US income inequality continues to grow

[GMDino]

Sigh...I guess the rest of us just have to "work harder". 


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/19/income-inequality-continues-to-grow-in-the-united-states.html

Quote:US income inequality continues to grow

• In 2015, the top 1 percent of families in the United States made more than 25 times what families in the bottom 99 percent did, according to a paper from the Economic Policy Institute.
• This trend, which has picked up post Great Recession, is a reversal of what was seen during and after the Great Depression, where the gap between rich and poor narrowed.
• “Rising inequality affects virtually every part of the country, not just large urban areas or financial centers,” said co-author Estelle Sommeiller.
  
  
  

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, at least in the United States.

The top 1 percent of families took home an average of 26.3 times as much income as the bottom 99 percent in 2015, according to a new paper released by the Economic Policy Institute, a non-profit, nonpartisan think tank in Washington, D.C. This has increased since 2013, showing that income inequality has risen in nearly every state.

The paper looked at the income of families across the nation and assessed inequality at the state, metropolitan area and county level using data from the IRS. The incomes are averages of the IRS summaries of taxpayers in each income range.

Mind the gap
To be in the top 1 percent of earners in the United States in 2015, a family would have to have brought in $421,926 in pre-tax dollars. What qualifies as the top 1 percent varies by each state, and the states with the highest thresholds are California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York.

Nationwide, the average income of the bottom 99 percent is $50,107 per family. This also varies depending on geography.

By looking at income data on the state and county level, it’s possible to get a more local picture of the trend of inequality.
When inequality came up, “often the conversation would turn to, well, that’s New York City, it’s not my state,” said Mark Price, a labor economist at the Keystone Research Center and co-author of the EPI paper.



“Rising inequality affects virtually every part of the country, not just large urban areas or financial centers,” said Estelle Sommeiller, a socio-economist at the Institute for Research in Economics and Social Sciences in France and co-author of the paper. “It’s a persistent problem throughout the country — in big cities and small towns, in all 50 states.”
[/url]“You do not want to give Jeff Bezos a seven-year head start.”
Between the years 2009 to 2015, the incomes of those in the top 1 percent grew faster than the incomes of the bottom 99 percent in 43 states and the District of Columbia. In nine states, the income growth of the top 1 percent was half or more of all income growth in that time period.

A recent trend
This trend is a reversal of what happened in the United States in the years during and after the Great Depression. From 1928 until 1973, the share of income held by the top 1 percent declined in nearly every state.

The report from the EPI attributes that growth to a different atmosphere for workers, where the minimum wage generally was steadily rising and they were able to join unions and bargain for rights.

Today, while [url=https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/06/nonfarm-payrolls-june.html]unemployment remains low and the economy is doing exceptionally well, wage growth has remained stagnant.

“When you look at economic expansions, it’s in that recovery that you see income growth – businesses recover, reorganize, workers find jobs,” Price said.

In those expansions since 1973, there has been less income growth for the bottom 99 percent, said Price.

Meanwhile, CEO pay has increased from about 20 times the typical worker’s pay to 271 times greater, from 1965 to 2016, according to 2017 a study by the EPI.

As the economic recovery continues, Price said that it is critically important to continue to look at growth and specifically how it is distributed.

“For some reason, the economy just doesn’t have the generation of wage growth we’d like to see,” Price said. “We like to focus a light on the way that income is distributed to share that the people who make decisions are benefiting from the economy in a way we might not all be.”

The gap between incomes of the top 1 percent and bottom 99 percent are growing

[fredtoast]

95% of all the new wealth created in the United Sates since 1970 has gone to the top 5% of the population.

Yet the middle class has fallen for the story that their biggest economic threat is from Mexican immigrants or people on government benefits drawing a few hundred dollars a month.

The middle class is being destroyed by the upper class and the blame is landing on the lowest class.

[hollodero]

(07-20-2018, 04:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 95% of all the new wealth created in the United Sates since 1970 has is owned by the to 5% of the population.

Yet the middle class has fallen for the story that their biggest economic threat is from Mexican immigrants or people on government benefits drawing a few hundred dollars a month.

The middle class is being destroyed by the upper class and the blame is landing on the lowest class.

Populism in a plutocracy.

Oh and also there's now a tax cut that will hand 99% of the benefits to the top 5% in 2027. Not hard to figure who will pay for these cuts in the long run. That people eat that one up because of a possible bonus and some temporary crumbs is one of the most surprising things.

