Top 1% Keep Getting Richer

- ADVERTISEMENT -

Recent reports from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) have shown that the top 1% keep getting richer over the years. The middle and lower classes, however, haven’t been so lucky.

Stated the CBO report:

“Over the past three decades, the distribution of income in the United States has become increasingly dispersed — in particular, the share of income accruing to high-income households has increased, whereas the share accruing to other households has declined.”

The report found that for the 1% of wealthiest Americans, the average inflation-adjusted household income grew by 275%. The rest of wealthiest 1/5th of the population, (not including the top 1%), saw household income grow by 65% during that time, far faster than the rest of the population. And the poorest people in America, the bottom 1/5th, have only seen an 18% increase over the past 30 years.

Yes, a 275% increase of annual income in the already richest 1% of the population compared to the 18% increase for the poorest segment of the population. How on Earth did this happen?

The CBO report offered some explanation:

ADVERTISMENT: CONTENT CONTINUED BELOW

“The rapid growth in average real household income for the 1% of the population with the highest income was a major factor contributing to the growing inequality in the distribution of household income between 1979 and 2007. Shifts in government transfers and federal taxes also contributed to that increase in inequality.”

Others point to the fact that climbing the economic ladder– a.k.a. the American Dream– has becoming increasingly difficult.

Perhaps one of the best qualities about U.S. society has been lost. Recent research indicates that Americans are less economically mobile than ever. Could it be? The the land of opportunity, where rags-to-riches stories make up our citizenry’s landscape is on the verge of extinction?

Occupy Wall Street seems to have shown a spotlight on the issue. With an emphasis on the “we are the 99%”, it has become painfully clear that the disparity between the rich and wealthy has reached extreme levels. But does that mean that mean the possibility for a Jefferson ‘s experience of “movin’ on up to the East side” is no longer within the average Americans reach?

Related: Summer Jobs and Tough Competition

Jason DeParle thinks so. Back in January the journalist penned an article for the New York Times entitled “Harder for Americans to Rise from Lower Rungs“. In it he argues that the evidence for America’s lack of economic mobility is staggering:

“A project led by Markus Jantti, an economist at a Swedish university, found that 42 percent of American men raised in the bottom fifth of incomes stay there as adults. That shows a level of persistent disadvantage much higher than in Denmark (25 percent) and Britain (30 percent) — a country famous for its class constraints.”

The study also found that 62% of men and women raised in the top 5th of incomes stay in the top 2/5ths. Likewise, 65% of men and women born in the bottom 5th stay in the bottom 2/5ths. This lack of mobility is not shared by Canada and Western European countries.

Between unfair taxation and a less mobile society, it’s no wonder that the rich keep getting richer.

GD Star Rating
loading...

Top 1% Keep Getting Richer, 5.0 out of 5 based on 1 rating

- ADVERTISEMENT -

Tags: Top 1% Keep Getting Richer

4 Responses to “Top 1% Keep Getting Richer”

JoeTaxpayer

12. May, 2012

But much of that bottom 40% pays no federal tax at all, zero. So what can we do in the tax code to make it fairer for them?
JoeTaxpayer recently posted..Fair Trade?

GD Star Rating
loading...

Reply to this comment
- Forest
  
  17. May, 2012
  
  Well I don’t think there is fairness in taxing people who already don’t have enough to live so the goal is to get more of those 40% into the tax paying brackets in my opinion and even out the playing field. Taxing the richest Americans could theoretically help create a bottom layer that would give people from disadvantaged backgrounds the ability to access the same high level education and aspirations of the more advantaged members of society.
  
  GD Star Rating
  loading...
  
  Reply to this comment
  - JoeTaxpayer
    
    17. May, 2012
    
    I don’t have the answers, just observations and questions. The recent 5 years of college grads have a horrific unemployment rate. Do they have the wrong degrees or are we in an economy that simply doesn’t need highly educated people right now?
    My question – there appears to be a class of job that requires no degree, has a low wage, but is essential. The grocery store worker, the cashiers, the restaurant help. In a perfect world, these people would all be either high school/college kids and those who for whatever reason want some part time work, just some hours here and there. Right? When I worked fast food as a kid, I felt uneasy doing it side by side with adults who would never have a better job. But, someone needs to do these things.
    I’m less concerned about taxing the rich (let them fend for themselves) and more interested in how you propose to create a fair society.
    JoeTaxpayer recently posted..Mother’s Day Roundup 2012
    
    GD Star Rating
    loading...
    
    Reply to this comment
    - Forest
      
      21. May, 2012
      
      I certainly don’t have all the answers either! I do feel I see fairer situations though. In places like Sweden the gap between rich and poor is far less and people working those jobs tend to be supported enough to live by the system. Does it cut down on desire to succeed though? Not in the slightest, Sweden has birthed some of the world’s most successful companies.
      
      I’m prepared to except different taxing systems but feel it should be in a way to be that people who have more (or consume more) pay more. I think it was Warren Buffet who was saying under the current system he effectively pays less tax than his secretary.
      
      Maybe a taxing of items would be far better with absolutely no tax on income. Make a beer 3 times the price and make vegetables 3 times less, subsidise necessity by higher taxation of chosen goods. That way all would be able to afford a simple healthy life and there will be a more even bottom line. I know the corporations would never go for this because the poor is often their target audience.
      
      Just some random thoughts, I am certainly no economist or politician.
      
      GD Star Rating
      loading...
      
      Reply to this comment