3 ms·
This is a bit misleading. They incorrectly haphazardly swap "income" and "wealth": The subtitle says "Explore the occupations and industries of the nation’s w
by jerfelix 15y ago
This is a bit misleading. They incorrectly haphazardly swap "income" and "wealth":
The subtitle says "Explore the occupations and industries of the nation’s wealthiest households." Yet the chart note is "The chart counts the number of individual workers living in households with an overall income in the top 1 percent nationwide."
This implies that a retired multimillionaire with a 300K passive income isn't in the wealthiest one percent, and a couple with a negative net worth (e.g. bought a $2 million dollar house that's now only worth a million; and no savings), with two $190K jobs is in the wealthiest one percent. Of course this is nonsense.
- jws 15y agoPlus, most of the entries are a mess of "spouse" jobs. e.g. They have 8k receptionists in the top 1% and 7k laborers. Dropping the lowest income household earners that weren't required in order to reach 1% would focus the data better.