-------------------------------------------------------------
[U.S. Census Bureau] Income Inequality
-------------------------------------------------------------
A BRIEF LOOK AT POSTWAR U.S. INCOME INEQUALITY
by Daniel H. Weinberg
------------------------
Table 1. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and
Top 5 Percent of Families, 1947 to 1994.
Table 2. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and
Top 5 Percent of Households, 1967 to 1994.
Table 3. Mean Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of
Households, 1967 to 1994
Table 4. Average Income-to-Poverty Ratios for Families, by
Income Quintile, 1967 to 1994.
-------------------------
Are the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer?
Historical Census Bureau statistics on income can shed some light
on that debate. Although the Bureau has been measuring incomes for
a half-century and a large number of factors have been identified as
contributing to changes in inequality, the root causes are still not
entirely understood.
The Census Bureau has been studying the distribution of income since
the late 1940's. The first income inequality statistics were
published for families and came from the annual demographic supplement
to the Current Population Survey (CPS). The most commonly used
measure of income inequality, the Gini index (also known as the index
of income concentration)/1/, indicated a decline in family income
inequality of 7.4 percent from 1947 to 1968.
Since 1968, there has been an increase in income inequality, reaching
its 1947 level in 1982 and increasing further since then.
The increase was 16.1 percent from 1968 to 1992 and 22.4 percent
from 1968 to 1994./2/
Living conditions of Americans have changed considerably since the
late 1940's. In particular, a smaller fraction of all persons
live in families (two or more persons living together related by
blood or marriage). Therefore, starting in 1967, the Census Bureau
began reporting on the income distribution of households in addition
to families. By coincidence, 1968 was the year in which measured
postwar income was at its most equal for families. The Gini index
for households indicates that there has been growing income
inequality over the past quarter-century.
Inequality grew slowly in the 1970's and rapidly during the early
1980's. From about 1987 through 1992, the growth in measured
inequality seemed to taper off, reaching 11.9 percent above its
1968 level. This was followed by a large apparent jump in 1993,
partly due to a change in survey methodology./3/ The Gini index
for households in 1994 was 17.5 percent above its 1968 level.
Income inequality measures such as the Gini index or shares of
aggregate income are particularly sensitive to changes in data
collection measures. A change that may only affect a relatively
small number of cases (especially those in the upper end of the
income distribution) can affect these measures, while having
virtually no effect on median income. We are unable to determine
what fraction of the measured increase in income inequality between
1992 and 1993 was due to changes in survey administration between
those two years, though our analysis suggests there was nonetheless
a real increase in inequality between 1992 and 1993./4/
The data illustrate the increasing share of aggregate household
money income received by the highest income quintile (households
with incomes above $62,841 in 1994)/5/ -- 49.1 percent in 1994
and 46.9 percent in 1992, up from 42.8 percent in 1968 -- and the
declining share for households in the middle 60 percent and those
in the bottom quintile (incomes below $13,426)./6/
During that same period, the share received by households in the
top 5 percent of the income distribution went from 16.6 percent
in 1968 to 18.6 percent in 1992 and 21.2 percent in 1994.
Yet another way to look at the change in inequality involves the
income at selected positions in the income distribution. As data
show, in 1994 dollars the household at the 95th percentile in 1994
had $109,821 in income, 8.2 times that of the household at the 20th
percentile, which was $13,426 (the comparable 1992 ratio was 7.9)/7/.
In contrast, in 1968, the household at the 95th percentile had
but 6.0 times the income of the household at the 20th percentile.
A parallel way to look at this change examines the average (mean)
household income in each quintile. The average income of households
in the top quintile grew from $73,754 in 1968 to $96,240 in 1992 and
$105,945 in 1994. In percentage terms, this growth was 30 percent
from 1968 to 1992 and 44 percent from 1968 to 1994.
During the 1968-1994 period, the average income in the bottom
quintile grew by only 8 percent, from $7,202 to $7,762 (7 percent
from 1968 to 1992)/8/.
Consequently, the ratio of the average income of the top 20 percent
of households to the average income of the bottom 20 percent went
from 10.2 in 1968 to 12.5 in 1992 and 13.6 in 1994.
