To: TimF who wrote (234781 ) 5/27/2005 3:16:17 AM From: tejek Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1571982 Households with two full-time workers earn five times as much as households in which nobody works. Median income for households with two full-time earners was $85,517 in 2003 compared with $15,661 for households in which nobody worked. Median income for households with one worker who worked full-time all year was $60,852, compared with $28,704 for those who worked part-time for 26 weeks or less. Alan Blinder of Princeton emphasized this point in a 1980 study: "The richest fifth of families supplied over 30% of the total weeks worked in the economy," he wrote, "while the poorest fifth supplied only 7.5%. Thus, on a per-week-of-work basis, the income ratio between rich and poor was only 2-to-1. This certainly does not seem like an unreasonable degree of inequality." • Experienced supervisors earn twice as much as young trainees. Median income for households headed by someone age 45 to 54 was $60,242 in 2003, compared with $27,053 for those younger than 24. When we define people as poor or rich at any moment in time, we are often describing the same people at earlier and later stages of life. Lifetime income is a moving picture, not a snapshot. These studies work hard to manipulate the facts in order to make it look like that there is an American dream, that its great and that its alive and well. Spin, spin and more spin to keep the peasants happy! The reality is that a smaller and smaller percentage of the American population controls a bigger and bigger portion of America's assets. That trend has been going on for at least 20 years and it is getting worse instead of better. And it just kills me how hard the right works to suggest its otherwise. Wealth distribution sucks in this country and its getting worse.