Talk:Income inequality in the United States

Latest comment: 5 months ago by DreaSteu in topic Footnotes are in the wrong place
Former good articleIncome inequality in the United States was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 7, 2007Good article nomineeListed
November 12, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 29, 2007.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that income inequality increased in the United States in 2005 with the top 1% of earners having roughly the same share of income as in 1928?
Current status: Delisted good article


Nonconstructive? no source?

edit

I put the link source in there, so no clue why it was deleted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Income_inequality_in_the_United_States&oldid=prev&diff=936531901

CBO reported that for the 1979-2007 period, after-tax income (adjusted for inflation) of households in the top 1 percent of earners grew by 275%, compared to 65% for the next 19%, just under 40% for the next 60% and 18% for the bottom fifth.The share of after-tax income received by the top 1% more than doubled from about 8% in 1979 to over 17% in 2007. The share received by the other 19 percent of households in the highest quintile edged up from 35% to 36%.[1][2] The major cause was an increase in investment income. Capital gains accounted for 80% of the increase in market income for the households in the top 20% (2000–2007). Over the 1991–2000 period capital gains accounted for 45% of market income for the top 20%.

References

  1. "The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes 2007". Congressional Budget Office, US ;Government. October 2011.
  2. Pear, Robert (2011-10-25). "Top Earners Doubled Share of Nation's Income, C.B.O. Says". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2019-10-10.

 Preceding unsigned comment added by Hippypink (talkcontribs) 8 November 2021

Unclear wording under “Causes § Globalization”

edit

At the end of the second bullet point paragraph, the following is poorly phrased:

“However, surveys of American Economic Association (AEA) members in 2000, 2011, and 2020 showed that consistent majorities of professional economists in the United States disagreed with the statement: ‘The increasing inequality in the distribution of income in the U.S. is due primarily to the benefits and pressures of a global economy.’”

In particular, the use of the colon before the quotation makes it unclear what position the sampled majority of economists hold. Do they believe that globalization is a contributing factor, or don’t they? 2600:8801:C914:FE00:8487:C428:AC7C:E06A (talk) 19:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Of course globalization is a contributing factor. The number of people still denying this in 2025 is absurd. American companies (mostly run by conservatives) have been moving their operations overseas since the 1960s while bringing in cheap labor to bust domestic unions. Viriditas (talk) 02:24, 12 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

World Inequality Database. Many graphs and maps are in the public domain. US too

edit

Take screenshot or download via share arrow. Screenshot makes for a larger image. Upload to the Wikimedia Commons. See also:

--Timeshifter (talk) 23:19, 22 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Footnotes are in the wrong place

edit

Usually the Footnotes are BEFORE the External Links. Instead they are embedded WITHIN the External Links within the section titled Syncretic Christianity.

They're hard to read in this location. DreaSteu (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

I didn't get the location correct. (I'm a newbie.)
Everything after the section titled "Opinions of notable individuals" is all messed up.
Footnotes should be in the section titled "References", before the section titled "Further Reading".
Instead the footnotes are embedded in a section that USUALLY is at the very end of the article; the area that has all sorts of links to other Wikipedia articles related to the subject (I don't know what that section is called).
And instead, this section is above the "See also" section, not at the end.
Like I said, all messed up.
I hope someone who knows more than I do, can clean this up! DreaSteu (talk) 01:43, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply