[OESY]

[Dane]

Wow the middle class actually gained, while the really rich declined.

Of course you would never see a headline from the NYT, "Middle class gains in income".

[KarlInOhio]

Wait, the last column of that graph says that rich got poorer and the poor got richer in 2000-2002. The 'Rats should be dancing in the streets about this economy - it's what they've been demanding for 75 years.

[Alberta's Child]

Interesting graphic.

The reduction in reported income from 2000-2002 is entirely attributable to those taxpayers who earn more than $200,000.

[bondjamesbond]

Looking at those graphs of the distribution of losses and gains shows that people making between 25K and 200K experienced robust gains in both years. This loss of income was primarily limited to the investor class, who got cleaned out in the stock market.

In other words, it was a paper loss. Nothing really changed except people lost their inflated, fictitious stock gains of the late '90s.

Well, Duh!

[Moonman62]

So when is the NYTimes going with the headline:

Economic Decline, Wealthiest Hardest Hit

[bobsatwork]

THANK YOU for your post (#6). Incomes fell for MILLIONAIRES for two years. The RICH got POORER, the POOR got RICHER!!!!. So tell me, NYT, is this a good thing or a bad thing??? John Kerry: is this a good thing or bad thing?