<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">This came in my email...<BR>
<BR>
DoreneC<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Astronomical Incomes<BR>
<BR>
Stan Cox,<BR>
<BR>
AlterNet July 30, 2003<BR>
<BR>
http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=16515<BR>
<BR>
When my son was in the sixth grade, his science project was a scale model of<BR>
the solar system. His "sun" was a basketball in his bedroom. Mercury,<BR>
Earth and Venus were in our house and front yard, and Mars was in his<BR>
friend's house across the street.<BR>
<BR>
The more interesting pieces of the model were the outer planets. Jupiter,<BR>
Saturn, Uranus and Neptune -represented by tennis balls, ping-pong balls,<BR>
etc. -were placed at increasingly greater distances around our neighborhood<BR>
and beyond, while Pluto was a quarter-inch ball of clay on the university<BR>
campus a mile from our house.<BR>
<BR>
map<BR>
<BR>
One purpose of the exercise was to illustrate for students what<BR>
statisticians call a "skewed distribution," in which numbers pile up at one<BR>
end of a scale and stretch out in a long "tail" at the other. A picture or<BR>
model illustrates "skewness" much better than a list of numbers does.<BR>
<BR>
Household income in the United States has a skewed distribution. The<BR>
imbalance is big, too -so big that statements like, "The benefits of the<BR>
Bush tax cuts will go mainly to households in the top 1 percent tax<BR>
bracket," tend not to tell the whole story.<BR>
<BR>
I'm proposing that the Internal Revenue Service, with the help of the<BR>
National Park Service, construct a scale model of household income in<BR>
America (see above). Let's imagine that they start by designing a big<BR>
bronze plaque that reads, "U.S. median income, 2002" and place it near the<BR>
center of the country -say, in Salina, Kansas, where I live. (We're an<BR>
obvious choice, being only about a 90-minute drive from the geographical<BR>
center of the continental United States.)<BR>
<BR>
The median income was about $43,000 last year. Half of American households<BR>
received less than that amount, and half received more. Suppose the IRS<BR>
were to locate the median-income plaque at one of Salina's exits on<BR>
Interstate 70 and then place plaques symbolizing other incomes along I-70 to<BR>
the east and west, using a scale of, say, $1,000 of income per mile of road.<BR>
<BR>
The plaque showing the federal poverty level for a family of four in<BR>
2002 -about $18,000 -would be located about 25 miles west of Salina, at the<BR>
exit for Ellsworth, Kansas. Eighteen miles beyond, in the town of Wilson,<BR>
would be the spot for the "zero income" plaque (assuming the good people of<BR>
Wilson would accept that dubious distinction).<BR>
<BR>
That's it for the incomes of half of all U.S. households. They would fit<BR>
within a 43-mile stretch, across only two Kansas counties. (See this map to<BR>
find Salina, Wilson and the other landmarks in the model.)<BR>
<BR>
The top half of the income scale would be illustrated by plaques to the east<BR>
of Salina. About 150 miles from the zero point, in the western suburbs of<BR>
Topeka, the capital city of Kansas, would be the spot for a plaque reading,<BR>
"Income: 95th percentile," because 95 percent of households take in less<BR>
than $150,000 a year. Ninety-nine percent of households make less than<BR>
$374,000, so the plaque reading "Income: 99th percentile" would go in<BR>
Williamsburg, Missouri, about 75 miles west of St. Louis.<BR>
<BR>
That takes care of 99 percent of us. But it's in the top 1 percent of<BR>
incomes -those east of Missouri -where we see what "a skewed distribution"<BR>
really means. The plaque for "Average income of the top 1%" ($1,082,000)<BR>
would lie a few miles southeast of Pittsburgh -a 20-hour drive on I-70 from<BR>
median-income Salina. But averages don't mean much when it comes to the top<BR>
1%.<BR>
<BR>
For example, one household that belongs to the top 1%, the George W. and<BR>
Laura Bush family, reported a paltry $856,000 in 2002 income, which puts<BR>
their plaque at an exit ramp a little east of Columbus, Ohio. Meanwhile,<BR>
the average income of major-corporation CEOs in 2002 was $7.4 million.<BR>
That's an amount that falls well beyond Baltimore, where Interstate 70 ends.<BR>
To keep to scale, the IRS would have to put that plaque in ... well ...<BR>
they'd have to put it in Kabul, Afghanistan. At this point, they might have<BR>
to bring the Defense Department in on the project.<BR>
<BR>
Not to mention NASA. The individuals at the pinnacle of the income pyramid,<BR>
those with the top 400 incomes (IRS year-2000 figures), averaged $174<BR>
million, which, at $1000 per mile, is almost three-fourths of the distance<BR>
to the moon. Maybe the top members of that group could use some of their<BR>
loot to fund a plaque -no, a monument -on the moon, reading, "Beyond this<BR>
point lie the incomes of dozens of Americans."<BR>
<BR>
But let's come back down to earth. Ninety-five percent of U.S. households<BR>
have incomes between zero and $150,000. There, between Wilson and Topeka,<BR>
Kansas on our income map, can be found almost the entire range of knowledge,<BR>
skills and political positions that our country has to offer. Yet the top<BR>
1% -that million or so families stretching out over the horizon from<BR>
Missouri to the moon -make a disproportionate share of the economic and<BR>
political decisions in America.<BR>
<BR>
The distribution of wealth is even more wildly skewed than that of income;<BR>
the 5% of households with the greatest net worth own almost 60% of the<BR>
country's wealth. The primary function of excess income is to generate<BR>
additional wealth, and wealth confers power. The "one person, one vote"<BR>
principle applies only in the poll booth. Everywhere else, it's that same<BR>
old skewed distribution.<BR>
<BR>
The income map doesn't have to be so distorted. This huge gulf between the<BR>
rich and the rest of us is a recent phenomenon. From World War II up to<BR>
1979, incomes increased at about the same rate in all brackets. But from<BR>
1979 to 1997, the average annual income of the top 1% (after taxes)<BR>
increased by 157%, or $414,000 in 1997 dollars. Over the same period, the<BR>
income of the poorest 20% fell by $100.<BR>
<BR>
Upcoming tax cuts will only aggravate the discrepancy. Without a drastic<BR>
change in course, we as a nation will be putting our fate, more and more, in<BR>
the hands of people who know as much about the reality of American life<BR>
below the median income line as would a visitor from the planet Remulak.<BR>
<BR>
Stan Cox is a plant breeder/geneticist and writer living in Salina, Kansas.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>