Let's look at some FACTS as BHibbs puts it... These aren't Wikipedia facts either. These are links from the US census:

Shows a two year average median income from 1998-1999... $41,609.00
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/incom.../statemhi.html

Shows three year average median income from 2002- 2004...$44,473.00
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/incom.../statemhi.html

Shows two year average median income 2005-2006... $47,584.00
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/incom.../statemhi.html

There is no data from the US census board for median income for 07 or 08. Keep it up BHibbs.... don't let the FACTS get in the way of your posts!!

 

Why are you trying to use 2 to 3 year Median Averages? Are you trying to be deceptive?

You're averages hold true if you drag 1998's HIGH number down with 2001's LOW number.

Besides, the Graph I listed is ALSO from from the US Census Bureau. (just scroll down and they list their source)

Regardless, the Median Income has far from DOUBLED like the price of gas, and Your income...

Sorry about the triple post, my computer went screwy.. :o

 

I'm not "trying" to deceive. I posted links from the census bureau exactly how they list them. I didn't find where they separate it by year. Wikipedia probably has the numbers by year someone made up, like your first link. Just guessing, but without an average of 2 or 3 years I bet it doesn't add up to what you are suggesting.

What has your income done since 1998? Is it the same now as it was then? You are suggesting that the avg american's income has stayed the same... are you in the average? I don't expect you to answer, much less answer truthfully. Rather than admiting you posted something in error; like you've done before, you will change the subject, beat around the bush, make more stuff up, and divert attention from your original ignorance. Just admit you were wrong and we can all move on to blaming Bush for all this!

 

Because you "couldn't Find" something, I'm wrong?

Here, let me hold your hand and walk you through it.

Click this Link:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p60-231.pdf

Go to Page 11.


Thank You.

Sometimes the truth is hard to swallow. I know it doesn't "jive" with what the Media's been shoving down your mouth " We're all SOOO much better off now we can afford the higher gas".

I'm glad things are so much better for YOU, but I'm sad to say this ISN'T the case for the Average Household.

I'm Man enough to admit when I'm wrong....

 

Nice try BHibbs... that is a report written by three women. Who are they? I'm not really sure. Your link takes you to their report... Do me a favor; go to the US census website and look at what is listed:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/incom.../statemhi.html

The 2 yr avg median income for 98-99 is $41,609.00. You said it is an avg and skews the numbers right? If that is so to get your number of $48,000.00 in 98 the median income in 99 would have to have been $34,000.00. That would get to an avg of 41k... My numbers are from a census. Your numbers are from 3 women who wrote a report that you found on Wikipedia.

BHibbs: Never letting the truth get in the way of a good post!!

 

Oh, by the way you never answered the question about your income. Has it gone up or gone down?

 

Oh but wait THERE'S MORE!!! Look at the bottom of page 8 of the link BHibbs posted:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p60-231.pdf

My favorite part is the right side of the blue box!!! Quoted:
"The estimates in the report (which may be shown in text, figures, and tables) are based on responses from a sample of the population and may differ from actual values because of sampling variability and other factors."


My favorite part is highlighted.

 

You should just give up, you're just looking silly now. If you scroll down on the cover page you will see who the "three women" work for:

U.S. Department of Commerce
Economics and Statistics Administration
U.S. CENSUS BUREAU


My information is correct, unless you're saying the US Census Bureau is Wrong. I thought the Graph would be Easier for you as you seem to be easily confused by numbers...

You may want to read the Acknowlegements as well:

Carmen DeNavas-Walt prepared the income section of this report
under the direction of Edward J. Welniak Jr., Chief of the Income
Surveys Branch. Bernadette D. Proctor prepared the poverty section
and Cheryl Hill Lee prepared the health insurance coverage section,
both under the direction of Sharon Stern, Chief of the Poverty
and Health Statistics Branch. Charles T. Nelson, Assistant Division
Chief for Income, Poverty, and Health Statistics, Housing and
Household Economic Statistics Division, provided overall direction.
Adelle D. Berlinger, George M. Mitcham, Tim J. Marshall,
Robert E. Rothhaas, and Gregory D. Weyland, Demographic
Surveys Division, processed the Current Population Survey 2006
Annual Social and Economic Supplement file. Caroline S.
Carbaugh, Chief of the Survey Processing Branch, Stacy J. Lyons,
Mary Thrift Bush, Kirk E. Davis, Jaime L. Hasiuk, and Thy K.
Le programmed and produced the detailed and publication tables.
Rebecca A. Olson, Jana Shepherd, and Michael White, under
the supervision of David V. Hornick of the Demographic Statistical
Methods Division, conducted sample review.
Bonnie S. Tarsia, Michelle L. Wiland, and Tim J. Marshall,
Demographic Surveys Division, and Andrew M. Stevenson,
Technologies Management Office, prepared and programmed the
computer-assisted interviewing instrument used to conduct the
Annual Social and Economic Supplement.
Additional people within the U.S. Census Bureau also made significant
contributions to the preparation of this report. Joseph Dalaker,
Marjorie Hanson, John Hisnanick, Len Norry, and Jessica L.
Semega reviewed the contents. Jessica Smith, Ann Margaret
Jensen, Kim Nguyen, and Miranda C. Hickman provided statistical
assistance. Doris Sansbury provided clerical assistance.
Census Bureau field representatives and telephone interviewers
collected the data. Without their dedication, the preparation of this
report or any report from the Current Population Survey would
be impossible.
Jan Sweeney, Jamie Peters, Theodora Forgione, and Don Meyd,
of the Administrative and Customer Services Division, Walter C.
Odom, Chief, provided publications and printing management, graphics
design and composition, and editorial review for print and electronic
media. General direction and production management were
provided by James R. Clark, Assistant Division Chief, and Wanda K.
Cevis, Chief, Publications Services Branch.

