Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What percentage of US population earn(s)over 100K? (Asking for FReephelp, please)
6/16/04 | me

Posted on 06/16/2004 12:41:11 PM PDT by patiodaddio

Asking for FReeper help to answer my boss's question, Thank you in advance!


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: incomedemographics
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 06/16/2004 12:41:12 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

family or individual?


2 posted on 06/16/2004 12:45:46 PM PDT by alisasny (GODSPEED DEAR SWEET PRINCE OF MEN RONALD REAGAN : ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Dept of Labor should have the info. Or better yet, the local library should have data on something like this.


3 posted on 06/16/2004 12:48:09 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
I'd have to check with my tax accountant.

I'll send one of the servants over to him and get back to you.

4 posted on 06/16/2004 12:48:46 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

It's something like 5%.


5 posted on 06/16/2004 12:49:26 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
I don't, so based on my anecdotal evidence, I'd say 0%.
6 posted on 06/16/2004 12:49:35 PM PDT by NYFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alisasny

Family, I guess, though she didn't specify. Have been to the DOL site, couldn't figger it out. It would be ok to include "individuals" too, though. Thank you.


7 posted on 06/16/2004 12:50:44 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NYFriend
based on my anecdotal evidence

ROFL! Ah, I think you've made my day.

8 posted on 06/16/2004 12:50:49 PM PDT by FourPeas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
oops, I read it as "what percentage of FReepers earn over $100,000".

Scratch my last answer.

9 posted on 06/16/2004 12:50:49 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Of 129 million returns, I would say 10-11 million (7.7 - 8.5%) are over $100K. That's if I am reading this table correctly.

http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-soi/01in01ts.xls


10 posted on 06/16/2004 12:51:11 PM PDT by wmichgrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

hehehe


11 posted on 06/16/2004 12:51:19 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
Google is our friend.
12 posted on 06/16/2004 12:51:20 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYFriend
Actually, now you've got a non-scientific survey, where I'm the only respondent, and your data says 0%.
13 posted on 06/16/2004 12:51:29 PM PDT by NYFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYFriend

Well, there's me, so it's at least .00000000001%. And I can attest that at least 30 people in my office are also over the line, so that's .00000000031. ;)


14 posted on 06/16/2004 12:52:11 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

According to the democraps- all Republicans earn at least that.


15 posted on 06/16/2004 12:52:29 PM PDT by bfree (Liberals are EVIL!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmichgrad

Glad you could, lol,I couldn't!


16 posted on 06/16/2004 12:53:51 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Appreciate that! Yes, google is our friend, but having the brain(?) to read those graphs helps, too!


17 posted on 06/16/2004 12:56:19 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Appreciate that! Yes, google is our friend, but having the brain(?) to read those graphs helps, too!


18 posted on 06/16/2004 12:56:19 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income.html

Not only can you answer the question posed...you can dazzle your leader with breaking it down by race,sex, age and location.

Ps. As the majority of Freepers are busy saving the world...
a subtle hint...in future please use Google or some other search engine.


19 posted on 06/16/2004 12:56:22 PM PDT by ijcr (Age and treachery will always overcome youth and ability.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

So, if we take your word for it, and mine, we have a survey result saying that 31 of the 32 known people earn over $100K. That's 96.88%


20 posted on 06/16/2004 12:57:38 PM PDT by NYFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

According to the latest IRS information at www.irs.gov (for tax year 2001) there were 130,904,889 individual tax returns filed, with the top ten percent break at approximately $92,500 in adjusted gross income. That being the case, there should be around 13,090,489 filers making $92,500 or above. That is the closest I can get you in just a few minutes research.


21 posted on 06/16/2004 1:00:19 PM PDT by Conservinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
I dunno, but according to Rush Limbaugh's site, 96.03 of taxes are paid by the top 50% of wage earners.

Mind blower! It's on his home page, complete with links and pie chart if anyone's interested.

22 posted on 06/16/2004 1:01:07 PM PDT by Humidston (THE ACLU ~IS~ THE ENEMY.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
Appreciate that! Yes, google is our friend, but having the brain(?) to read those graphs helps, too!

Sorry! Didn't mean to sound so flip! Try this table.

