The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

A recent Congressional Budget Office report on inequality has been drawing headlines for finding that inequality is on the rise. Given the Occupy Wall Street protests focused on the 1 percent vs. 99 percent narrative, the paper couldn't be more timely.

The report actually doesn't contain much new information -- we've known for a while that many measures of inequality have been rising -- but it does contain a number of stark charts like this one: 

As I've argued at length before, in many ways the rich are getting richer while the middle class isn't doing quite as well, but the way these statistics are reported, including in this newest CBO report, exaggerates the size and nature of the problem. For an interesting and informed explanation of how the stats on inequality can be misleading, I'd recommend this Econtalk podcast with University of Chicago economist Bruce Meyer. But I'd also recommend this chart from Political Calculations, which cuts to the heart of the matter by showing the trend of the Gini Coefficient, a commonly-used measure of inequality, for U.S. individuals over the period 1994-2010:

It's totally flat, indicating no increase in inequality at all over the past 15 years or so. The reason that it differs so drastically from the CBO chart above is that it captures what's happened to individuals as opposed to households. Household formation has changed significantly over the past 40 years, leading to correspondingly large changed in measurements of incomes and inequality at the household level. 

View all comments (2) | Leave a comment

Kingofthenet| 10.26.11 @ 2:34PM

Why the RICH are allowed to make most of their income from investments at such a low tax rate is a disgrace, Capital Gains need to be taxed as regular income NOW.

Odikhmantievich| 10.26.11 @ 4:25PM

True - the Gini coefficient hasn't changed much since 1994. But this doesn't really "cut to the matter" as (1) a rise in GDP under income inequality, with a flat coefficient, means the earnings are being distributed unevenly - in other words, inequality as a measure of distribution of total income may not be rising but it is enforcing itself; and (2) the coefficient rose rapidly between '79 and '09, so the time frame Political Calculations provides obscures the big-picture development. See: http://newsbatch.com/econ-newginihistus.html

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Joseph Lawler

http://spectator.org/blog/2011/10/26/the-99-percent-are-keeping-up

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT