As I said, I have been pissing and moaning my opinions now for some time, but until now I haven't had much solid data to back my observations up--just my gut reactions, primarily based upon my observations in the record business. Today, I discovered the US Bureau of Census Median (midpoint) and Mean (avg.) household income stats by region, at:
Here are the most recent extractions for 13 years:
Table H-6. Regions--All Races by Median and Mean Income: 1975 to 2012
| |||||
(Households as of March of the following year. Income in current and 2012 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars (28))
| |||||
Region and year
|
Number (thousands)
|
Median income
|
Mean income
| ||
Current dollars
|
2012 dollars
|
Current dollars
|
2012 dollars
| ||
2012
|
122,459
|
51,017
|
51,017
|
71,274
|
71,274
|
2011
|
121,084
|
50,054
|
51,100
|
69,677
|
71,133
|
2010 (37)
|
119,927
|
49,276
|
51,892
|
67,392
|
70,970
|
2009 (36)
|
117,538
|
49,777
|
53,285
|
67,976
|
72,767
|
2008
|
117,181
|
50,303
|
53,644
|
68,424
|
72,968
|
116,783
|
50,233
|
55,627
|
67,609
|
74,869
| |
2006
|
116,011
|
48,201
|
54,892
|
66,570
|
75,810
|
2005
|
114,384
|
46,326
|
54,486
|
63,344
|
74,502
|
2004 (35)
|
113,343
|
44,334
|
53,891
|
60,466
|
73,501
|
2003
|
112,000
|
43,318
|
54,079
|
59,067
|
73,741
|
2002
|
111,278
|
42,409
|
54,127
|
57,852
|
73,837
|
2001
|
109,297
|
42,228
|
54,766
|
58,208
|
75,491
|
2000 (30)
|
108,209
|
41,990
|
55,987
|
57,135
|
76,180
|
It should be noted that the averages (means) in Table H-6 are much higher than the medians. This would happen because the averages must take into account those households with really high incomes. It is the principle illustrated by Bill Gates walking into a roomful of homeless people, and the average per-person income immediately shoots way up, but it will drop just as soon as Bill Gates leaves the room, and the others will remain no better off. Such averages are almost worthless as data.
The median incomes are better stats for comparison, because a "median" is a true mid-point: half below and half above. Note, that in a household getting $51,017 annually, if there are two adult earners therein, each is "averaging" only $25K or so! That ain't chicken-feed!
The measured median household incomes has risen slowly from almost $42K in 2000 to $51K in 2012. That is an "average" of about 6.9% a year.
The following table shows the percentage shares of aggregate income distribution by brackets. The 5 fifths listed add up to 100%:
4 to 5.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2012
|
122,459
|
3.2
|
8.3
|
14.4
|
23.0
|
51.0
|
22.3
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2011
|
121,084
|
3.2
|
8.4
|
14.3
|
23.0
|
51.1
|
22.3
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 (37)
|
119,927
|
3.3
|
8.5
|
14.6
|
23.4
|
50.3
|
21.3
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 (36)
|
117,538
|
3.4
|
8.6
|
14.6
|
23.2
|
50.3
|
21.7
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
117,181
|
3.4
|
8.6
|
14.7
|
23.3
|
50.0
|
21.5
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
116,783
|
3.4
|
8.7
|
14.8
|
23.4
|
49.7
|
21.2
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2006
|
116,011
|
3.4
|
8.6
|
14.5
|
22.9
|
50.5
|
22.3
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
114,384
|
3.4
|
8.6
|
14.6
|
23.0
|
50.4
|
22.2
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 (35)
|
113,343
|
3.4
|
8.7
|
14.7
|
23.2
|
50.1
|
21.8
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2003
|
112,000
|
3.4
|
8.7
|
14.8
|
23.4
|
49.8
|
21.4
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2002
|
111,278
|
3.5
|
8.8
|
14.8
|
23.3
|
49.7
|
21.7
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2001
|
109,297
|
3.5
|
8.7
|
14.6
|
23.0
|
50.1
|
22.4
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2000 (30)
|
108,209
|
3.6
|
8.9
|
14.8
|
23.0
|
49.8
|
22.1
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Note that the higher the income bracket, the larger the share. The top 5% share of 22.3% is included in the 51% of the "highest fifth." So, the top 5% has 22.3% of that nut, and the other 15% have the remaining 28.7%; thus, 49% of the remaining aggregate income is shared among 80% of US households!
The following table shows the actual average incomes shared by each fifth of the households. The top fifth's average is almost $182K, yet the top 5% within that bracket average $318K! That means the other 95% of that highest 20% of households pull down that top 5% figure to "only" $182K! One should compare these numbers with the median household income (Table H-6) for 2012 of $51,017 which, as one can see, hits within the "third fifth" bracket below. The following table also shows that 40% of US households received less than $30K gross last year, while the top 5% got over $318K.
Table H-3. Mean Household Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent, All Races: 1967 to 2012
| ||||||
(Households as of March of the following year. Income in current and 2012 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars (29))
| ||||||
Year
|
Lowest fifth
|
Second fifth
|
Third fifth
|
Fourth fifth
|
Highest fifth
|
Top 5 percent
|
Current Dollars
| ||||||
2012
|
11,490
|
29,696
|
51,179
|
82,098
|
181,905
|
318,052
|
2011
|
11,239
|
29,204
|
49,842
|
80,080
|
178,020
|
311,444
|
2010 (37)
|
10,994
|
28,532
|
49,167
|
78,877
|
169,391
|
287,201
|
2009 (36)
|
11,552
|
29,257
|
49,534
|
78,694
|
170,844
|
295,388
|
2008
|
11,656
|
29,517
|
50,132
|
79,760
|
171,057
|
294,709
|
2007
|
11,551
|
29,442
|
49,968
|
79,111
|
167,971
|
287,191
|
2006
|
11,352
|
28,777
|
48,223
|
76,329
|
168,170
|
297,405
|
2005
|
10,655
|
27,357
|
46,301
|
72,825
|
159,583
|
281,155
|
2004 (35)
|
10,244
|
26,212
|
44,411
|
70,026
|
151,438
|
263,896
|
2003
|
9,996
|
25,678
|
43,588
|
68,994
|
147,078
|
253,239
|
2002
|
9,990
|
25,400
|
42,802
|
67,326
|
143,743
|
251,010
|
2001
|
10,136
|
25,468
|
42,629
|
66,839
|
145,970
|
260,464
|
2000 (30)
|
10,157
|
25,361
|
42,233
|
65,653
|
142,269
|
252,400
|
These numbers clearly demonstrate my repeated observations that the bulk of the population is losing spending money to the wealthier classes who simply don't spend much money. That lack of SPENDING is clearly responsible for our economic malaise for the past several years!
The recently reported rise in the stock markets is irrelevant to these numbers because most US households have NOTHING to do with the stock markets!
The OBVIOUS solution is to "redistribute" some of that wealth imbalance through the power of taxation to funnel more spending money to the less wealthy households.
NOT because the wealthy should be punished! But because their investments and the economy generally will degrade further over the long term if the bulk of the ordinary people do not have spending money!
As I have said many, many times, there is NO SUCH THING as a "supply-side" market--ALL markets are DEMAND-DRIVEN! It should be obvious that there must be a demand for things before a market for sellers of those things will exist!
So, you can decide for yourself if any of this makes any difference. I must confess my knowledge and appreciation of late English Prime Minister Benjamin D'Israeli's overriding observation about there being 3 kinds of lies: Lies, DAMNED lies and Statistics!
No comments:
Post a Comment