Yet one more way to look at the income distribution corrects for
family size changes over the period, by examining the change in
the ratio of family income to its poverty threshold.
Poverty thresholds vary by family size and composition reflecting
consumption efficiencies achieved through economies of scale (i.e.,
families of two or more persons can share certain goods such as
housing)./9/
A ratio of 1.00 thus indicates that the family has an income equal
to the poverty threshold for its size and composition. The average
ratio in the bottom quintile in 1968 was 1.04, while the average in
the top quintile was 6.13.
By 1994, these ratios were 0.92 and 9.22, respectively, (and 0.89
and 8.39 in 1992), also indicating a widening income gap. The
ratio for the middle quintile also rose, from 2.80 in 1968 to 3.26
in both 1992 and 1994.
In sum, when money income is examined, each of these indicators shows
increasing income inequality over the 1968-1994 period.
But, are there other perspectives that change this story?
Since 1979, the Census Bureau has examined several experimental
measures of income. These measures add the value of noncash
benefits (such as food stamps and employer contributions to
health insurance) to, and subtract taxes from, the official money
income measure. The Bureau's research in this area/10/ has shown
that the distribution of income is more equal under a broadened
definition of income that takes account of the effects of taxes
and noncash benefits.
Further, government transfer benefits play a much more equalizing
role on income than do taxes.
Nonetheless, while the levels of inequality are lower, this
alternative perspective does not change the picture of increasing
income inequality over the 1979-1994 period./11/
Why are these changes in inequality happening?/12/
The long-run increase in income inequality is related to changes
in the Nation's labor market and its household composition.
The wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with
more highly skilled, trained, and educated workers at the top
experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom real wage
losses.
One factor is the shift in employment from those goods- producing
industries that have disproportionately provided high- wage
opportunities for low-skilled workers, towards services that
disproportionately employ college graduates, and towards low-wage
sectors such as retail trade.
But within-industry shifts in labor demand away from less-educated
workers are perhaps a more important explanation of eroding wages
than the shift out of manufacturing.
Also cited as factors putting downward pressure on the wages of
less-educated workers are intensifying global competition and
immigration, the decline of the proportion of workers belonging
to unions, the decline in the real value of the minimum wage,
the increasing need for computer skills, and the increasing use
of temporary workers.
At the same time, long-run changes in living arrangements have
taken place that tend to exacerbate differences in household
incomes. For example, divorces and separations, births out of
wedlock, and the increasing age at first marriage have led to a
shift away from married-couple households and toward single-parent
and nonfamily households, which typically have lower incomes.
Also, the increasing tendency over the period for men with
higher-than-average earnings to marry women with higher-than-average
earnings has contributed to widening the gap between high-income and
low-income ouseholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACTS
Income Inequality -- Edward Welniak (301) 763-8576
Statistical Methods Tom Moore (301) 457-4215
Historical tabulations on income and poverty can be found on
the Census Bureau's Internet site, at http://www.census.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
ACCURACY OF THE ESTIMATES
All statistics in the report are from the Current Population Survey
and are subject to sampling variability, as well as survey design
flaws, respondent classification errors, and data processing mistakes.
The Census Bureau has taken steps to minimize errors, and analytical
statements have been tested and meet statistical standards. However,
because of methodological differences, use caution when comparing
these data with data from other sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
1. The Gini index ranges from 0.0, when every family (household) has
the same income, to 1.0, when one family (household) has all the
income and is therefore one way to measure how far a given income
distribution is from equality.
2. Part of the increase from 1992 to 1994 is due to changes in survey
methodology; see below.
3. Computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) was introduced in
January 1994 to the Current Population Survey. As part of the March
1994 supplement, households were permitted to report up to $1 million
in earnings, up from $300,000, and parallel increases were made in the
reporting limits for selected other income sources. Both of these
changes affected the data. Analysis of the 1993 statistics suggests
that the increase in the maximum amounts that could be reported
accounts for about 1.8 percentage points or about one-third of the
1992-1993 increase of 5.2 percentage points. The contribution of
the change to CAPI to the increase in measured inequality cannot be
determined, but may bring the share of survey methods-related
changes in inequality to over one-half of the 5.2 percentage points.
See Paul Ryscavage, "A Surge in Growing Income Inequality?", Monthly
Labor Review, August 1995.
4. See U.S. Bureau of the Census, Income, Poverty and Valuation of
Noncash Benefits: 1993, Current Population Reports P60-188,
Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1995, and
Ryscavage, op. cit. for a discussion of the 1993 statistics. The Gini
index of inequality did not change significantly between 1993 and 1994.
5. All dollar amounts are in 1994 dollars and all percentage increases
are corrected for inflation, as measured by the experimental Consumer
Price Index for Urban Consumers. (The experimental index uses the
official methodology adopted in 1983 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
as applied to the 1968-1982 period; see U.S. Bureau of the Census,
op. cit., Appendix A.)
6. The respective shares of the middle 60 percent and the bottom 20
percent were 53.0 and 4.2 percent in 1968, down to 49.3 and
3.8 percent in 1992 and 47.3 and 3.6 percent in 1994.
7. Not significantly different from the 1994 ratio.
8. Not significantly different from the 1968-1994 percentage change.
9. Poverty is defined only for families and unrelated individuals, not
for households.
10. See U.S. Bureau of the Census, op. cit., and U.S. Bureau of the
Census, Income, Poverty, and The Valuation of Noncash Benefits: 1994,
Current Population Reports P60-189, forthcoming.
11. There was no significant difference between the percentage changes
in the Gini index measured using the official income definition and a
comprehensive measure including all income sources except imputed rent
to owner-occupied dwellings.
12. This section is based on Paul Ryscavage and Peter Henle, "Earnings
Inequality Accelerates in the 1980's", Monthly Labor Review, December
1990; Sheldon Danziger and Peter Gottschalk (eds.) Uneven Tides: Rising
Inequality in America, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1993; Lynn A.
Karoly and Gary Burtless, "Demographic Change, Rising Earnings
Inequality, and the Distribution of Personal Well-Being, 1959-89,"
Demography, v. 32, no. 3 (August 1995), 379-405; U.S. Council of
Economic Advisors, Economic Report of the President, Washington DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1992, Chapter 4; and U.S.
Council of Economic Advisors, Economic Report of the President,
Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1995,
Chapter 5.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Revised: Tuesday, 25-Feb-97 14:44:52
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[U.S. Census Bureau] Income Inequality - Table1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and
Top 5 Percent of Families, 1947 to 1994.
(Families as of March of the following year.)
Percent distribution of aggregate income
Number Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Gini
Year (thous.) fifth fifth fifth fifth fifth percent ratio
1994../21/..69,313 4.2 10.0 15.7 23.3 46.9 20.1 0.426
1993../20/..68,506 4.1 9.9 15.7 23.3 47.0 20.3 0.429
1993../19/..68,506 4.2 10.1 15.9 23.6 46.2 19.1 0.420
1992../18/..68,216 4.3 10.5 16.5 24.0 44.7 17.6 0.404
1992........68,144 4.4 10.5 16.5 24.0 44.6 17.6 0.403
1991........67,173 4.5 10.7 16.6 24.1 44.2 17.1 0.397
1990........66,322 4.6 10.8 16.6 23.8 44.3 17.4 0.396
1989........66,090 4.6 10.6 16.5 23.7 44.6 17.9 0.401
1988........65,837 4.6 10.7 16.7 24.0 44.0 17.2 0.395
1987../17/..65,204 4.6 10.7 16.8 24.0 43.8 17.2 0.393
1986........64,491 4.6 10.8 16.8 24.0 43.7 17.0 0.392
1985../16/..63,558 4.6 10.9 16.9 24.2 43.5 16.7 0.389
1984........62,706 4.7 11.0 17.0 24.4 42.9 16.0 0.383
