Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was considerable income mobility of individuals in the U.S. economy during the 1996 through 2005 period as over half of taxpayers moved to a different income quintile over this period.
Roughly half of taxpayers who began in the bottom income quintile in 1996 moved up to a higher income group by 2005.
Among those with the very highest incomes in 1996 – the top 1/100 of 1 percent – only 25 percent remained in this group in 2005. Moreover, the median real income of these taxpayers declined over this period.
The degree of mobility among income groups is unchanged from the prior decade (1987 through 1996).
Economic growth resulted in rising incomes for most taxpayers over the period from 1996 to 2005. Median incomes of all taxpayers increased by 24 percent after adjusting for inflation. The real incomes of two-thirds of all taxpayers increased over this period. In addition, the median incomes of those initially in the lower income groups increased more than the median incomes of those initially in the higher income groups.The degree of mobility in the overall population and movement out of the bottom
Outside of Washington people have a different conception of bravery. After all, over the last three decades the policies crafted in Washington have led to the most massive upward redistribution in the history of the world. The richest 1 percent of the population has seen its share of national income increase by close to 10 percentage points. This comes to $1.5 trillion a year, or as Representative Ryan might say, $90 trillion over the next 75 years. That’s almost $300,000 for every man, woman, and child in the United States.
Unless someone is a member of the One Per Centers, I really can't understand why they would defend the abuses of the super rich. It's not like they can ever hope to become one of them.
Some of us defend the service to the rest of mankind performed by the One Per Centers. I don't know anyone who defends abuses.
Did you even bother reading your own link? Exhibit A, from your own link, page 3 for christ's sake!!!!
Thread is a huge fail, probably biggest of the week.
Quote:
Many studies have documented the long term trend of increasing income inequality in the US economy. The share of the household income of the top 20 percent 44 percent in 1980 to 50.4 percent in 2005 with the share of the bottom 20% going from 4.2 percent to 3.4
Did you even bother reading your own link? Exhibit A, from your own link, page 3 for christ's sake!!!!
Thread is a huge fail, probably biggest of the week.
Actually no it isn't, you and others are just failing to grasp the study he is linking too. It's actually pretty humorous, go back to the quote I posted from Thatcher and maybe you'll get a clue.
Actually no it isn't, you and others are just failing to grasp the study he is linking too. It's actually pretty humorous, go back to the quote I posted from Thatcher and maybe you'll get a clue.
Actually yes it is, because it's premise is wrong. The richer ARE getting richer and the rest of us, are getting poorer.
There was considerable income mobility of individuals in the U.S. economy during the 1996 through 2005 period as over half of taxpayers moved to a different income quintile over this period.
Roughly half of taxpayers who began in the bottom income quintile in 1996 moved up to a higher income group by 2005.
Among those with the very highest incomes in 1996 – the top 1/100 of 1 percent – only 25 percent remained in this group in 2005. Moreover, the median real income of these taxpayers declined over this period.
The degree of mobility among income groups is unchanged from the prior decade (1987 through 1996).
Economic growth resulted in rising incomes for most taxpayers over the period from 1996 to 2005. Median incomes of all taxpayers increased by 24 percent after adjusting for inflation. The real incomes of two-thirds of all taxpayers increased over this period. In addition, the median incomes of those initially in the lower income groups increased more than the median incomes of those initially in the higher income groups.The degree of mobility in the overall population and movement out of the bottom
WTF? Considerable income mobility, huh? A great deal of "income mobility" is driven by AGE. People start out earning low incomes and then earn more income as they gain work experience and promotions.
Increases in income for the past few decades have been driven by the huge baby boomer generation. As the boomers became older (and more experienced and skilled), their incomes generally increased.
The flip side of this is that the boomers are currently passing through their peak earning years and as they continue to age, their newly-declining incomes will lower the median income.
While you move up the earnings curve and into a higher income quintile, someone else (usually past their peak earning years) is going down the earnings curve and into a lower quintile. (So when incomes DO decline, do not panic...it's largely just the baby boomers naturally going down the earnings curve.)
Also, since income is measured (for tax and statistical purposes) annually, in any given year, there are a number of people who have unusually high or unusually low income. A business owner who sells their business can easily go from the middle quintile to the top 1 percent IN THE YEAR THEY SELL and then back to their 'usual' income the next year.
Someone who is unemployed or disabled or taking a year off work to travel (or maybe write the Great American Novel) can be in the bottom quintile that year, although they are normally in an upper quintile.
Also there are a number of people near the 'edge' of an income quintile who frequently move up or down a quintile in any given year, even though their income remains fairly stable. People with unstable or inconsistent income - many of the self-employed - often move between income quintiles from year to year.
The OP goes right up to the height of the housing boom 2005, before the fall, and gets all his data from that point. And 6 years later is telling us how good the middle class has it. ....LOL
He wants to tell us incomes increased for "all taxpayers" so he can be sure and include all the ultra rich Billionaire income in the figures ....like that puts food on the average person's plate.
Here how average wages did during that same time....they went down. From 1996 to 2005 they were essentially flat.
He's hoping you don't know this so that they can continue to bend the middle class over so the rich can keep their Robber Baron lifestyles.
The OP didn't make up the data; it came from the Treasury Department and the report they published. Find a more recent one if you wish/can. The point is that the data shows that people move up and down and that the rich aren't necessarily the same people each year and neither are the poor. Yes, wages went down for many during the recession, there were also many wealthy people that lost huge sums of money in that time as well. You are free to continue to make this about me if you wish as though this is an opinion I created, but all I did was post the facts. You have posted assumptions that in no way refute anything I posted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
