Still The Land of Opportunity

[Annie]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010855

Movin' On Up
A Treasury study refutes populist hokum about "income inequality."

Tuesday, November 13, 2007 12:01 a.m.

If you've been listening to Mike Huckabee or John Edwards on the Presidential trail, you may have heard that the U.S. is becoming a nation of rising inequality and shrinking opportunity. We'd refer those campaigns to a new study of income mobility by the Treasury Department that exposes those claims as so much populist hokum.

OK, "hokum" is our word. The study, to be released today, is a careful, detailed piece of research by professional economists that avoids political judgments. But what it does do is show beyond doubt that the U.S. remains a dynamic society marked by rapid and mostly upward income mobility. Much as they always have, Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder continue to climb into the middle and sometimes upper classes in remarkably short periods of time.

The Treasury study examined a huge sample of 96,700 income tax returns from 1996 and 2005 for Americans over the age of 25. The study tracks what happened to these tax filers over this 10-year period. One of the notable, and reassuring, findings is that nearly 58% of filers who were in the poorest income group in 1996 had moved into a higher income category by 2005. Nearly 25% jumped into the middle or upper-middle income groups, and 5.3% made it all the way to the highest quintile....

 

[Bern80]

WHAT?! You mean people can actually achieve if they work hard? This can't be.

 

[William Joyce]

So we can all be rich?

Hallelujah!

I hereby declare ALL AMERICANS to be in the top 10 percent of income-earners.

Just kidding. I am sure that our masters well realize that if our standard of living drops low, we'll lose our incentive to keep bleating like sheep and might actually revolt. So they keep the bread and circuses coming.

 

[Toro]

The other thing about the income inequality studies is that they include poor immigrants, many of whom come to America illegally. If these people are excluded, the statistics would show inequality hasn't widened as much. Plus, if you included them in the statistics for their home countries, it would show that the immigrants have moved dramatically up the income latter since they are making so much more in America.

 

[manu1959]

this can't be true....it just can't....

 

[Bern80]

The other thing about the income inequality studies is that they include poor immigrants, many of whom come to America illegally. If these people are excluded, the statistics would show inequality hasn't widened as much. Plus, if you included them in the statistics for their home countries, it would show that the immigrants have moved dramatically up the income latter since they are making so much more in America.

I couldn't help but notice you're response to this very same article in the other thread "Growing Income...."

That's an interesting article but it flies in the face of almost every other study, also conducted by non-political economists. Here are a few.

Now it appears as though in this thread you have stated income inequality is not as dramatic as some would have us beleive (based on your post in this thread). Yet in the other (also quoted above) you cite sources to support your assertion that income inequality is growing larger. Which is it?

 

[Toro]

I couldn't help but notice you're response to this very same article in the other thread "Growing Income...."



Now it appears as though in this thread you have stated income inequality is not as dramatic as some would have us beleive (based on your post in this thread). Yet in the other (also quoted above) you cite sources to support your assertion that income inequality is growing larger. Which is it?

It is growing larger, but the statistics are probably skewing to the downside. However, that doesn't mean the gap isn't widening. It is not an either/or situation.

I do not approach this politically, and I find that both sides manipulate the data to support their own biases. So, the Right says the economy is great. Its not for most people, but its not bad either. The Left says the middle class is disappearing. Its not, but there have been economic papers written measuring that the percentage of the middle class has fallen over the past few decades, although it is by 1%-2%, a very small amount.

 

[Bern80]

]I do not approach this politically, and I find that both sides manipulate the data to support their own biases. So, the Right says the economy is great. Its not for most people, but its not bad either. The Left says the middle class is disappearing. Its not, but there have been economic papers written measuring that the percentage of the middle class has fallen over the past few decades, although it is by 1%-2%, a very small amount.

Define 'most people'. Better yet tell me what a great economy is suppossed to be for most people. Somwheat implied is that somehow the economy is giveing some people the short end of the stick. How specifically?

I ask because I know how much I make. It isn't very much at this point. From a salary persepective it would be considered to be in the 'have not' range so to speak. Yet I don't have this feeling that I'm being screwed over by the economy. Would I like to make more and save more? Sure. But I'm under no delusion that the reason for it is the economy.