Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DreamGypsy

(2,252 posts)
7. How about income distribution in 1947?
Fri May 4, 2012, 12:03 PM
May 2012

I found an interesting census bureau publication The Changing Shape of the Nation’s Income Distribution 1947-1998 that was published in 2000.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2000pubs/p60-204.pdf

Since 1947, the Census Bureau has employed a commonly used measure, the Gini coefficient (also known as the index of income concentration), to measure family income inequality. With two exceptions, the Gini coefficient decreased between 1947 and 1968. During this period, the Gini for families indicated a decrease in income inequality of 7.5 (±2.1) percent.2 Since 1968, however, this trend has reversed. Income inequality for families, measured by the Gini coefficient, increased between 1968 and 1998 (see Figure 1). The net effect over the entire 1947-1998 period is an increase in family income inequality


The document has detailed information about the years 1968-1998, including distribution of household income by fifths from lowest to highest and Men/Women income disparities.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Open Letter To Romney sharp_stick May 2012 #1
That should be Obama's reply. denverbill May 2012 #2
Yeah, and ProSense May 2012 #4
Federal tax rates 1947 DreamGypsy May 2012 #5
Thanks. n/t ProSense May 2012 #6
Open letter to Mittens Romney WI_DEM May 2012 #3
How about income distribution in 1947? DreamGypsy May 2012 #7
All carrot - no stick aint_no_life_nowhere May 2012 #8
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Romney Pens Open Letter T...»Reply #7