> On Oct 24, 2011, at 9:57 AM, Bryan Atinsky wrote:
>
>> I was just wondering who has good data on generational perpetuity of wealth.
> It helps a lot, but there's no guarantee. Actually, membership in the 1% (by income, not wealth) is quite volatile. Most people have short stays at the top, then slip back a few percentiles.
>
> Quoting from LBO #132:
>
>> The George W. Bush Treasury Department did a mobility study based on tax data which does allow a look at the very high end (though it must be said that the high end often manages to excuse itself from paying taxes, so this is only a partial look). It found that of the top 1% in 1996 (minimum income: $284,603 in 2005 dollars), 40% were still there in 2005 (when the minimum income was $463,615 in the same 2005 dollars, up 63%).
Of course, you could also define top 1% by wealth instead of income. There would be much more stickiness, almost by definition.
SA