For lack of a better explanation I figure that 95% of people believe they will be amongst the 5% in 2027.

[Belsnickel]

[Belsnickel]

[GMDino]

I think Matt is trying to tell us something....

(07-20-2018, 04:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:

(07-20-2018, 04:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

I'm not saying this is THE answer of why, but I have to imagine that it is a very large contributor.....


-There are 22 of the 51 (50 States + DC) with a Top 1% of over $1m.
-Those 22 have 99 professional sports teams in them. The remaining 29 have 36 professional sports teams in them.

If you lower the threshold to $900k instead of $1m, the numbers become 119 and 16, respectively.

In fact, there are only 4 of the 51 who have at least 1 professional team and are under $900k for the Top 1%. Arizona, Louisiana, Indiana, and Ohio. That's it. Also, of those 16 teams in the 4 under $900k, Ohio has 8 of them.



In the NFL alone right now, there are 132 players making at least $10m/yr, 46 making at least $15m/yr, 17 making at least $20m/yr, 6 making at least $25m/yr, and 1 making $30m/yr.

In 2011 those numbers were 52, 7, 0, 0, and 0, respectively. THERE is some income inequality skewing for you.

... and there are 5 professional sport leagues.


- - - - - - - - - - - -



Throwaway stat because this is P&R and this post thus far isn't nearly fight-provoking enough:

21 of the 51 voted Democrat in the election. That 21 contains 14/22 of the >$1m and 6/8 of the >$1.5m in the Top 1%.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-20-2018, 04:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 95% of all the new wealth created in the United Sates since 1970 has gone to the top 5% of the population.

Yet the middle class has fallen for the story that their biggest economic threat is from Mexican immigrants or people on government benefits drawing a few hundred dollars a month.

The middle class is being destroyed by the upper class and the blame is landing on the lowest class.

It went solely to the top 5% or it went to the top 5% and moved people to the top 5%?

Also wouldn’t the minimum wage violations have a lot to do with illegal immigrants?

[*Nately120*]

(07-20-2018, 08:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Also wouldn’t the minimum wage violations have a lot to do with illegal immigrants?

Illegals and the job creators who choose to hire 'em rather than employ a greedy American, eh?

[*michaelsean*]

(07-20-2018, 08:47 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Illegals and the job creators who choose to hire 'em rather than employ a greedy American, eh?

Oh I’m on record blaming the employees most of all. I’m just saying it’s the illegal immigrants that in part make this possible. Maybe even some legal ones.

[*Nately120*]

(07-20-2018, 08:50 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh I’m on record blaming the employees most of all.  I’m just saying it’s the illegal immigrants that in part make this possible. Maybe even some legal ones.

I hear ya.  I just happen to think there would be less incentive for them to come here if we all agreed to not hire them.  That's a pipe dream, eh?

[*michaelsean*]

(07-20-2018, 08:52 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I hear ya.  I just happen to think there would be less incentive for them to come here if we all agreed to not hire them.  That's a pipe dream, eh?

Absolutely. I think we can say that the vast majority of employers who pay below the going rate know they are employing illegals. Or if they pay in cash. While I’m sure some people here legally will work for cash, I’m guessing most would see that as too big of a risk not to mention they would like to become established.

[fredtoast]

(07-20-2018, 08:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Also wouldn’t the minimum wage violations have a lot to do with illegal immigrants?

My point is "Who cares"?

The top 10% control about 75% of the wealth in the United States.  That is about $72 trillion.  The $23 billion in minimum wage violations would be about 3 tenths of one percent of that amount.

The middle class is losing trillions to the upper class and the upper class has them all worked up over 3 tenths of one percent of the wealth split up among 90% of the population.

[*Nately120*]

(07-20-2018, 08:56 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Absolutely. I think we can say that the vast majority of employers who pay below the going rate know they are employing illegals. Or if they pay in cash. While I’m sure some people here legally will work for cash, I’m guessing most would see that as too big of a risk not to mention they would like to become established.

I think it's one of those things people do and then justify why they are doing it, while still thinking everyone else who does it is a scumbag.  It's easier to hire illegals and then spend your time badmouthing them and calling for the government to keep them out of the country and pull that "I might as well...everyone else is doing it!" card out of your sleeve.

