Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rich4eagle who wrote (247649)	4/13/2002 1:38:36 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Rich, While the standard of living may have improved, it is also possible that the distribution of income (wealth) has shifted from the poorest 40% to the wealthiest 5%. Gordon's data is from the U.S. Census department, and most likely, all other data (regarding income distribution) is derived from them. The trend seems to have started in the 60s. For instance, according to the Census Department, in 1965-67, the aggregate share of income of the bottom 40% was about 17.4-18% (according to the census dept.), while the income of the richest 5% was 15.5%. By 2000, the income distribution shifted so that the richest 5% was over 20%, and the poorest 40% had fallen to 14%(aggregate income). At the same time, the percentage of poor has decreased during the 90's. In fact, they approached the levels last seen in the Nixon Administration. If you look at the actual numbers of poor people (those living in poverty) they have steadily increased during the Clinton Administration. This paradox, must be due to the national population growth in the 90's (table A-1 of the report:Poverty in the United States: 2000). Statistics have something for everyone!