I think you'll find that in 2002 (latest data) there were 111,278 housholds in the US, and 15,675 of them had incomes of $100,000 or more.

15,676/111,278 = 0.1409, or 14% of US households.

23 posted on 06/16/2004 1:03:54 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
According to the pdf file titled "Income in the United States: 2002(P60-221)," 14.1% of households had income over $100,000 in 2002. This info is on page 17 of the report.

See www.census.gov

24 posted on 06/16/2004 1:05:48 PM PDT by Cooter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Actually, many of the returns at this level represent sole proprietorships - businesses rather than wage-earners, that operate without incorporation. That is one of the main reasons that the tax cut was so effective at stimulating the economy.


25 posted on 06/16/2004 1:06:49 PM PDT by MainFrame65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
I think you'll find that in 2002 (latest data) there were 111,278 housholds in the US, and 15,675 of them had incomes of $100,000 or more.

Slight problem with decimal places. That table has housholds in thousands so there are a total of 111,278,000 total households, and 15,675,000 at $100,000 or above income levels. The percentage math remains the same at 14%, however, which was your original question!

26 posted on 06/16/2004 1:07:20 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Contacting the Department of Labor

By Mail
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20210

By Phone

National Toll-Free Call Center. Live assistance is available Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time by calling, 1-866-4-USA-DOL, TTY: 1-877-889-5627.


27 posted on 06/16/2004 1:07:52 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ijcr

WILL DO!


28 posted on 06/16/2004 1:12:34 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
Part of the problem is that $100,000 in most of New Jersey or the San Francisco Bay Area is not the same as $100,000 in Kansas or Iowa. In some parts of the country, you can get a nice house for $50,000. In other parts of the contry, you can't even buy any house at that price.

Of course what makes this all really absurd is that it's the parts of the country where $100,000 per year is essentially "middle-class" (e.g., the Northeast, Chicago, West Coast cities, etc.) that will vote for Kerry to "get the rich" while the parts of the country where $100,000 per year probably would qualify someone as "well off" will vote for Bush. Of course most of the wealthy states that will vote for Kerry also run a net loss with Washington, often sending their money off to states that will vote for Bush.

29 posted on 06/16/2004 1:13:14 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio; All
Ok, a serious question. I am moderately familiar with the census and treasury/IRS income distribution tables, having had frequent occasions to dig out this information over the years. Unfortunately, however, they list the data by return or by household. As y'all know, this leaves the individual/joint income question dangling, and it's an important one. Given my non-technical needs, I can usually write around that ambiguity without much trouble, but it would be nice to nail it.

I will be indebted to anyone who knows a good source on this.

30 posted on 06/16/2004 1:14:23 PM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Humidston
"according to Rush Limbaugh's site, 96.03 of taxes are paid by the top 50% of wage earners."

Welcome to the world of sad truths. The lower half of income earners in the US make up about 4% of all the taxes paid. Plus, if you earn little enough and have kids, the taxpayers pay you through a welfare system called the Earned Income Tax Credit. America is good to the poor. In an earlier day all Americans were obliged to pay some tax. Not anymore!

31 posted on 06/16/2004 1:18:24 PM PDT by NetValue (They're not Americans, they're democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NYFriend

If you add me to your survey - you have 50% earning over $100k a year. Anecdotal studies are soooo meaningful.


32 posted on 06/16/2004 1:21:53 PM PDT by familyofman (out of the night when the full moon is bright comes a horseman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions
Part of the problem is that $100,000 in most of New Jersey or the San Francisco Bay Area is not the same as $100,000 in Kansas or Iowa. In some parts of the country, you can get a nice house for $50,000. In other parts of the contry, you can't even buy any house at that price.

That's for sure. My coworker's double-wide mobile home fifty miles from San Francisco is worth $60,000 - and he feels like he got it cheap. Middle class starts at about $250K/year in the Bay Area.

