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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (28145)	9/7/2006 11:49:08 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 540884

I think the BEA and the Census bureau are calculating income differently. Its true that the Census bureau is looking at household income whole the BEA is looking at personal income, but the size of households has changed only to a minimal extent in 6 years. Its also true that the Census is looking a the median, while the BEA is looking at the total. But there hasn't been enough population growth to make the total growth that much different than the average and there hasn't been a significant change in income inequality over the period so I don't think the change in median should vary widely from the change in the average. See Message 22767344 for information about income inequality. The source for that information is also the BEA site. Hmm, well that info is from 2001 forward (for changes in quintiles) or from 2000 forward (gini index) so its possible that there was a large increase in inequality in 1999, that wouldn't show up in that data, still it would have to be pretty massive to account for all the discrepancies. I still think that the BEA's basic calculation of income must be different than the Census bureau's. You wouldn't happen to have any link detailing what either or both of them consider income?