Top 1 percent took record share of US income in 2012

[AVG-JOE]

Why?

 

[Trajan]

According to the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2007 incomes of the top 1% of Americans grew by an average of 275%. During the same time period, the 60% of Americans in the middle of the income scale saw their income rise by 40%. Since 1979 the average pre-tax income for the bottom 90% of households has decreased by $900, while that of the top 1% increased by over $700,000, as federal taxation became less progressive. From 1992-2007 the top 400 income earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%.[19] In 2009, the average income of the top 1% was $960,000 with a minimum income of $343,927.[20][21][22]

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[23] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[24] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[18][23][24] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928.

Dan Ariely and Michael Norton show in a study (2011) that US citizens across the political spectrum significantly underestimate the current US wealth inequality and would prefer a more egalitarian distribution of wealth, raising questions about ideological disputes over issues like taxation and welfare.[25]


Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

notice the way HARDING, COOLIDGE, AND REAGAN screwed the nonrich...

you really shouldn't post vis a vis things you don't understand, and hey clinton screwed the pooch too then, eh?

 

[Trajan]

The 400 richest Americans control an amount of capital equal to 50% of the nations' total privately owned wealth.

And the Republicans are just fine with that.

and they always have ( since the advent of the Industrial revolution) , under all presidents/admins dem or rep.

aside from dismantling capitalism, whats the answer?

 

[hortysir]

Trajan, now man, you can't trust these dembulbs to grasp the real math you posted AND answer questions.

Ya need to spread it out in smaller doses......like over a period of, say, a year

 

[Chris]

The gulf between the richest 1% of the USA and the rest of the country got to its widest level in history last year.

The top 1% of earners in the U.S. pulled in 19.3% of total household income in 2012, which is their biggest slice of total income in more than 100 years, according to a an analysis by economists at the University of California, Berkeley and the Paris School of Economics at Oxford University.

The richest Americans haven't claimed this large of a slice of total wealth since 1927, when the group claimed 18.7%. The analysis is based on data from Internal Revenue Service data.

Income

 

[hortysir]

Late getting your e-mailed talking points about that ever-present finite-sized pie?



http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...took-record-share-of-us-income-in-2012-a.html


"Search" Function: Use it

 

[whitehall]

Who woulda thunk it? America supports a growing population of illegal aliens approaching 15 million and left wing analysts determine that the gulf between the rich and the poor is growing wider. Sure it is and will continue to grow as long as democrats support illegal immigration and keep Black Americans in double digit unemployment dependent on the federal plantation.

 

[kiwiman127]

Find me a non-partisan economist who doesn't acknowledge the wealth gap, flat wages and the weakening Middle Class. The chart on recessions tells a big story. The weakening Middle Class hurts this country's economy. If not, please explain, in detail backed by facts and not ideological opinions/talking points.
Some people refuse to recognize reality because it goes against their ideology's economic approach.
Facts are facts.
Being married to an ideology sure limits how open a mind can or can't get. I'm not an ideologue, I'm Middle Class and I'm for what's good for the working Middle Class and we have been fucked over by some folk's heroes/Gods.

 

[percysunshine]

The top 1% of earners in the U.S. pulled in 19.3% of total household income in 2012....

And they paid 37% of total taxes.

The top 1% are getting screwed.

 

[whitehall]

he pay gap between the richest 1 percent and the rest of America widened last year, making a record.

The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share in Internal Revenue Service figures going back a century.

U.S. income inequality has been growing for almost three decades. But until last year, the top 1 percent's share of pre-tax income had not yet surpassed the 18.7 percent it reached in 1927, according to an analysis of IRS figures dating to 1913 by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, the Paris School of Economics and Oxford University.

One of them, Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, said the incomes of the richest Americans might have surged last year in part because they cashed in stock holdings to avoid higher capital gains taxes that took effect in January.

Last year, the incomes of the top 1 percent rose 19.6 percent compared with a 1 percent increase for the remaining 99 percent.

What else can be said, the powerful line their pockets while chastising and hurting workers.
Top 1 percent took record share of US income in 2012 - NBC News.com

Think about the title of the post. What does the word "took" really mean in this context? You could say that the legendary 1% actually produced income in spite of the president's anti-capitalist agenda. What might happen when the 1% fail to produce? I don't want to think about it.

 

[hortysir]

he pay gap between the richest 1 percent and the rest of America widened last year, making a record.

The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share in Internal Revenue Service figures going back a century.

