the standard of living is NOT lower for the 99
it is lower for the 80
http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/Household-Income-Distribution.php
that's a chart showing the last 44 years
the top FIVE percent has seen significant real growth (of course much of that growth is perhaps in the top 1% which unfortunately is not filtered out). But even the top 20% has seen decent real growth (but again that includes the top 1% in that group - argh). It is the bottom 60% which is flat. Even the 60-80% group has seen some growth over the last 44 years.
Okay, let me link to my own chart http://www.koch2congress.com/5.html
Showing the 20 years from 1986 to 2006 with IRS data.
1986
11.3% top 1%
12.8% top 4%
11% next 5%
23.9% next 15%
24.3% next 25%
16.7% bottom 50%
2006
22.1% top 1%
14.6% top 4%
10.7% next 5%
20.8% next 15%
19.3% next 25%
12.5% bottom 50%
in 1986 real GDP was $7.1 trillion
in 2006 it was $13 trillion
that shows a 37% growth rate even for the bottom 50%
maybe that just looks flat compared to the 258% growth rate for the top 1%
and the 109% growth rate for the top 4%
and 78% growth rate for the next 5%
59% growth rate for the next 15%
45% growth rate for the next 25%
However, I am looking at TOTAL wealth. If you figure that that wealth is divided up among an increasing number of households. Growth in households was 28% between 1987 and 2007, subtracting that gives you
9% growth for the bottom 50%
17% growth for the next 25%
31% growth for the next 15%
50% growth for the next 5%
81% growth for the top 4%
230% growth for the top 1%
150% growth for the top 5%
14% for the bottom 75%
Which pretty much matches that chart I linked to, except with more divisions at the top and fewer divisions at the bottom. My point is that members of the top 25%, even those who are not members of the 1% are doing much better, with growth rates of 31% and 50% and 81% as you move up the ladder. Which is much better than the 14% down in the bottom 75%.
= new reply since forum marked as read