33 posted on 06/16/2004 1:26:29 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves
Friends of mine recently got a fairly old and small ranch in the SF suburbs across the bay for quite a bit more than they had spent just a few years before for a McMansion in Northern Virginia. I'm from New Jersey and I've lived in Tokyo and the Bay Area prices frighten me. :-)
34 posted on 06/16/2004 1:28:29 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
Are you sure you are looking for earned income (primarily salaries and wages, which are also subject to Social Security and Medicare taxes) as opposed to all taxable income, which would include some forms of unearned income (capital gains, dividends, interest, pensions, etc,, which can be treated differently rate-wise, and which are not subject to Social Security and Medicare)? There is a big difference. Just looking at earned income greater than $100K a year is going to give you a much smaller universe than filers with greater than $100K a year that is taxable.
35 posted on 06/16/2004 1:39:10 PM PDT by surely_you_jest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

Making over $100K per year is only alot if you don't make that. Despite GWB's tax cuts, they kill you.


36 posted on 06/16/2004 1:50:15 PM PDT by Phinanceguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Humidston

Accepting anything stated by that demagogic idiot as fact is more folly.


37 posted on 06/16/2004 2:00:24 PM PDT by middie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Just arrived - interested to know single and / or joint filing stats. For example a postman and teacher would certainly fit in as do most couples working in civil servant positions.


38 posted on 06/16/2004 2:17:09 PM PDT by BlessedByLiberty (Respectfully submitted,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlessedByLiberty; All

Filing status wasn't asked. Thank you all for such a robust response to (what I thought was) a simple question. FReepers are the best, and I'm humbled, (and a bit chastised too!)


39 posted on 06/16/2004 2:24:08 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Oh! Now get back to saving the world!


40 posted on 06/16/2004 2:25:13 PM PDT by patiodaddio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: middie

Please... Enlighten all of us on FR as to the error in that stat.


41 posted on 06/16/2004 2:43:02 PM PDT by Humidston (THE ACLU ~IS~ THE ENEMY.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio; MainFrame65

Patio, pay good attention to MainFrame. I have 3 friends who either own or work for subchapter S corps. They file as individual taxpayers, but they really are companies.
The IRS statistics are misleading because of this.


42 posted on 06/16/2004 4:50:32 PM PDT by speekinout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MainFrame65
The other factor to consider is that small business owners even in corporations (ours only has 5 employees) rarely take their full compensation as salary.

Wage statistics do not really tell the whole story.
43 posted on 06/16/2004 4:57:43 PM PDT by CyberCowboy777 (Veritas vos liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Phinanceguy

Boy aint that the truth.


44 posted on 06/16/2004 7:12:24 PM PDT by festus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

Glad you corrected that; I was wondering, how we ALL suddenly had such LARGE families...


45 posted on 06/17/2004 2:10:52 PM PDT by Yehuda (http://PostNineEleven.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Humidston

I wouldn't believe anything that self-centered, egomaniac, evil piece of waste matter said. I he were to tell me that it was raining and I saw the drops, I'd still stick my hand out of the window to verify his assertion. Hell, today, he is upset because his entire three-hour diatribe is not carried on AFN because, of course, he is the most important single voice on the public airwaves. Being a legend in one's mind does not entitle a person to insist that others believe in his omniscience.


46 posted on 06/17/2004 2:12:38 PM PDT by middie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions
$100,000 in most of New Jersey or the San Francisco Bay Area is not the same as $100,000 in Kansas or Iowa. In some parts of the country, you can get a nice house for $50,000. In other parts of the contry, you can't even buy any house at that price.

Ain't that the truth. The county I live in is a San Francisco Bay Area county, and the median home price is over $450,000. That's not much of a house where I live. That's a two-bedroom, no garage fixer-upper on a teeny-tiny lot.

47 posted on 06/17/2004 2:17:40 PM PDT by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Humidston
The thing to keep in mind with this is since the top 50% pay 96% of the taxes think how much the illegal aliens are contributing to our treasury.

1or 2% if we are lucky!

48 posted on 06/18/2004 1:17:56 PM PDT by B4Ranch ( GET READY!!..-> http://www.ready.gov/get_a_kit.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio

Go to the IRS web site. They have tables on income.


49 posted on 06/18/2004 1:19:43 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patiodaddio
What percentage of US population earn(s)over 100K?

Probably almost everyone.

Oh...you meant per year?

That's crazy talk.

50 posted on 06/18/2004 1:26:26 PM PDT by BikerTrash (Enough already with the carnival freak show...bring back COOL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson