Re:The Geography of U.S. Inequality
by Bartweiss on Tuesday September 06, 2016 @11:10AM
(#12436557)
I can appreciate the general sentiment, but at least for this post specifically I'm not sure I agree.
The subtle aspects of these two charts are really interesting. Like, the only non-rich group to see income gains in the US is the ~15th percentile group? That's striking, and deserves some consideration. (At a guess, EITC and Clinton's work-for-benefits programs have helped the employed-near-minimum-wage cohort, but not the very poor.) The 2000-2014 numbers are similarly interesting - we see that the ~90th percentile (e.g. surgeons) was insulated from the crash better than the middle class or the very rich, but that the very rich have rebounded completely.
So yes, signaling is different from actual action, but I'm filing this one under 'education'. For me at least, I'm interested more by the subtleties than by the basic restatement of "this is an issue".
The subtle aspects of these two charts are really interesting. Like, the only non-rich group to see income gains in the US is the ~15th percentile group? That's striking, and deserves some consideration. (At a guess, EITC and Clinton's work-for-benefits programs have helped the employed-near-minimum-wage cohort, but not the very poor.) The 2000-2014 numbers are similarly interesting - we see that the ~90th percentile (e.g. surgeons) was insulated from the crash better than the middle class or the very rich, but that the very rich have rebounded completely.
So yes, signaling is different from actual action, but I'm filing this one under 'education'. For me at least, I'm interested more by the subtleties than by the basic restatement of "this is an issue".