4 ms·
> 12% of the population will find themselves in the top 1% of the income distribution for at least one year That is just wild. I wish they dove deeper into the
by RickS 7y ago
> 12% of the population will find themselves in the top 1% of the income distribution for at least one year
That is just wild. I wish they dove deeper into the data here. The top 1% of earning, based on a quick google, is 1.3m/yr. That's a lot! Are there, say, estate windfalls pushing people around to cause some of those blips?
Also, this article fails to separate income from wealth/assets, which seems to be a common pitfall in this kind of conversation. Many of the people with the most wealth are not those with the most income. So while there appears to be lots of income volatility, I would be interested in seeing the same thing for wealth over time.
- huffmsa 7y agoWealth typically only lasts 2-3 generations. That might change as people have fewer kids. Takes 2-5 generations to go from poverty to top 1%. I would give citations but I've forgotten where I heard this.
- munk-a 7y agoYour phrasing is a bit misleading, wealth is very fleeting, but the 2-5 generations to get into the top 1% is not "typical" by definition 1% of people reside in the top 1% - if we were to assume that the cycle of boom and bust is the lower bound in your example (two to fall out, two to get in) then one out of every five generations a family should be in the 1%, yielding that 20% of the population should currently be in the top 1% - using your upper bounds it's a bit less silly but still mathematically unsound _and_ I would strongly challenge that 2-3 generations number. Evidence that I've seen doesn't support wealthy families falling out in 2-3 generations (except borderline wealthy families) and the dynamics of money are changing, the estate tax has been abolished and we simply don't have enough information past 1980 to see if that claim will hold true... and what evidence we have (general information about wealth inequality) is showing a strong trend to continue the concentration of wealth.
- munk-a 7y agoIs it wild? I'm guessing this one year is the year they sell their "working" house and downsize into retirement. Many retirees will see a windfall of 1-2 million from going from a paid off property in a city to a house for their retirement in New Mexico. I know some specific cases of similar transitions moving from Boston to Vermont, when you don't need to be located near a job center you can find really cheap real estate.
- ivalm 7y agoTop 1% if 422k/year. 1.3mil is closer to top 0.1%