1983../15/..62,015 4.7 11.1 17.1 24.3 42.8 15.9 0.382
1982........61,393 4.7 11.2 17.1 24.3 42.7 16.0 0.380
1981........61,019 5.0 11.3 17.4 24.4 41.9 15.4 0.369
1980........60,309 5.1 11.6 17.5 24.3 41.6 15.3 0.365
1979../14/..59,550 5.2 11.6 17.5 24.1 41.7 15.8 0.365
1978........57,804 5.2 11.6 17.5 24.1 41.5 15.6 0.363
1977........57,215 5.2 11.6 17.5 24.2 41.5 15.7 0.363
1976../13/..56,710 5.4 11.8 17.6 24.1 41.1 15.6 0.358
1975../12/..56,245 5.4 11.8 17.6 24.1 41.1 15.5 0.357
1974./12/11/55,698 5.5 12.0 17.5 24.0 41.0 15.5 0.355
1973........55,053 5.5 11.9 17.5 24.0 41.1 15.5 0.356
1972........54,373 5.4 11.9 17.5 23.9 41.4 15.9 0.359
1971../10/..53,296 5.5 12.0 17.6 23.8 41.1 15.7 0.355
1970........52,227 5.4 12.2 17.6 23.8 40.9 15.6 0.353
1969........51,586 5.6 12.4 17.7 23.7 40.6 15.6 0.349
1968........50,823 5.6 12.4 17.7 23.7 40.5 15.6 0.348
1967../9/...49,834 5.4 12.2 17.5 23.5 41.4 16.4 0.358
1966../8/...49,214 5.6 12.4 17.8 23.8 40.5 15.6 0.349
1965../7/...48,509 5.2 12.2 17.8 23.9 40.9 15.5 0.356
1964........47,956 5.1 12.0 17.7 24.0 41.2 15.9 0.361
1963........47,540 5.0 12.1 17.7 24.0 41.2 15.8 0.362
1962../6/...47,059 5.0 12.1 17.6 24.0 41.3 15.7 0.362
1961../5/...46,418 4.7 11.9 17.5 23.8 42.2 16.6 0.374
1960........45,539 4.8 12.2 17.8 24.0 41.3 15.9 0.364
1959........45,111 4.9 12.3 17.9 23.8 41.1 15.9 0.361
1958........44,232 5.0 12.5 18.0 23.9 40.6 15.4 0.354
1957........43,696 5.1 12.7 18.1 23.8 40.4 15.6 0.351
1956........43,497 5.0 12.5 17.9 23.7 41.0 16.1 0.358
1955........42,889 4.8 12.3 17.8 23.7 41.3 16.4 0.363
1954........41,951 4.5 12.1 17.7 23.9 41.8 16.3 0.371
1953........41,202 4.7 12.5 18.0 23.9 40.9 15.7 0.359
1952../4/...40,832 4.9 12.3 17.4 23.4 41.9 17.4 0.368
1951........40,578 5.0 12.4 17.6 23.4 41.6 16.8 0.363
1950........39,929 4.5 12.0 17.4 23.4 42.7 17.3 0.379
1949../3/...39,303 4.5 11.9 17.3 23.5 42.7 16.9 0.378
1948........38,624 4.9 12.1 17.3 23.2 42.4 17.1 0.371
1947../2/...37,237 5.0 11.9 17.0 23.1 43.0 17.5 0.376
NOTES to Table 1:
1/ [not used]
2/ Based on 1940 census population controls.
3/ Implementation of expanded income questions to show wage and salary,
farm self-employment and nonfarm self-employment and all other
nonearned income separately.
4/ Implementation of 1950 census population controls.
5/ Implementation of first hot deck procedure to impute missing income
entries (all income data imputed if any missing).
6/ Implementation of 1960 census population controls.
7/ Implementation of new procedures to impute missing data only.
8/ Questionnaire expanded to ask eight income questions.
9/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
10/ Implementation of 1970 population controls.
11/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
Questionnaire expanded to ask eleven income questions.
12/ These estimates were derived using pareto interpolation and may
differ from published data which were derived using linear
interpolation.
13/ First year medians are derived using both pareto and linear
interpolation. Prior to this year all medians were derived using
linear interpolation.
14/ Implementation of 1980 census population controls. Questionnaire
expanded to show 27 possible values from 51 possible sources
of income.
15/ Implementation of Hispanic population weighting controls.
16/ Recording of amounts for earnings from longest job
increased to $299,999.
17/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
18/ Implementation of 1990 census population controls.
19/ See footnote 20. To maintain comparability, income data
topcoded to 1992 limits.
