The latest thing is to cry about the income gap between wealthier Americans and middle class Americans.
From ABC:
The income of the richest 1 percent in the U.S. soared 275 percent from 1979 to 2007, but the bottom 20 percent grew by just 18 percent, new government data shows.Shocking, eh?
This income disparity means that those poor people don't have as much money as the rich people. Huh.
Now if the growth, which takes into account all factors such as inflation, had been 65% as it was for 20% of the wage earners, the commenters would be shocked! shocked that the bottom only grew 5%. IOW, it's all relative to what the top makes.
Class warfare is difficult in a country so prosperous as this has been so let's look at what it means to be "poor" in America.
Here's a description from Heritage of what living below the poverty line means in America:
As scholar James Q. Wilson has stated, “The poorest Americans today live a better life than all but the richest persons a hundred years ago.”[3] In 2005, the typical household defined as poor by the government had a car and air conditioning. For entertainment, the household had two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR. If there were children, especially boys, in the home, the family had a game system, such as an Xbox or a PlayStation.[4] In the kitchen, the household had a refrigerator, an oven and stove, and a microwave. Other household conveniences included a clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee maker.
The home of the typical poor family was not overcrowded and was in good repair. In fact, the typical poor American had more living space than the average European. The typical poor American family was also able to obtain medical care when needed. By its own report, the typical family was not hungry and had sufficient funds during the past year to meet all essential needs.You can read more over there but it becomes obvious that again the media are shilling for Obama's reelection campaign strategy of creating envy between income earners.
Why should you care how much someone else's style of living increased in the last 20 or 30 years if yours increased greatly?
It's all about the posturing.
What you are reporting here is based off a report from the CBO. CBO's mandate is to provide the Congress (not our President) with: Objective, nonpartisan, and timely analyses to aid in economic and budgetary decisions on the wide array of programs covered by the federal budget and the information and estimates required for the Congressional budget process.
ReplyDeleteThe report also states:
The share of income going to higher-income households rose, while the share going to lower-income households fell.
The top fifth of the population saw a 10-percentage-point increase in their share of after-tax income.
Most of that growth went to the top 1 percent of the population.
All other groups saw their shares decline by 2 to 3 percentage points.
Just some facts for you Perrysburg. Keep up the good work!