The NY Times has a couple of interesting articles on what constitutes
being in the top 1% of wealth in the U.S. (it is also conditioned on
local context) and which careers/jobs are likely to have more/less
1%-er.   For an interesting graphic, see:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/newsgraphics/2012/0115-one-percent-occupations/index.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=thab1

Teachers are along the top, about 2/3 of the way from the left margin.
Note that there is a large rectangle for all teachers and then smaller
rectangles for subgroups within it.  If you scroll over "colleges and
universities" a little window will pop up informing one that 31.672
members of this category are in the top 1% or 1.8% of all members.

The designation of being in the 1% can use either "absolute"
criteria (i.e., all people are evaluated with the same criteria) or
"relative" criteria (i.e., top 1% is defined by the local groups
income distribution; see below).  The NY Times uses relative
criteria and reviews the diversity of the members of the 1%; see:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/business/the-1-percent-paint-a-more-nuanced-portrait-of-the-rich.html?_r=1&ref=business&pagewanted=all

Consider this description:
|Most 1 percenters were born with socioeconomic advantages,
|which helps explain why the 1 percent is more likely than other
|Americans to have jobs, according to census data. They work
|longer hours, being three times more likely than the 99 percent
|to work more than 50 hours a week, and are more likely to be
|self-employed. Married 1 percenters are just as likely as other
|couples to have two incomes, but men are the big breadwinners,
|earning 75 percent of the money, compared with 64 percent of
|the income in other households.

But, a person who is a 1%-er in one location might not be
a 1%-er elsewhere as shown in this quote:

|Financial benchmarks in this area can differ radically from
those in places where more people are struggling to put food
|on the table. Many of [NY] Nassau’s affluent families think of
|themselves as practically middle class, saying that property
|values and taxes are so high that $380,000 does not go very far.
|
|“On Long Island, it’s barely a living,” said Steven R. Schlesinger,
|a lawyer and professional poker player. “In Plano, it’s a living.”
|
|There is something to that. Aspen’s 1 percent is very different
|from Akron’s. In some areas there are so many 1 percenters
|that the whole income hierarchy can shift. It may take $380,000
|to be in the national 1 percent, but it takes $900,000 to be among
|the top 1 percent of earners in Stamford, Conn. Compared with that,
|the price of admission to the 1 percent in Clarksville, Tenn., is
|a bargain at $200,000. Of course, the cutoff is only one measure,
|and perhaps not the most telling one. The average income of
|the 1 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center, is $1.5 million,
| and the superrich — the 120,000 tax filers that make up the top
|tenth of this group — earned an estimated average of $6.8 million
|in 2011.

One notorious problem of attracting good faculty to NYC area
colleges is that a well-paid professor elsewhere in the U.S.
might not make enough to maintain their lifestyle here, even with
a raise in salary and other considerations.

Another way of looking at the 1%-ers is with the "Brandeis ratio",
that is the ratio of the median income of the top 1% to the median
income household income.  In the 1980s it was around 12.5
while in 2006 it was 36 -- a sign of growing income inequality.
For more on this topic, see:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/opinion/dont-tax-the-rich-tax-inequality-itself.html?src=me&ref=general

One wonders what the Brandeis ratio is for college professors.

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected]

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=15327
or send a blank email to 
leave-15327-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to