4 ms·

Some other data which tells a different story; I wonder how it all reconciles: In the United States, the richest 1 percent have seen their share of national in

Some other data which tells a different story; I wonder how it all reconciles: In the United States, the richest 1 percent have seen their share of national income roughly double since 1980, to 20 percent in 2014 from 11 percent. ... No other nation in the 35-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is as unequal among those with comparable tax data, and none have experienced such a sharp rise in inequality. ... Almost all of the growth in top American earners has come from just three economic sectors: professional services, finance and insurance, and health care, groups that tend to benefit from regulatory barriers that shelter them from competition. The groups that have contributed the most people to the 1 percent since 1980 are: physicians ... The United States also stands out in terms of how much money its elite professionals earn relative to the median worker. Workers at the 90th percentile of the income distribution for professionals make 3.5 times the earnings of the typical (median) worker in all occupations in the United States. Only Mexico and Israel, which have very high inequality, compensate professionals so disproportionately. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-united-states.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-...

lloyd-christmas 9y ago
Income is not the same as wealth, and income is irrelevant if it doesn't turn into wealth. My father is a doctor and he finished paying off his education at 48. I make half what he made and finished paying mine off at 28. I'm drastically more wealthy now, and will be wealthier when I retire. This seems strange given the significant difference in income. 1980 is a very peculiar data point to mention. That year is pretty much exactly when minimum wage and tuition suddenly diverged. Between 1965 and 1980, A full time summer job at minimum wage could consistently pay for ~45% of your tuition. In the next 15 years, it dropped to around 20-25%. Running the numbers for 2017-2018, in-state tuition is 20%, out of state is 11%, and private is 8.6%. The groups that have contributed the most people to the 1 percent since 1980 are: physicians ... With all that in mind, this statement doesn't seem unreasonable to me. If education prices have skyrocketed, shouldn't the career that spends the most in education (both time and cost) be compensated accordingly? Point being, income is only half of the equation to wealth. That article doesn't bother mentioning debt at all. Relevant assumptions/data: Summer job: 14 weeks @ 40hrs per week Tuition costs 2017: https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/average-published-undergraduate-charges-sector-2017-18 https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tabl... Older tuition costs: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76 https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76 Minimum wage: https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm

lloyd-christmas 9y ago

Income is not the same as wealth, and income is irrelevant if it doesn't turn into wealth. My father is a doctor and he finished paying off his education at 48. I make half what he made and finished paying mine off at 28. I'm drastically more wealthy now, and will be wealthier when I retire. This seems strange given the significant difference in income. 1980 is a very peculiar data point to mention. That year is pretty much exactly when minimum wage and tuition suddenly diverged. Between 1965 and 1980, A full time summer job at minimum wage could consistently pay for ~45% of your tuition. In the next 15 years, it dropped to around 20-25%. Running the numbers for 2017-2018, in-state tuition is 20%, out of state is 11%, and private is 8.6%. The groups that have contributed the most people to the 1 percent since 1980 are: physicians ... With all that in mind, this statement doesn't seem unreasonable to me. If education prices have skyrocketed, shouldn't the career that spends the most in education (both time and cost) be compensated accordingly? Point being, income is only half of the equation to wealth. That article doesn't bother mentioning debt at all. Relevant assumptions/data: Summer job: 14 weeks @ 40hrs per week Tuition costs 2017: https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/average-published-undergraduate-charges-sector-2017-18 https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tabl... Older tuition costs: https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76 https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76 Minimum wage: https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm https://www.dol.gov/whd/minwage/chart.htm