4 ms·
The actual raw data is here: http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2010 http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2010 My first thought was to think, W
by aasarava 15y ago
The actual raw data is here:
http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2010 http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/netcomp.cgi?year=2010
My first thought was to think, Wow this really provides a strong counterargument to people who keep touting the fact that 47% of US citizens don't pay any income taxes (other than FICA). Also I was shocked to see that "The 1%" included essentially anyone making over $200K. [edit: i originally made a mistake and said $100K]
But in looking more closely, I can't tell if the numbers are based from individual W2s (meaning a single individual with two jobs might contribute two separate data points), on individual taxpayers, or individual tax filings (maybe a family).
I suspect it's one of the first two. And if that's the case, these numbers can't directly be applied to stats about poverty levels or the "99%" and the "1%" and the "47%" figures being slung around these days.
For instance, these numbers include part time workers, such as teenagers with after-school jobs. At minimum wage, working 4 hours a day for 6 days a week for 50 weeks, this person might earn ~$8K.
So it's likely that some part of that first 25% on the chart are part-time workers.
That's not to say that there aren't some families doing everything they can to make just $8K in a year, but rather that the percentages would sound different if we built the chart using only data from tax returns (not W2s) and stripped out everyone who was not attempting to work full time to support themselves or a family.
Can someone provide insight that would either debunk or validate my assumptions above?
- yummyfajitas 15y agoHere is data on part time workers. About 1/4 of workers are part time (about 34 million people). ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat19.txt About 3/4 of those who are part time are voluntarily part time (i.e., not because they can't find full time work). ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat20.txt
- rmah 15y agoThe data only includes the types of compensation that are subject to FICA. This includes only salaries, wages, bonuses, profit sharing and tips. It does not include dividends, capital gains (includes things like options) and interest income. The data does include part time workers, including students. There aren't that many teens and college students in the US (only about 10% of the population). It also includes some retired people working part time jobs. I think the IRS and the US Census publishes similar data but uses total compensation. IIRC, the median moves up a bit (but still under $30k) while the top end skews upwards dramatically.
- onedognight 15y ago> Also I was shocked to see that "The 1%" included essentially anyone making over $100K. It looks like it's anyone making over $200k not $100k if I'm reading it correctly.
- spenrose 15y agoA large fraction of the 47% are the elderly. The evil rank dishonesty of the people who started this meme (not the useful ignorant who spread it) is highlighted by the fact that the elderly are their electoral base. Rich men are encouraging senior citizens watching Fox to think that "they" are freeloaders ... and using those same senior citizens to inflate the number of supposed freeloaders. That's on TOP of not including payroll, sales, and other taxes with regressive distributions when they calculate tax burden.
- jquery 15y agoI don't think this invalidates the point. The elderly can still vote.