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

To: CMAC51
Your's is a common misconception. The truth is that it is simply math. If you look at the top 4 lines and increase each by the same percentage, you end up with the these graphs.

Sorry, the misconception is yours, not mine.

Consider this graph:

This is the share of income, by category. If your "simple math" was true, the above graph would be straight lines. They aren't.

Instead, what you see is approximately the inverse. The share for the top 1% grows from 1992-2000, then shrinks from 2011 to 2003. Then, it starts growing again.

If you focus on just the top 20% (and 10%, 5%, and 1%), they don't increase by the same percentage, either. I'm not going to try to create a table, so this isn't going to look nice. But, you can paste this into Excel and convert text to columns, using space delimiters:

category 1979 2007 difference
1% 49300 76400 55%
5% 128700 289300 125%
10% 169600 440500 160%
20% 346600 1319700 281%

Well, that's ugly. But, I think you get the idea.

11 posted on 11/03/2011 9:21:43 AM PDT by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good WOMAN (Sgt. Kimberly Munley) with a gun)

To: CMAC51
Ooops. I have the first column in the wrong order. The top 20% should be in the first row, and the top 1% should be in the last row.

category 1979 2007 difference
20% 49300 76400 55%
10% 128700 289300 125%
5% 169600 440500 160%
1% 346600 1319700 281%

14 posted on 11/03/2011 9:33:01 AM PDT by justlurking (The only remedy for a bad guy with a gun is a good WOMAN (Sgt. Kimberly Munley) with a gun)

To: justlurking

Changing arguments in mid-stream does not invalidate my orrignal assertion. Regardless of whether moving positive or negative, the magnitude of change is greater the higher in the order the income line is. Exactly as the math would indicate. If incomes increase by the same percentage, the higher the original income, the greater the increase. If incomes decrease by the same percentage, the higher the income, the greater the decrease. The graph clearly illustrates my point.

I have no idea of the significance of your tabular numbers since you provide no source or frame of reference. They amount to gibberish, so I definately do not get the idea. 493000 what of what?

18 posted on 11/03/2011 12:39:20 PM PDT by CMAC51

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

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794