Stalking the Apparently Fascinating Top 1%

The current shameless campaign of envy and division purposefully confuses income and wealth, two entirely different entities; it also confuses the people who are being maligned.

A recent Congressional Budget Office report shows that, while the average household income fell 12% between 2007 and 2009, the average for the lower four-fifths fell by 5% or less, while the average income for households in the top fifth fell 18%. For households in the apparently fascinating "top one percent", income fell by 36% in those same years.

This data is different from most that is published which generally show the upper bracket improves. Why? The IRS tracks people, not groups. The CBO numbers are based on IRS statistics of specific individuals and households over time through Social Security numbers, not the generalized numbers from each bracket where the people change over time. There is a large turnover in each bracket from one time period to another--for example, in the apparently fascinating top 1% most people are in that bracket for only one year in a decade.

In fairness, these numbers are also self fulfilling. Since most people in the top one percent are there for a specific reason--stock sale, house sale, inheritance event or insurance event--and those events are not repeated, these people will have decline in income almost by definition.

But it only further demonstrates the complexity--and the insincerity--of such generalizations.