U.S. income inequality has been growing for almost three decades. But until last year, the top 1 percent's share of pre-tax income had not yet surpassed the 18.7 percent it reached in 1927, according to an analysis of IRS figures dating to 1913 by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, the Paris School of Economics and Oxford University.

One of them, Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, said the incomes of the richest Americans might have surged last year in part because they cashed in stock holdings to avoid higher capital gains taxes that took effect in January.

Last year, the incomes of the top 1 percent rose 19.6 percent compared with a 1 percent increase for the remaining 99 percent.

What else can be said, the powerful line their pockets while chastising and hurting workers.
Top 1 percent took record share of US income in 2012 - NBC News.com

Think about the title of the post. What does the word "took" really mean in this context? You could say that the legendary 1% actually produced income in spite of the president's anti-capitalist agenda. What might happen when the 1% fail to produce? I don't want to think about it.

The fat buy must have taken the skinny dude's food

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not even surprising that rightwing nuts would think this is a good thing.

 

[Rshermr]

he pay gap between the richest 1 percent and the rest of America widened last year, making a record.

The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share in Internal Revenue Service figures going back a century.

U.S. income inequality has been growing for almost three decades. But until last year, the top 1 percent's share of pre-tax income had not yet surpassed the 18.7 percent it reached in 1927, according to an analysis of IRS figures dating to 1913 by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, the Paris School of Economics and Oxford University.

One of them, Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, said the incomes of the richest Americans might have surged last year in part because they cashed in stock holdings to avoid higher capital gains taxes that took effect in January.

Last year, the incomes of the top 1 percent rose 19.6 percent compared with a 1 percent increase for the remaining 99 percent.

What else can be said, the powerful line their pockets while chastising and hurting workers.
Top 1 percent took record share of US income in 2012 - NBC News.com

Think about the title of the post. What does the word "took" really mean in this context? You could say that the legendary 1% actually produced income in spite of the president's anti-capitalist agenda. What might happen when the 1% fail to produce? I don't want to think about it.

Perhaps you would understand what they meant if you read the piece.
Relative to production, most of the 1% are not in the production business. Bill gates, for instance, when he ran microsoft, produced NOTHING. Those who worked for him produced, he arranged financing, determined direction, etc. So, if I understand you, it looks like you agree that the producers of the products deserve the lions share of the profits. That, me boy, would be the workers.

 

[Mr. H.]

Late getting your e-mailed talking points about that ever-present finite-sized pie?



http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...took-record-share-of-us-income-in-2012-a.html


"Search" Function: Use it

Well, he has been gone 3 weeks.

 

[hortysir]

Late getting your e-mailed talking points about that ever-present finite-sized pie?



http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...took-record-share-of-us-income-in-2012-a.html


"Search" Function: Use it

Well, he has been gone 3 weeks.

5 1/2 years by my count

 

[hortysir]

"Leverage"

 

[oldfart]

Think about the title of the post. What does the word "took" really mean in this context? You could say that the legendary 1% actually produced income in spite of the president's anti-capitalist agenda. What might happen when the 1% fail to produce? I don't want to think about it.

Actually economies usually do very well in the aftermath of the top 1% fleeing the country, being killed, or having their power and toys taken away. America after the revolution and the Tory exodus, France after abolishing the monarchy, Britain after the political reforms of 1832, Hungary after expanding the franchise, and so forth. Too bad you read only fascist and monarchist views of history. Seriously, Obama anti-capitalist? He's been the best thing for Wall Street in American political history.

 

[Political Junky]

Is it official, that the US is now a banana republic?

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-richer-through-the-recovery/?hp

The top 10 percent of earners took more than half of the country’s total income in 2012, the highest level recorded since the government began collecting the relevant data a century ago, according to an updated study by the prominent economists Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty.

The top 1 percent took more than one-fifth of the income earned by Americans, one of the highest levels on record since 1913, when the government instituted an income tax.

The figures underscore that even after the recession the country remains in a new Gilded Age, with income as concentrated as it was in the years that preceded the Depression of the 1930s, if not more so.

High stock prices, rising home values and surging corporate profits have buoyed the recovery-era incomes of the most affluent Americans, with the incomes of the rest still weighed down by high unemployment and stagnant wages for many blue- and white-collar workers.

 

[idb]

Well, if I understand the theory correctly, the 'Job Creators' still haven't got enough money...otherwise there would be full employment.

"Give them more", I say.

 

[Chris]

It's not even surprising that rightwing nuts would think this is a good thing.

The plantation is the Republican ideal.

“The Republicans believe in the minimum wage — the more the minimum, the better.” - Harry Truman