> Between 1967 and 2003 here in the US, according to the US Census Bureau,
> people in the bottom 20% of incomes have seen their incomes raise an
> average of 28.4%. ($14,002 at the start and $17,984 in 2003)
>
> At the same time, people in the 95th percentile have seen their average
> incomes go up by about 78%. ($88,678 in '67, $154,120 in '03).

I was looking at figures globally, not just for one country. There must 
be reasons why the USA increases for the bottom 20% have not kept up 
with the global trend.

> I'm talking in the US, and those values don't appear to take inflation
> into account, it seems.

They all take inflation into account.

 > But those graphs also don't provide sources for
> their data, so they don't seem to be particularly useful.  I can create a
> graph that tells whatever story I want if I don't tell you the source of
> the data.

You can try googling "global income distribution", the answers are all 
the same.

Try pages 34 and 35 (pages 35 and 36 in the PDF) of this report.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/globalincometrends.pdf

The table "Income growth by decile" holds the key data. Essentially the 
low-mid earners have seen the largest growth, with the very lowest and 
high earners seeing lower growth (but still significantly positive). The 
only real negative growth (in real terms) was for those in the 75-85 
percentile from 1990-2000. In the same period the bottom 10% saw 12% growth.

Post a reply to this message