And sadly, No, My Income has Not Doubled since 1998 like the price of gas. (Luckily I was making a lot of money in 1998 to begin with! )




You may want to look up the Definition of a Survey as well...

 

True the women work for the census bureau and wrote a report... not sure what the report was for, but possibly extra credit. They took some numbers from a sample of the population, what sample did they use? Not sure because they don't say. I'm quoting numbers from the census; not three women who work for the census bureau.

I think I have a way to solve this, or atleast shed a little more light on it... check for a new post!

 

If you took the time to actually READ the report, you'd see who it was for, why, by whom, their Sampling Methods, etc.

You Do realize, the Census itself IS a Survey, right???

They DO Say, Page 28

CPS DATA COLLECTION
The information in this report was collected
in the 50 states and the District
of Columbia and does not represent
residents of Puerto Rico and U.S. island
areas.40 It is based on a sample of
about 100,000 addresses. The estimates
in this report are controlled to
national population estimates by age,
race, sex, and Hispanic origin, and to
state population estimates by age.
The population controls used to prepare
estimates for 1999 to 2004 were
based on the results from Census
2000 and are updated annually using
administrative records such as birth
and death certificates.
The CPS is a household survey
primarily used to collect employment
data. The sample universe for the
basic CPS consists of the resident
civilian noninstitutionalized population
of the United States. People in
institutions, such as prisons, longterm
care hospitals, and nursing
homes, are therefore not eligible to
be interviewed in the CPS. Students
living in dormitories are only included
in the estimates if information about
them is reported in an interview at
their parents’ homes. The sample
universe for the CPS ASEC is slightly
larger than the basic CPS since it
includes military personnel who live
in a household with at least one other
civilian adult, regardless of whether
they live off post or on post. All
other Armed Forces are excluded.
For further documentation about the
CPS ASEC, see <www.bls.census.gov
/cps/ads/adsmain.htm>.

 

They took a sampling of the population... didn't state how large a sampling and state they are only sure to 90%. Why does the report contradict the census data? Maybe they took the sampling they wanted!

I'm hoping the other post can shed a little more light on the numbers. If you have anything to add besides a report written by three women you found on Wikipedia please fill me in. Until then... I'll go by the census bureau's information posted earlier.

 

Yes They DID. I Listed the sample size for you. Just Read it.

Yes, there is a Margin of Error you deal with in this kind of data collection. They rightfully point that out.

The US Census Itself has a margin of error. Again, it's a SURVEY Too.

Do you seriously think average incomes have Doubled since 1998???

 

I do believe the median income is around 48K today. That is somewhat of a guess since the only CENSUS data I can find is from 2006 and it shows something around 47K for a median income. I also believe, from the census data, that the median income in 1998 was AROUND 41K.

Do you want me to post up a graph stating this to put on Wikipedia? I can write up a report real quick.

 

At least you concede that the income of people Today is only 10-15% higher than what it was 10 years ago. (a far cry from the Double, or Triple you were implying).

I'd be very happy if the price of gas was only 10% higher than what it was back then.

My Job is done, I'm going to Bed, I've got to help contribute to the National Median Income Early tomorrow Morning...

 

What the hell media are you seeing? I haven't seen any media saying that anything is good in any way. Quite the contrary. We have the local morning news on while we're getting ready for work. It makes me think that by the end of the news cast people are going to slit their wrists, it's so depressing.

Is that statistic in the census survey? Sorry, I'm not going to play Google Tag with you. Things have improved for me. My income hasn't doubled since '98, but close. What I've been able to do is manage my money better. That way it doesn't matter what the market does, I know I'll be able to weather it. I see this scenerio play out for many people every day. My family members have been doing better. My friends have been doing better. Our customers have been doing better. I guess you could say that I live in a bubble, but I think that what I see every day is a pretty good representation of the "average household".

We are bombarded by polls and surveys every day now. Even if you have he survey results right in front of you, that means that you have the big picture? Is the factor of how many people were working in '98 as opposed to how many people were working in the latest survey figured in? There are a lot of factors that are relevent to this conversation.

In my travels, I see the people suffering. The thing is they've always been suffering. They wait for someone to bail them out. That hasn't happened yet. Some people genuinly need the help. There are a large percentage that don't. It's time that people who don't need the help get up on their own two feet and start taking care of themselves. It's time, but the country seems to think that we need to make a point before we require self sufficientcy.

I hope that you all can get this figured out. All I know is that I've made things better for my self. I think that a greater percentage of the population should give that a try.