Comments on: 2005 US Income Distribution part 3 http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/ Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Carl Von Snarl http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1435 Carl Von Snarl Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:06:00 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-1435 What suppresses that information is the same thing that suppresses your income: A failure to understand mathematics.  Just look at the histogram of income distribution; if X people earn Y income, you can figure it out.  Duh. What suppresses that information is the same thing that suppresses your income: A failure to understand mathematics.  Just look at the histogram of income distribution; if X people earn Y income, you can figure it out.  Duh.

]]> By: Taxpayer700B http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1167 Taxpayer700B Thu, 05 May 2011 22:21:00 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-1167 What I want to see, on a linear/linear scale, is the distribution of aggregate national income across evenly-spaced income brackets. My suspicion is that it will show a substantial proportion of the aggregate US income falls above the $250K income level. Impossible to find that data on the internet. Probably those who fall into that category would be happier that the general public isn't aware, and have the influence to suppress that information. What I want to see, on a linear/linear scale, is the distribution of aggregate national income across evenly-spaced income brackets. My suspicion is that it will show a substantial proportion of the aggregate US income falls above the $250K income level. Impossible to find that data on the internet. Probably those who fall into that category would be happier that the general public isn’t aware, and have the influence to suppress that information.

]]> By: 2005 US Income Distribution part 3 – インフォグラフィックス http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1055 2005 US Income Distribution part 3 – インフォグラフィックス Fri, 08 Apr 2011 05:59:49 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-1055 [...] VisualizingEconomics Comments [...] [...] VisualizingEconomics Comments [...]

]]> By: Michael http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-150 Michael Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:00:38 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-150 One question: Where do I sign up to be a hedge fund manager? One question: Where do I sign up to be a hedge fund manager?

]]> By: rainer http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-149 rainer Wed, 02 Jun 2010 22:31:49 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-149 Hi, thanks for this useful rendering of data. Two things... you might consider including a y axis with unit markers in your "bottom 98%" chart, would make it easier to match a particular y value with its corresponding x value. As it is one has to count the houses for each column and that's a little tedious. But the overall visual impact is great. Secondly, in the "top 2%" chart, the unit is undefined on the y axis. How many people or households does one of those little figures represent? Perhaps I have missed something but this chart seems not to provide the necessary households to income level ratio info that is necessary for completing the L shaped curve begun in your "bottom 98%" chart. I would so appreciate it if you could please clarify. Hi, thanks for this useful rendering of data. Two things… you might consider including a y axis with unit markers in your “bottom 98%” chart, would make it easier to match a particular y value with its corresponding x value. As it is one has to count the houses for each column and that’s a little tedious. But the overall visual impact is great.

Secondly, in the “top 2%” chart, the unit is undefined on the y axis. How many people or households does one of those little figures represent? Perhaps I have missed something but this chart seems not to provide the necessary households to income level ratio info that is necessary for completing the L shaped curve begun in your “bottom 98%” chart. I would so appreciate it if you could please clarify.

]]> By: Catherine http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-148 Catherine Sun, 19 Oct 2008 00:56:35 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-148 Unfortunately no I don't have that kind of data Unfortunately no I don’t have that kind of data

]]> By: Higgins http://visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-147 Higgins Tue, 23 Sep 2008 02:45:25 +0000 http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2007/02/15/2005-us-income-distribution-part-3/#comment-147 Excellent work! Do you know if is there a formula that we can use to estimate the number of households at any given income? Could you run a regression on your data set? Excellent work! Do you know if is there a formula that we can use to estimate the number of households at any given income? Could you run a regression on your data set?

]]>