20/ Data collection method changed from paper and pencil to
computer-assisted interviewing. In addition, the March 1994
income supplement was revised to allow for the coding of different
income amounts on selected questionnaire items. Limits either
increased or decreased in the following categories:
earnings increased to $999,999; Social Security increased
to $49,999; Supplemental Security Income and Public Assistance
increased to $24,999; Veterans' Benefits increased to $99,999;
Child Support and Alimony decreased to $49,999.
21/ Introduction of new 1990 census sample design.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Revised: Tuesday, 25-Feb-97 14:54:16
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[U.S. Census Bureau] Income Inequality - Table2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and
Top 5 Percent of Households, 1967 to 1994.
(Households as of March of the following year.
Income in CPI-U-X1 adjusted dollars.)
Income at selected positions (dollars)
Number Upper limit of each fifth($)
Year (thous.) Lowest Second Third Fourth Top 5%
1994./14/.98,990 13,426 25,200 40,100 62,841 109,821
1993./13/.97,107 13,299 25,311 39,786 61,844 107,318
1993./12/.97,107 13,296 25,293 39,757 61,824 107,295
1992./11/.96,426 13,309 25,499 40,034 61,273 104,596
1992......96,391 13,377 25,668 40,140 61,477 104,967
1991......95,699 13,697 26,115 40,336 61,761 104,893
1990......94,312 14,174 26,830 41,047 62,597 107,434
1989......93,347 14,457 27,489 42,249 64,192 109,656
1988......92,830 14,259 26,934 41,975 63,380 107,285
1987./10/.91,124 14,089 26,744 41,746 63,093 105,577
1986......89,479 13,856 26,503 41,132 62,176 104,262
1985../9/.88,458 13,692 25,761 39,908 60,021 99,173
1984......86,789 13,551 25,361 39,073 59,023 97,706
1983../8/.85,290 13,316 24,760 38,001 57,429 94,485
1982......83,918 13,022 24,766 37,841 56,428 93,146
1981......83,527 13,198 24,673 38,160 56,418 90,795
1980......82,368 13,466 25,253 38,716 56,687 91,227
1979../7/.80,776 14,019 26,035 40,056 58,078 93,847
1978......77,330 13,872 26,228 39,685 57,717 92,334
1977......76,030 13,446 25,325 38,602 56,278 89,108
1976../6/.74,142 13,485 25,124 38,273 55,064 87,323
1975../5/.72,867 13,185 24,746 37,393 53,690 84,725
1974./5/4/71,163 13,878 25,742 38,038 55,205 87,378
1973......69,859 13,872 26,353 39,091 56,470 89,513
1972......68,251 13,518 26,035 38,485 55,074 88,653
1971../3/.66,676 13,066 24,909 36,655 52,265 82,999
1970......64,374 13,230 25,348 36,874 52,609 83,171
1969......63,401 13,443 25,803 37,313 52,284 81,999
1968......61,805 13,063 24,766 35,497 49,877 78,031
1967../2/.60,446 12,248 23,883 33,910 48,343 77,570
----------------------------
Percent distribution of aggregate income
Number Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5 Gini
Year (thous.) fifth fifth fifth fifth fifth percent ratio
1994./14/.98,990 3.6 8.9 15.0 23.4 49.1 21.2 0.456
1993./13/.97,107 3.6 9.0 15.1 23.5 48.9 21.0 0.454
1993./12/.97,107 3.6 9.1 15.3 23.8 48.2 20.0 0.447
1992./11/.96,426 3.8 9.4 15.8 24.2 46.9 18.6 0.434
1992......96,391 3.8 9.4 15.8 24.2 46.9 18.6 0.433
1991......95,699 3.8 9.6 15.9 24.2 46.5 18.1 0.428
1990......94,312 3.9 9.6 15.9 24.0 46.6 18.6 0.428
1989......93,347 3.8 9.5 15.8 24.0 46.8 18.9 0.431