Anyways, the fact that we elected a man who hired zounds of illegals to be our president has me pretty skeptical we'll be going after the big fish any time soon.

[*bfine32*]

(07-20-2018, 09:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: My point is "Who cares"?

The top 10% control about 75% of the wealth in the United States.  That is about $72 trillion.  The $23 billion in minimum wage violations would be about 3 tenths of one percent of that amount.

The middle class is losing trillions to the upper class and the upper class has them all worked up over 3 tenths of one percent of the wealth split up among 90% of the population.

And the top 10% pay about 70% of the taxes.

What do folks what: 

1. successful people to make less?

2. Give more of their money to the poor?

3. Throw it all in a big pot and split it evenly among everyone?

I'm middle class and I'm doing fine.

[*Nately120*]

(07-20-2018, 09:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: And the top 10% pay about 70% of the taxes.

What do folks what: 

1. successful people to make less?

2. Give more of their money to the poor?

3. Throw it all in a big pot and split it evenly among everyone?

I'm middle class and I'm doing fine.

Personally, I want us to stop electing politicians who promise to spend obscene amounts of money on things we don't need all while promising to slash our taxes.  I'd like for us to treat money as if it were a viable asset and not something the government continuously prints until we all find ourselves bitterly laughing that a normal American can find himself using a credit card to buy something that used to cost 10 cents. I just get skeptical any time the government does something that would be insane or illegal for me to do.

Hey, I'm going to quit my job and then buy a giant house. It's ok, I don't need money...I'll just print it myself!

But hey, we just elected a guy who will build a giant wall for free and cut our taxes, so I'm sure we're on the right path towards that.

FAIRNESS ALERT - Obama promised to get us free phones or something, too.

[Belsnickel]

I heard a DSA member talking recently about the idea of a maximum wage instead of a minimum wage. It was rather interesting, this idea that essentially any income beyond a certain amount would be taxed at 100%. Not saying I'm for it, just throwing this out there for people to think about.

Me, personally, I'd much rather have a tax structure closer to what we had in, say, the 50s. I know that the MAGA types talked about that era with high esteem, though I suspect they felt that way for other reasons. Me, I like the idea that we were bringing in revenues and taking care of our people. There was this idea that was the role of government, promoting the welfare of the people. Crazy idea, that one.

[*bfine32*]

(07-20-2018, 09:20 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Personally, I want us to stop electing politicians who promise to spend obscene amounts of money on things we don't need all while promising to slash our taxes.  I'd like for us to treat money as if it were a viable asset and not something the government continuously prints until we all find ourselves bitterly laughing that a normal American can find himself using a credit card to buy something that used to cost 10 cents.  I just get skeptical any time the government does something that would be insane or illegal for me to do.

Hey, I'm going to quit my job and then buy a giant house.  It's ok, I don't need money...I'll just print it myself!

But hey, we just elected a guy who will build a giant wall for free and cut our taxes, so I'm sure we're on the right path towards that.

Not sure you really answered what you want the rich to do; but you did type a lot of words

[*Nately120*]

(07-20-2018, 09:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Not sure you really answered what you want the rich to do; but you did type a lot of words

I'm saying it doesn't matter because the rich control the government which prints money.  More money being printed causes money to lose its value which is why wages don't keep up with inflation and why the gap grows.  You and I are both middle class and we are fine with it.  I was born middle class, but my parents were lower-middle class by the end because the point at which they were standing financially slid down the proverbial hill that our system creates.

And that system is eagerly propped up by voters, even though so many people swear to be fiscally conservative.  

I don't want the rich to do anything specific, I just want us all to be using a system of currency that isn't play money for the powers that be.  Again, a pipe dream.

[*michaelsean*]

(07-20-2018, 09:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I heard a DSA member talking recently about the idea of a maximum wage instead of a minimum wage. It was rather interesting, this idea that essentially any income beyond a certain amount would be taxed at 100%. Not saying I'm for it, just throwing this out there for people to think about.

Me, personally, I'd much rather have a tax structure closer to what we had in, say, the 50s. I know that the MAGA types talked about that era with high esteem, though I suspect they felt that way for other reasons. Me, I like the idea that we were bringing in revenues and taking care of our people. There was this idea that was the role of government, promoting the welfare of the people. Crazy idea, that one.

People also forget that the world was in pieces and one country was still together with the ability to rebuild it.