Re: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index

2012-12-25 Thread Richard Ruquist 
Indeed. Can you guess why?

On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 3:56 AM, Roger Clough  wrote:
> Hi Richard Ruquist
>
> From what you say, also interesting is that democrats--those folks
> who hate the rich--have made the rich richer.
>
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
> 12/25/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> From: Richard Ruquist
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-12-24, 12:03:15
> Subject: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>
> Interesting Roger,
>
> According to these charts the richest people have always increased their
> wealth under democratic presidents whereas they have always decreased
> wealth under republican presidents except for the first half of Reagan,
> which seemed to be a continuation of their increased wealth under Carter.
> But the usual republican wealth decrease kicked in during Reagan's 2nd term
> and continued under Bush.
> Same thing happened under Bush II. The increase was followed by an equal
> 2nd term decrease.
>
> Conservatism, at least the republican brand, does not work for the very
> wealthy.
> Richard
>
>
> Richard
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Roger Clough  wrote:
>
>> Hi meekerdb
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
>>
>>
>> This graph shows the income of the given percentiles from
>> 1947 to 2010 in 2010 dollars. The 2 columns of numbers in the
>> right margin are the cumulative growth 1970-2010 and the
>> annual growth rate over that period. The vertical scale is
>> logarithmic, which makes constant percentage growth
>> appear as a straight line. From 1947 to 1970,
>> all percentiles grew at essentially the same rate; the light, straight
>> lines for the different percentiles for those years all have the same
>> slope.
>> Since then, there has been substantial divergence, with
>> different percentiles of the income distribution growing at different
>> rates.
>> For the median American family, this gap is $39,000 per year (just over
>> $100 per day):
>> If the economic growth during this period had been broadly shared
>> as it was from 1947 to 1970, the median household income would
>> have been $39,000 per year higher than it was in 2010. This plot was
>> created by combining data from the US Census
>> Bureau[48]
>> and the US Internal Revenue
>> Service.[49]There
>> are systematic
>> differences between these two sources, but the differences are small
>> relative to the scale of this
>> plot.[50]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 
>> 12/24/2012
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>
>>
>> - Receiving the following content -
>> *From:* meekerdb 
>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>> *Time:* 2012-12-22, 15:35:27
>> *Subject:* Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>>
>> On 12/22/2012 3:35 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>>
>> Hi Hal Ruhl
>>
>> Sure, wealth inequality has gotten linearly greater,
>> but the economy has grown much faster (exponentially),
>> so we are all getting richer, fairness or not.
>>
>>
>>
>> That only means *some* of us are getting richer, specifically those that
>> are rich. The median income, corrected for inflation is essentially flat.
>> And "exponential" doesn't mean "faster" no matter what the media think.
>> It's simple mathematics that the gini isn't going to "grow exponentially"
>> because it's a fraction and it's bounded by 1.0 above (complete inequality
>> in which everything belongs to one person).
>>
>> Brent
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?h

Re: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index

2012-12-25 Thread Roger Clough 
Hi Richard Ruquist 

>From what you say, also interesting is that democrats--those folks 
who hate the rich--have made the rich richer. 


[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/25/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen

- Receiving the following content - 
From: Richard Ruquist 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-12-24, 12:03:15
Subject: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index


Interesting Roger,

According to these charts the richest people have always increased their
wealth under democratic presidents whereas they have always decreased
wealth under republican presidents except for the first half of Reagan,
which seemed to be a continuation of their increased wealth under Carter.
But the usual republican wealth decrease kicked in during Reagan's 2nd term
and continued under Bush.
Same thing happened under Bush II. The increase was followed by an equal
2nd term decrease.

