It's these people in the bottom half who are going to be affected most by the credit crunch / rising oil prices and its over 150 MM people. That's a scary thought.

Where Do You Stand on America's Wealth Spectrum?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')elow you'll find the average income picture sliced into income levels. Think of this chart as a parking ramp. If your household income is $170,000, you're among the nation's top 10 percent wage earners and get to park on the top floor.

Anything in six figures means you're in the top 20 percent and get to park on the floor right below.

Annual income parking ramp
Income level (percentile) Median income (rounded)
Level VI (90 to 100) $170,000
Level V (80 to 89.9) $99,000
Level IV (60 to 79.9) $65,000
Level III (40 to 59.9) $40,000
Level II (20 to 39.9) $24,000
Level I (less than 20) $10,000
Source: Before-Tax Family Income, 2001 Federal Reserve Board Survey

[mgibbons19]

It's worth pointing out that this is household income data. As in both ppl working, if it's a 2-grownup household.

The second thing worth pointing out is that while the headline says wealth, the figures they give you are for income.

Meaning that somebody making 170 per year, but nothing in the bank is in the top 10% income-wise, but has literally no wealth (ie held value).

The only reason to point that out is that factoring in wealth makes the picture that much more complex, and the disparity that much larger.

Interesting too, to drive around parts of the US doing well, and everywhere else. you get the vibe that it really is a tremendously complex picture, and the numbers don't tell the whole story. In the right sectors, there is still money to be made and quite a bit of opportunity. Outside of those sectors, large swaths of ppl are already/still hurting.

[Roy]

I wonder how much those numbers have changed in the last 6 years. I would venture to say that the wealth distribution in this country is even more skewed than it was in 2001.

For that matter, why is that the most recent data available?

[Tyler_JC]

This data doesn't include transfer payments to the bottom third or so of the population.

Housing subsidies, food stamps, unemployment insurance, earned income tax credits, etc. help to reduce inequality.

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'T')his data doesn't include transfer payments to the bottom third or so of the population.

Housing subsidies, food stamps, unemployment insurance, earned income tax credits, etc. help to reduce inequality.

[Tyler_JC]

The tax cuts were actually progressive, believe it or not.

Marginal rates went from 39.6% to 35% (a 13% decrease) for incomes over $300,000(or whatever the top rate is at this point) while the bottom tax rate was reduced from 15% to 10% (a 33% decrease).

The ratio of top tax rate to bottom tax rate increased from 2.64 to 3.5.

The % of taxes paid by the top 10% increased as a result of the Bush tax cuts, not decreased.

Tax cuts aside, the United States has experienced a dramatic increase in income inequality in the past 25 years.

Virtually all gains in income for the bottom 50% of households has come as a result of steadily rising female employment.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'T')his data doesn't include transfer payments to the bottom third or so of the population.

Housing subsidies, food stamps, unemployment insurance, earned income tax credits, etc. help to reduce inequality.

[Tyler_JC]

Consumer Expenditure Survey (scroll down to page 7)

Income before taxes of lowest 20% of consumer units: $9,676
Expenditures of lowest 20% of consumer units: $19,120

Are you telling me they are somehow borrowing $10,000 a year?

And that they have been able to do it, year after year?

Of course not. There are government subsidies to provide a safety net against poverty in the United States.

Does it work 100%? Obviously not.

Does it reduce inequality? Undeniably yes.

The data as presented in the original table that started this thread indicated that the income level of the lowest paid 20% was $10,000 per year.

Sure, 20% of the population might earn pretax wages of $10,000 per year but that does not indicate their actual standard of living.

The poorest members of society are allowed to consume far more than they earn in wages because of government subsidies such as rent control, food stamps, earned income tax credits, TANF, Low Income Home Energy Assistance, Medicaid, Medicare, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and so on.

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')The poorest members of society are allowed to consume far more than they earn in wages because of government subsidies such as rent control, food stamps, earned income tax credits, TANF, Low Income Home Energy Assistance, Medicaid, Medicare, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and so on.

[Keith_McClary]

The article doesn't attach a date to its stats, but usually these numbers take a year or so to come out. So assume the numbers are from before the housing crash.

If the median net worth was $86000 before the housing crash, what is it today?

