"Since the Census Bureau started measuring the Gini coefficient in 1967, it has risen by 20% for full-time workers and 18% for households. Among households, the index has risen from 39.7 to 46.9, from 31.4 to 42.4 among men and from 29.8 to 35.7 among women. According to Gini coefficient data, income inequality in the U.S., already among the highest in the post-industrial world, has risen considerably between 1967 and 2005 among households and individuals. "
Income Inequality Reaches Gilded Age Levels, Congressional Report Finds
The master debate strikes again. Using a CBO report based ENTIRELY on HOUSEHOLD income to refute statements about INDIVIDUAL income. It's not even apples and oranges, its apples and horses.....
Now let me quote to you again why HOUSEHOLD INCOME doesn't mean $%&^ for the purposes of the discussion.
So the real complaint of the left isn't about rising income inequality produced by markets, but rather, income inequality produced by how people choose to group together into families and households.
In other words, when I, the engineer, marry my wife, the doctor, we have driven up the HOUSEHOLD gini coefficient by some amount because we are concentrating wealth within our HOUSEHOLD, but the INDIVIDUAL coefficient, which is what matters, is unchanged because we both have the same amount individually as before.
HOUSEHOLD income is dependent upon MANY MANY factors OTHER than economic effects. Yet again I will quote...
And yes, there is more inequality in individuals now than there was in 1967, but again in the last 20 years, if anything there has been a small decrease. So if you're bitching about individual inequality, well, you're bitching about something that happened over the course of 20 years in the middle of the last century. Maybe you should bitch about 19th century sweat shops using child labor while you're at it....