From the Nation. The top graph shows the average income of the top o.o1% compared to the bottom 90%. The higher the peak the bigger the gap between the two groups. In 2006 you would need an income of over $10 million to make it into the top 0.01% while your income would have to be less than $100,000 to be in the bottom 90. The second graph shows the marginal tax rate over the same time period. Here is graph I created plotting similar data.
{Click on the image to take a closer look}
[tags]Income Inequality, United States, Marginal Tax Rate[/tags]
Popularity: 9% [?]
Get the latest graphs and maps sent to you automatically!
Subscribe to my RSS feed or sign up for updates by email.
I have updated my most popular graph Average Income in the United States. It now includes data through 2006 (in 2006$). I also added recessions from National Bureau of Economic Research
{Click on the image to take a closer look}
Data from Emmanuel Saez’s web site
[tags]Average Income, United States, Recessions[/tags]
Popularity: 61% [?]
A recent NY Times article included a graph showing the amount of taxes paid to the federal government based on income groups. While I like the graph it does not explain what the income thresholds are for each income group. However, I was able to pull out of the original journal article that the average income for the highest earning 0.01% was $18,113,612.
See also: What does Top 1%, Top 0.1%, Top 0.01% mean?
2005 US Income Distribution part 3
[tags]NYTimes, Taxes, income inequality, wealth, income distribution, superrich[/tags]
Popularity: 12% [?]
In my earlier post on Sources of Income of the super rich I plotted the percentage of income that comes from wages, entrepreneurial income, dividend income, interest income, rental income, and capital gains for the Top 0.01 percent. Here I am posting the same data but this time all income sources are on the same graph.
{Click on the graph to take a closer look}
A few items that caught my attention: the decline (starting in the 1930s) of the importance of Dividend income which was replaced in part by “Entrepreneurial” income then Capitals Gains and finally in the 60s by Wages. Also in the 70s and 80s Interest income becomes more important no doubt due to the high interest rates during those decades.
The income data can be found on Emmanuel Saez’s web site.
[tags]income distribution, US income distribution, US income inequality, income inequality, capital gains, super rich[/tags]
Popularity: 4% [?]
In my earlier post on Sources of Income of the super rich I plotted the percentage of income that comes from wages, entrepreneurial income, dividend income, interest income, and rental income for the Top 0.01 percent; but this did not include capital gains. In 2005 capital gains was 18% of the income of the super rich (if you exclude capital gains when determining the Top 0.01 percent).
In the graphs below, I have plotted the all 6 income sources for Top 0.01% (this time including capital gains as one of the income sources).
{Click on the graph to take a closer look}
The income data can be found on Emmanuel Saez’s web site.
[tags]income distribution, US income distribution, US income inequality, income inequality, capital gains, super rich[/tags]
Popularity: 3% [?]
In my earlier post I plotted the percentage of income that comes from capital gains for the Top 0.01 percent. (In 2005 it was 18% if you exclude capital gains when determining the Top 0.01 percent and 51% if you include capital gains when determining the Top 0.01 percent).
In the graphs below, I have plotted the other income sources for Top 0.01% (excluding capital gains when you rank the families). The question I am trying to answer: since most of the income was not from capital gains in the original graph, what are the sources of the unaccounted for income?
{Click on the graph to take a closer look}
The income data can be found on Emmanuel Saez’s web site.
[tags]income distribution, US income distribution, US income inequality, income inequality, super rich[/tags]
Popularity: 6% [?]
View