Conservatism, at least the republican brand, does not work for the very
wealthy.
Richard


Richard
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Roger Clough  wrote:

> Hi meekerdb
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States
>
>
> This graph shows the income of the given percentiles from
> 1947 to 2010 in 2010 dollars. The 2 columns of numbers in the
> right margin are the cumulative growth 1970-2010 and the
> annual growth rate over that period. The vertical scale is
> logarithmic, which makes constant percentage growth
> appear as a straight line. From 1947 to 1970,
> all percentiles grew at essentially the same rate; the light, straight
> lines for the different percentiles for those years all have the same
> slope.
> Since then, there has been substantial divergence, with
> different percentiles of the income distribution growing at different
> rates.
> For the median American family, this gap is $39,000 per year (just over
> $100 per day):
> If the economic growth during this period had been broadly shared
> as it was from 1947 to 1970, the median household income would
> have been $39,000 per year higher than it was in 2010. This plot was
> created by combining data from the US Census 
> Bureau[48]
> and the US Internal Revenue 
> Service.[49]There
>  are systematic
> differences between these two sources, but the differences are small
> relative to the scale of this 
> plot.[50]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 
> 12/24/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> *From:* meekerdb 
> *Receiver:* everything-list 
> *Time:* 2012-12-22, 15:35:27
> *Subject:* Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>
> On 12/22/2012 3:35 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> Hi Hal Ruhl
>
> Sure, wealth inequality has gotten linearly greater,
> but the economy has grown much faster (exponentially),
> so we are all getting richer, fairness or not.
>
>
>
> That only means *some* of us are getting richer, specifically those that
> are rich. The median income, corrected for inflation is essentially flat.
> And "exponential" doesn't mean "faster" no matter what the media think.
> It's simple mathematics that the gini isn't going to "grow exponentially"
> because it's a fraction and it's bounded by 1.0 above (complete inequality
> in which everything belongs to one person).
>
> Brent
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index

2012-12-19 Thread Richard Ruquist 
Then you can easily provide a link to that data

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Roger Clough  wrote:
> Hi Richard Ruquist
>
> I already sent that out a few days ago, maybe
> even yesterday. curve follows log (inflation-adjusted personal income)
> vs time I think back perhaps a century or more.
>
>
>
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
> 12/19/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> From: Richard Ruquist
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-12-19, 11:43:55
> Subject: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>
> Hi Roger,
>
> Show me the exponential data.
> Richard
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Roger Clough  wrote:
>> Hi meekerdb
>>
>> But while the gini index increases linearly with time,
>> the individual wealth of each american
>> (at least before Obama) increases exponentially
>> with time.
>>
>> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
>> 12/19/2012
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>
>>
>> - Receiving the following content -
>> From: meekerdb
>> Receiver: everything-list
>> Time: 2012-12-18, 14:23:12
>> Subject: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>>
>> On 12/18/2012 7:05 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>>
>> Hi Craig Weinberg
>>
>> More liberal misrepresentation of the truth. The
>> gini for the USA is about average for the world.
>>
>>
>> But it's above the average, and the individual values, for the OECD AND
>> it's
>> been steadily increasing since 1980 - when Ray-gun was elected.
>>
>> Brent
>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index

2012-12-19 Thread Roger Clough 
Hi Richard Ruquist 

I already sent that out a few days ago, maybe
even yesterday. curve follows log (inflation-adjusted personal income)
vs time I think back perhaps a century or more.




[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/19/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen

- Receiving the following content - 
From: Richard Ruquist 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-12-19, 11:43:55
Subject: Re: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index


Hi Roger,

Show me the exponential data.
Richard

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Roger Clough  wrote:
> Hi meekerdb
>
> But while the gini index increases linearly with time,
> the individual wealth of each american
> (at least before Obama) increases exponentially
> with time.
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
> 12/19/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> - Receiving the following content -
> From: meekerdb
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-12-18, 14:23:12
> Subject: Re: clearing up the confusion on the fairness index
>
> On 12/18/2012 7:05 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
>
> Hi Craig Weinberg
>
> More liberal misrepresentation of the truth. The
> gini for the USA is about average for the world.
>
>
> But it's above the average, and the individual values, for the OECD AND it's
> been steadily increasing since 1980 - when Ray-gun was elected.
>
> Brent
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.