However I still thought the wages seemed low. $52,000 a year in 1999 was among the top 10%tile of U.S. Wage earners? $39,000 was in the top 20%? My thinking was that there are a lot of people in white-collar jobs (doctors, lawyers, executives, IT) that would be more than 10% of the workforce that earn over 52k.
---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 14:39:49 -0400
>Chris wrote:
>
>>I'm puzzled by the way these numbers work out.
>>
>>The top 20% of households in 1998 was $127,000.
>>
>>The 90%tile of workers in 1999 was 52%. Assuming
>>that a household has two wage earners in a similar
>>earnings basis (which is certainly >not< valid
>>in the real world) that makes the top 10%tile averaging
>>104,000 a year. It would also make the top 20%tile
>>making about 78,000 a year.
>>
>>The number also seem awfully low in my opinion.
>
>You mean the wage numbers seem lots lower than the overall income
>numbers? People at the high end have lots of nonwage income - like
>interest, dividends, and capital gains. Also, people above the 90th
>percentile make *lots* of money, which pulls up the averages.
>
>Doug
>