1988......92,830 3.8 9.6 16.0 24.3 46.3 18.3 0.427
1987./10/.91,124 3.8 9.6 16.1 24.3 46.2 18.2 0.426
1986......89,479 3.8 9.7 16.2 24.3 46.1 18.0 0.425
1985../9/.88,458 3.9 9.8 16.2 24.4 45.6 17.6 0.419
1984......86,789 4.0 9.9 16.3 24.6 45.2 17.1 0.415
1983../8/.85,290 4.0 9.9 16.4 24.6 45.1 17.1 0.414
1982......83,918 4.0 10.0 16.5 24.5 45.0 17.0 0.412
1981......83,527 4.1 10.1 16.7 24.8 44.4 16.5 0.406
1980......82,368 4.2 10.2 16.8 24.8 44.1 16.5 0.403
1979../7/.80,776 4.1 10.2 16.8 24.7 44.2 16.9 0.404
1978......77,330 4.2 10.2 16.9 24.7 44.1 16.8 0.402
1977......76,030 4.2 10.2 16.9 24.7 44.0 16.8 0.402
1976../6/.74,142 4.3 10.3 17.0 24.7 43.7 16.6 0.398
1975../5/.72,867 4.3 10.4 17.0 24.7 43.6 16.6 0.397
1974./5/4/71,163 4.3 10.6 17.0 24.6 43.5 16.5 0.395
1973......69,859 4.2 10.5 17.1 24.6 43.6 16.6 0.397
1972......68,251 4.1 10.5 17.1 24.5 43.9 17.0 0.401
1971../3/.66,676 4.1 10.6 17.3 24.5 43.5 16.7 0.396
1970......64,374 4.1 10.8 17.4 24.5 43.3 16.6 0.394
1969......63,401 4.1 10.9 17.5 24.5 43.0 16.6 0.391
1968......61,805 4.2 11.1 17.5 24.4 42.8 16.6 0.388
1967../2/.60,446 4.0 10.8 17.3 24.2 43.8 17.5 0.399
---------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES to Table 2.
1/ [not used]
2/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
3/ Implementation of 1970 census population controls.
4/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
Questionnaire expanded to ask eleven income questions.
5/ These estimates were derived using pareto interpolation
and may differ from published data which were
derived using linear interpolation.
6/ First year medians are derived using both pareto and
linear interpolation. Prior to this year all
medians were derived using linear interpolation.
7/ Implementation of 1980 census population controls.
Questionnaire expanded to show 27 possible values
from 51 possible sources of income.
8/ Implementation of Hispanic population weighting controls.
9/ Recording of amounts for earnings from longest job
increased to $299,999.
10/ Implementation of a new March CPS processing system.
11/ Implementation of 1990 census population controls.
12/ See footnote 13. To maintain comparability, income data
topcoded to 1992 limits.
13/ Data collection method changed from paper and pencil to
computer-assisted interviewing. In addition,
the March 1994 income supplement was revised to allow for
the coding of different income amounts on selected questionnaire
items. Limits either increased or decreased in the following
categories: earnings increased to $999,999; Social Security
increased to $49,999; Supplemental Security Income and
Public Assistance increased to $24,999; Veterans' Benefits
increased to $99,999; Child Support and
Alimony decreased to $49,999.
14/ Introduction of new 1990 census sample design.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Revised: Tuesday, 25-Feb-97 14:52:03
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[U.S. Census Bureau] Income Inequality - Table3
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3. Mean Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of
Households, 1967 to 1994
(Households as of March of the following year.
Income in 1994 CPI-U-X1 adjusted dollars.)
