Graphic by me, source US Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-hinc/hinc-01.html

*There is one major flaw with this dataset: they do not differentiate income over $200k, despite a sizeable portion of the population earning this much. Hopefully this will be updated in the coming years.

Posted by TA-MajestyPalm

30 comments

  2. Not your fault, since you’re just using the data, but it seems like $200k+ needs to be broken down more. Just read your comment and I agree.

  3. Your chart completely cuts off the value for the “over 200k” category, which makes it very misleading to look at. That bar should be about 4 times its current height to properly show the skew in the distribution

  4. Nothing like a bimodal distribution to tell you something is off.

  6. Someone made a similar chart showing the change over the last 50ish years. Any chance someone knows where to find that?

  7. Could you do two images? One like this and one with the 19.04 not cut off? I feel like the latter would really help drive home the point.

  9. Your x-axis labels should label the bin edges, not the bin range, then you wouldn’t need to repeat numbers and the labels would fit on one row.

  10. Why is your plot serving Saddam Hussein’s hiding spot?

  11. No way nearly 20% of the populations hpuseholds make over 200k

  12. I wonder if data from income tax brackets could help break down income over $200k further?

  13. Which colors do we say is middle class? Saying 35k-175k all as middle class just doesn’t sound right. Even adding upper and lower middle doesn’t fit.

    We need new names for this.

    Struggling, Modest, Comfortable, Affluent, Wealthy, and Prosperous are what Copilot came up with.

  14. Didnt know there was a 200k limit. Odd. For one i fall into that category. I feel special now

  15. What do the colors mean? It’s fucking wild to be in the fascia color and then realize I still have to create a budget, stick to it, and save up for bigger purchases like home appliances or electronics. $200k when I was a kid was fairy tale money. Now it’s just “not hand to mouth but if I lose my job I’m fucked in 30 days”

  16. What is beautiful about this data? It’s literally just a bar chart

  17. This is depressing.

    Thought I was doing ok right around $100k.

    Turns out I am in the bottom 50%.

    No wonder I can’t buy a house nearly anywhere in my state.

  18. It would be interesting to see how strongly this is impacted by household size, and I’d be quite surprised if the average number of earners per household doesn’t progressively increase with each bin.
    Not many people actually earn >200k/yr, but lots of >100k earners have partners of similar income.

  19. This graphs is one of the worst designs I have seen posted.

  20. Probably a dumb question, but if you live with your spouse, then the household income is both incomes right? So this takes into account single income households and dual income households at the same time?

  21. I hate the household income metric. Wish individual income was more prevalent in these kinds of reports.

  23. Yeah, it should continue on with the same scale or it’s just complete garbage, probably done that way for some political purpose, “everybody over $200K sucks”, or something along those lines. If the scale was the same it would like continue along that same declination trend.

  24. These charts, while interesting, don’t give the proper insight. I live in a VHCOL where $200k is like make $100k elsewhere

  25. I almost thought this was another Saddam hiding spot post… Good graphing

  26. This is a caste society. Like a slave-owning society. This is not an equal, democratic society. Period.

    You all are sheep, not human.

  27. What is the definition of a household? Joint filings/ family? Or can a single taxpayer also be a household?

  28. Even without the missing breakout data for 200k+ income, the chart shows an “unhealthy” distribution with a gutted middle class. It would be interesting to see how this same data has changed through the years since 1950s.

  29. I’m assuming those who don’t bother working are not included since they don’t get W2s. Wonder what that bar would look like?

  30. In California it’s not that difficult to exceed 200k for a two income household. It’s pretty much required too. The census lumping all those in together really doesn’t help for data clarity.

Comments are closed.