On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 2011, at 9:01 AM, James Leveque wrote:
>
> > http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/06/us-wealth-distribution-2011.html
> >
> > If you look at the second graph from the top, something I don't
> understand
> > happens between about 2000 and 2003. The share of wealth for the top 1%
> took
> > a nosedive from about 100 percent compared to 1979 to less than 60
> percent.
> > The top 20% also took a mild hit. But the bottom 80% saw an increase - it
> > was small and was erased by 2004, but it's definitely there. Obviously
> the
> > trend is major increases for the top 1% and a slow decline for most
> everyone
> > else, but then there's this anomaly between 2000 and 2003. What happened?
>
> That's income, not wealth.
>
> What happened was the bear market. That concept of income includes capital
> gains (which the Census Bureau's annual number don't - the CBO combines
> Census and tax data to come up with this series). A very large share of the
> superrich's income is capital gains.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>