Shhh! Americans Getting Richer

Reader Comments
Back to blog

1) Adjusted gross income reported on tax returns in 2006, adjusted for inflation, averaged $58,029, up 1.2 percent from 2000.
The increase in adjusted gross income (AGI ) can be attributed to changes in the definitions for items qualifying for subtraction (phase out) from gross income. Also, the average is biased by some higher income individuals.
2) Some 60 percent of the increase in total income went to those making more than $75,000, but less than $1 million a year.
One hundred percent of the increase in total income went to those making more than $75,000 of which 42 percent went to those making more than $1 million in 2006.
3) Average income rose $2,291 in 2004 and $2,210 in 2005, and $1,369 in 2006—the slowdown because of the effect of inflation.
These figures are correct but if one takes the average wage in 2006 it is actually lower by $101 than the average wage of the year 2000.
4) Salaries fell by almost 1 percent among taxpayers whose total income was $1 million or more.
True again. However, most of that decrease was among those who had their wages fall to an average of $3.5 million a year. Yeah... unless I'm wrong, it looks as if the modestly wealthy are getting No Richer.
Me: I wait with bated breath to learn just how much our country has prospered in 2007 and what we might expect in 2008!

SEM of IL 3:47AM August 29, 2008

Sorry, that really makes me wonder wth you're spending your money on. I am in the low 40s and have been the last 4 years and am doing better than just fine.
In fact, if I'd stop wasting 2/3 of my paycheck every month, I'd have a real chunk of savings or investment money put together right now.
But then, I don't "need" that Hi-def TV or that new computer or the most expensive steaks to cook for dinner for my friends (I would recommend learning how to marinade cheap steak). I don't need an SUV or luxury car, or...
God, Honestly, even after subtracting the 35% of taxes (or is it more?) that you have to pay, I Still can't figure out how to spend all that money without buying stupid, frivolous junk. LOTS of stupid, frivolous junk (or really, REally good vacations).

Taran of PA 4:11PM August 27, 2008

"Yes, I know "cost of goods" is general -- that's why I said "cost of goods in general," which we all know is impacting everyone at every level. Of course things scale differently as your income increases - but it doesn't mean that someone making $100K isn't feeling pinched right now. When I examine what I could change to cut back on my monthly costs, I'm looking at commuting via public transportation rather than driving, not cooking dinner for friends as often, etc. I realize I am fortunate not to have to choose between putting food on the table and paying for medication -- but when I say living paycheck to paycheck, I honestly mean that."
Which goes to my original point. If you are feeling the "pinch" (and believe me, I sympathize. I am about to lose my house and my wife and I are going down to one car!), then now is not the time to be talking about "taxing the rich". The government ALWAYS have a broad definition of who is rich, and when revenues are not coming in, that definition only gets broader. We can't always have it good: having it always good then gives us a sense of entitlement. And that then leads to contempt for others who are doing better. I am obviously not doing as well as you, but I don't want what you have because it's not mines to take. So instead of wanting to take other people's earnings, I look within at what I can cut and ask family for help.

Chris of AZ 5:56PM August 26, 2008

"No, Chris, it says that you in the "high 30's" got your dollar diminished (with more deficits) for benefit of those making up to a million---who got almost all of the tax cuts."
And which deficit are you referring to? The war in Iraq or the funding for Medicare, or the funding for Social Security or the myriad other programs?
My dollar was not diminished, as I was able to get a refund. See, your logic is faulty (as it always is). If you happen to pay the majority of the tax, which most people in the bracket does, you get the majority of the benefit of a tax cut. For those who are in my tax bracket we hardly pay the tax, therefore we get no benefit. That, however, isn't the point. The point is is that when you keep taxes lower, everyone benefits. By the way, for all of those programs you support, I don't get to benefit from any of them because the government, rightly, says I make too much in income to benefit from them.
"And yet you keep blogging away for the right wingers---as though you had even an ounce of sense. If you were going to spend this much time pounding the keyboard, one would think you'd at least put some thought in the effort instead of shilling for the upper crust."
Come now, Daniel David. The only person here who never makes sense is you. Now, spare me the personal attacks and make an argument on the issues. Explain why you feel that people need to pay more money to the government.

Chris of AZ 5:38PM August 26, 2008

No, Chris, it says that you in the "high 30's" got your dollar diminished (with more deficits) for benefit of those making up to a million---who got almost all of the tax cuts. And yet you keep blogging away for the right wingers---as though you had even an ounce of sense. If you were going to spend this much time pounding the keyboard, one would think you'd at least put some thought in the effort instead of shilling for the upper crust.

of 1:36PM August 26, 2008

Yes, I know "cost of goods" is general -- that's why I said "cost of goods in general," which we all know is impacting everyone at every level. Of course things scale differently as your income increases - but it doesn't mean that someone making $100K isn't feeling pinched right now. When I examine what I could change to cut back on my monthly costs, I'm looking at commuting via public transportation rather than driving, not cooking dinner for friends as often, etc. I realize I am fortunate not to have to choose between putting food on the table and paying for medication -- but when I say living paycheck to paycheck, I honestly mean that.

L.C. of MD 1:19PM August 26, 2008

"2) Some 60 percent of the increase in total income went to those making more than $75,000, but less than $1 million a year.
This says everything you need to know."
Actually, it says that the tax cut had the biggest impact on the middle class, not on the rich.
"My income has increased significantly since 2000. But so have my expenses. Real estate, gas prices, and the cost of goods in general is killing me. I make more than 6 figures but still live paycheck to paycheck -- and I'm not spending my money on travel, lavish dinners or expensive clothing."
Well, my income went up as well, but so did my spending. And I only make in the high 30s. But if your expenses have gone up, how do you benefit from having to pay more in taxes? You should ask for politicians to keep them lower so you can keep more of your money to spend on the rising cost in expenses.
By the by "cost of goods" is pretty general. Kinda makes me wonder about the statement that you're making a six figure salary and still living paycheck to paycheck.

Chris of AZ 12:52PM August 26, 2008

My income has increased significantly since 2000. But so have my expenses. Real estate, gas prices, and the cost of goods in general is killing me. I make more than 6 figures but still live paycheck to paycheck -- and I'm not spending my money on travel, lavish dinners or expensive clothing.

L.C. of MD 11:06AM August 26, 2008

2) Some 60 percent of the increase in total income went to those making more than $75,000, but less than $1 million a year.
This says everything you need to know.

of 10:58AM August 26, 2008