Originally Posted By: sinij
Have you read "Y" axis label? It says "share of total income going to top 10%". Top 10% is defined as all families making about $110K per year.

This graph indirectly demonstrates that concentration of wealth, by examining % of all income going to top 10% of earners, started going up right around time Reagan economic reforms were enacted... and is still going up. That was easrly 80s.

Quote:
Another thing your graph ignores is the fact that MANY, MANY more high earners were created in that time frame.


This goes contrary to the information presented in this graph.
Increasing number of high earners would lower % of total income taken by top 10%, because it would re-define top 10% by moving cutoff higher. If anything, this graph suggesting that top 10% now earns more than ever in post-WWII era. This is likely (!speculation!) due to the bottom falling out, meaning bottom 90% making less money, not top 10% making more.



The implicit point is that 100k being the top 10% is a very low number, and if you were to stratify it down to 70k for a family it would be a pretty even curve, and geography would have a lot to do with the earnings.

So, the graph says little because a family making 70k/yr in Canton Ohio lives as well as, if not better than a family making 100k/yr in many parts of California for example. The cost of living is just very different.

Also, good point on the 2-income families Ictinike.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)