Lowest Second Third Fourth Highest Top 5
Year fifth fifth fifth fifth fifth percent
1994./14/... 7,762 19,224 32,385 50,395 105,945 183,044
1993./13/... 7,602 19,134 32,073 49,843 103,846 178,234
1993./12/... 7,601 19,124 32,060 49,816 101,113 167,408
1992./11/... 7,698 19,205 32,356 49,669 96,240 152,751
1991........ 7,903 19,748 32,803 50,006 95,895 149,649
1990........ 8,158 20,444 33,768 50,913 98,804 157,335
1989........ 8,391 20,797 34,570 52,292 102,221 165,153
1988........ 8,148 20,441 34,189 51,681 98,665 155,610
1987./10/... 8,045 20,331 33,991 51,378 97,709 153,940
1986........ 8,037 20,084 33,609 50,630 95,831 150,126
1985./9/.... 7,984 19,595 32,525 48,925 91,390 140,975
1984........ 7,996 19,313 32,005 48,189 88,608 133,757
1983./8/.... 7,795 18,887 31,226 46,859 86,032 129,986
1982........ 7,756 18,790 31,103 46,258 84,841 128,198
1981........ 7,954 18,856 31,237 46,564 83,176 123,600
1980........ 8,073 19,316 31,875 46,959 83,728 125,122
1979./7/.... 8,239 19,955 32,900 48,281 86,647 132,146
1978........ 8,358 19,870 32,808 48,061 85,805 130,605
1977........ 8,238 19,250 31,842 46,655 83,198 127,276
1976./6/.... 8,178 19,254 31,663 45,982 81,383 123,999
1975./5/.... 8,001 18,844 30,916 44,924 79,316 120,364
1974./5/4/.. 8,312 19,751 31,830 45,971 81,447 123,800
1973........ 8,063 19,988 32,661 46,953 83,271 126,903
1972........ 7,730 19,687 32,127 46,119 82,798 128,330
1971./3/.... 7,310 19,012 30,826 43,824 77,652 119,100
1970........ 7,281 19,359 31,176 43,947 77,810 119,432
1969........ 7,361 19,620 31,351 43,911 77,184 118,808
1968........ 7,202 19,034 30,186 42,113 73,754 114,189
1967./2/.... 6,638 18,098 28,897 40,430 73,267 116,784
----------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES to Table 3: See Table 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Last Revised: Tuesday, 25-Feb-97 14:54:56
----------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
[U.S. Census Bureau] Income Inequality - Table4
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4. Average Income-to-Poverty Ratios for Families, by
Income Quintile, 1967 to 1994.
(Families as of March of the following year.)
Number of
families Lowest Second Middle Fourth Highest
Year (thous.) fifth fifth fifth fifth fifth
1994./14/. 69,313 0.92 2.17 3.26 4.67 9.22
1993./13/. 68,506 0.88 2.10 3.19 4.60 9.07
1993./12/. 68,506 0.88 2.10 3.19 4.60 8.79
1992./11/. 68,216 0.89 2.15 3.26 4.55 8.39
1991...... 67,173 0.94 2.22 3.28 4.60 8.40
1990...... 66,322 0.99 2.27 3.35 4.70 8.61
1989...... 66,090 1.01 2.30 3.43 4.79 8.90
1988...... 65,837 0.99 2.27 3.39 4.73 8.48
1987./10/. 65,204 0.99 2.28 3.39 4.68 8.36
1986...... 64,491 0.99 2.25 3.32 4.62 8.16
1985./9/.. 63,558 0.96 2.17 3.20 4.43 7.80
1984...... 62,706 0.95 2.15 3.15 4.38 7.48
1983./8/.. 62,015 0.91 2.07 3.06 4.26 7.13
1982...... 61,393 0.92 2.05 3.01 4.11 6.94
1981...... 61,019 0.99 2.10 3.04 4.14 6.79
1980...... 60,309 1.03 2.17 3.11 4.20 6.82
1979./7/.. 59,550 1.11 2.28 3.25 4.38 7.18
1978...... 57,804 1.12 2.29 3.24 4.36 7.14
1977...... 57,215 1.10 2.21 3.18 4.27 6.91
1976./6/.. 56,710 1.10 2.19 3.14 4.14 6.70
1975./5/ . 56,245 1.08 2.13 3.04 4.01 6.55
1974./5/4/ 55,698 1.13 2.24 3.11 4.12 6.69
1973...... 55,053 1.12 2.27 3.15 4.19 6.99
1972...... 54,373 1.09 2.22 3.07 4.09 6.90
1971./3/.. 53,296 1.05 2.08 2.89 3.82 6.47
1970...... 52,227 1.04 2.10 2.88 3.80 6.38
1969...... 51,586 1.06 2.13 2.91 3.80 6.35
1968...... 50,823 1.04 2.06 2.80 3.64 6.13
1967./2/.. 50,111 0.97 1.94 2.67 3.51 6.06
NOTES to Table 4: See Table 2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Revised: Tuesday, 25-Feb-97 14:56:17
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RRojas Research Unit/RRojas Databank/1997 BACK to TOP
|