[Aimrehtopyh]

http://lcurve.org/

[RedStateGreen]

I didn't read all the links in this thread, but one thing that's misleading in the income lists is the amount of debt people are holding. Just because you have a high income and a fancy house, car, etc, doesn't mean you aren't one paycheck away from disaster. I know several people in that situation.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RedStateGreen', 'I') didn't read all the links in this thread, but one thing that's misleading in the income lists is the amount of debt people are holding. Just because you have a high income and a fancy house, car, etc, doesn't mean you aren't one paycheck away from disaster. I know several people in that situation.

[RedStateGreen]

LOL that's what I get for not reading the article...

In all seriousness, I bet there are a lot of people in the upper income tiers who are in the bottom tiers on net worth.

[jeezlouise]

The Nov. 24 issue of Time magazine featured a special report called "America By the Numbers" that catalogued American worker statistics like commuting distance, job satisfaction, free time spent, etc.. anyway, one of the issues looked at was income growth. They broke down American taxpayers (in terms of annual income) into five categories:
-the "bottom" 99%
-the top 1%
-the top 0.5%
-the top 0.1%, and
-the top 0.01% (representing 14,588 people who control 5.1% of all U.S. income)

The super-elite, the top 0.01%, has flown head and shoulders above the unwashed masses since at least the turn of the 20th century, but has been up and down, more or less flat - up until 1980, when they took off. They had a peak of about 15 million per capita in 1986, faltered, and then took off like a rocket in 1995 from 10 mil. to 26 mil. a few years later, dove back to 15 mil. with the "tech crash" and now are back where they were at 26.3 mil. today. Meanwhile, the average income for all American taxpayers has grown 26.5% since 1980, but for 99% of us, income has been nearly flat. The crazy rich have skewed the numbers considerably.

Growth in real average income since 1980:
Bottom 99%: 8%
top 1% (the merely rich): 177%
top 0.5%: 214%
top 0.1%: 308%
top 0.01%: 408%

The median household income grew 0.7% last year, but earnings fell for both men and women, indicating more household members are working just to stay afloat.

Just statistics... make of them what you will. But I wish they had published the graph from the print magazine online because it was quite startling. Like staring up at Everest from the foothills on a clear day.

(sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, income distribution analysis by Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, using tax data; U.S. Census Bureau)

[FreakOil]

This is what happens when labor unions lose their teeth. Labor unions are a fundamental part of industrial societies. They should assert themselves. I'm not sure what part labor unions will play in the post-Peak world.

[vision-master]

Don't forget, with rising income the average Joe 6-pack just pays more in taxes. So? What's the point!!!!!

[Newfie]

Did anyone hear (Robert?) Reisch sp?) the ex Labor Secretary on NPR last week? I can't remember the numbers exactly but they went something like this:
Since the 1970's, Joe Six Packs real (adjusted) income has decreased 17%.
To compensate Joe has:
1. Put his wife to work (28% then vs 56% now, roughly)
2. Worked more hours (325 hours/year more than Europeans and more even that Japanese)
3. Taken the liquidity out of his house.

The point is that Joe has now just about used up his coping mechanisms and hit rock bottom. Therefore there will besome relatively drastic economic change.

Again, this is just the gist, of what he said, numbers are not exact.

I want to nominate this guy for President. He is one of the few with guts to say what should be obvious.

Howard

[FreakOil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'D')id anyone hear (Robert?) Reisch sp?) the ex Labor Secretary on NPR last week? I can't remember the numbers exactly but they went something like this:
Since the 1970's, Joe Six Packs real (adjusted) income has decreased 17%.
To compensate Joe has:
1. Put his wife to work (28% then vs 56% now, roughly)
2. Worked more hours (325 hours/year more than Europeans and more even that Japanese)
3. Taken the liquidity out of his house.

The point is that Joe has now just about used up his coping mechanisms and hit rock bottom. Therefore there will besome relatively drastic economic change.

Again, this is just the gist, of what he said, numbers are not exact.

I want to nominate this guy for President. He is one of the few with guts to say what should be obvious.

Howard

[Denny]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FreakOil', 'T')his is what happens when labor unions lose their teeth. Labor unions are a fundamental part of industrial societies. They should assert themselves. I'm not sure what part labor unions will play in the post-Peak world.