You can avoid death but not the tax. This state is more than truth, and this is why it is recommended to calculate it if you can. Therefore in the United States of America, they managed to perform calculating for households. It was the first time in the history of income calculating that it was performed for households. They developed the options of income calculations by age.
The main source for this type of process is Microdata Series Current Population Survey Version 3.0. You can easily access this software and even more easily calculate what you need. No, we are not talking some magic here; we are talking about a methodological approach that can use about 70,000 household data points for this purpose.
How does your household income result compare with the census’s data?
Both are working on the same dataset. However, because the census is a little bit higher than ours, our public uses data and the effect on our household income calculation, and the result is slightly but measurable. This tool will help you to get the most accurate information. You can also check only with this tool if your income makes you in 1%. You can use it on a daily basis to see where you stand and how can you improve your situation or you should simply keep with the good work. This way you can make your project for the future and see which direction and path to follow.
The process of calculation is quite easy
Simply put together everything (your salary, annual income, even your spouse’s salary or business income) and add everything into your calculator. When we mention age, we mean on the head of household. This age limitation exists only to provide you with the most accurate results. This way we are eliminating age groups, you do not belong and make the result more precise. You can find the thousands of links that will offer you the same service.
The best way to get the most accurate result and to have a clear picture in your head is to use links with income visualizations via some diagrams. They are simple to use, and the best thing is the fact realized your situation with the simple glance. Thanks to our software that saves your last result you can compare it with the new one and see if it is going up or it is getting worse. Some of the sites with calculation tools are offering you free consulting, and you can use this option and see how can you improve your situation and achieve better results in the future.
It has always been like that, the more money you have, the easier life you will get. No matter what you thing never underestimate the power of money. You will be surprised what can you achieve and get if you are rich. Despite all fairy tales and happy endings, it is not so easy to become rich and to experience this type of life. However, some of them have managed to build an empire and accomplish the American dream like Bill Gates. He uses his skills wisely, and he managed to build t with his potential real empire. He wouldn’t succeed without his exquisite talent for marketing.
Mounting evidence is demonstrating the inverse relationship between income inequality and intergenerational earnings mobility. This finding is important as it demonstrates how inequality is transmitted from parents to their children and directly reflects on the progress to achieve the American Dream, regardless of initial birth origins. It provides a metric to understand how inequality of outcomes occurs, thereby providing a measure of the status of “equal opportunity” in American society.
Our society has been built on the central idea that individual initiative, talent, and hard work should determine social and economic outcomes, as opposed to the socio-economic family background. A survey by the PEW Charitable Trusts in 2009 found 90% of Americans said hard work and having ambition was either essential or very important to getting ahead in life (Economic Mobility Project, 2009).
As indicated in the above figure the U.S. intergenerational elasticity coefficient of .47 tells us that if one father makes 100% more than another, then the son of the high-income father will, as an adult, earn 47% more than the son of the relatively lower income father. The second finding from the above figure is that U.S. transmission of earnings from fathers to sons is higher than most European countries, with Italy and the United Kingdom being the exceptions.
The above represents a descriptive analysis. The question is why do these findings occur?
According to Corak one accepted framework for answering this question is provided by Solon (2004). He suggests differences in intergenerational elasticity across countries is the result of three major institutions determining the life chances of children: the family, the labor market, the state and the variations struck between their influence across countries. (In a previous post, Rich Child, Poor Child: Education’s Role in Upward Mobility, I provided findings from Pew Charitable Trusts’ study of the role of education in determining the life chances of children.)
An ongoing debate exists: what works best to lower teen pregnancies? One side advocates abstinence-only education while others are persuaded that comprehensive sex education (including instruction in birth control) is best for students. What does the evidence suggest?
Here’s a graph of teen births by sex education requirement at the State level. Sex education requirement is classified in three ways: 1) State must stress abstinence (red); 2) State must cover abstinence (yellow), and 3) No abstinence required (green).
Cohen finds “states that require abstinence-only education have higher rates of teen births than those that do not. States that require abstinence-only be “stressed” in any sex-ed classes average 9.9% of births to teenagers; those that require it be “covered” average 9.0%; and those with no requirement average 7.3%.” While the above is an interesting descriptive analysis, it doesn’t allow one to conclude any causal association between abstinence education and teen births. Cohen properly points the reader to a more rigorous multivariate study (Stanger-Hall and Hall, 2011), controlling for four possible confounding variables: socio-economic status, educational achievement, and ethnic composition and Medicaid waivers for family planning. (Benson et al. (2009) found “Medicaid-funded access to contraceptives and family planning services has been shown to decrease the incidence of unplanned pregnancies, especially among low-income women and teens.”)
The authors conclude:
“…increasing emphasis on abstinence education is positively correlated with teenage pregnancy and birth rates. This trend remains significant after accounting for socioeconomic status, teen educational attainment, the ethnic composition of the teen population, and availability of Medicaid waivers for family planning services in each state. These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S.”
Other studies appear to support the overall conclusion:
In a lot of cases, it turned out that sexual education is crucial for later events that one teenager will survive in his life. Teenagers that attempt sexual education classes were less confused at the period when hormones started to do their work. Children that haven’t faced with this subject in early aged were terrified with the situation they got themselves into. It turned out that the percentage of pregnancy was higher than among children that attempted sexual education classes. If they are prepared, they won’t be frightened and paralyzed in front of the new life challenge. It is very important not to forbid them to act natural according to their age. The only thing they need to do is to be cautious.
No matter what you think, the education is the essential part of every society. The base of everything is placed in elementary school. The way your citizens will act in the future lays down in elementary education and education in general. If your student respects his teacher, it means it is going to respect his authority later and his boss at work. You are not just teaching them to learn, but to behave too. As a former educator, I was monitoring the entire system. How Post-Secondary Degree can affect the lives of the ones that have attained a degree in higher education.
As a retired educator and has spent the great majority of my career in higher education I am always curious about how post-secondary education affects the lives of those who have attained a degree in higher education. A few days ago I learned about “NSF SESTAT 2008 National Survey of Recent College Graduates Public Use File”, a comprehensive and integrated system of information about the employment, educational and demographic characteristics of individuals with post-secondary degrees with a focus on scientists and engineers in the United States.
One of the major outcomes of attaining a postsecondary degree is its impact on socio-economic status, namely salary. With the SESTAT database in hand, I examined salary outcomes, controlling for some covariates.
It should be noted that I restricted the analysis to exclude individuals who responded that they were not in the labor force.
The purpose of this study is to assess each of the above covariate’s influence on the dependent variable, salary.
Model Specification and Findings
The following multiple regression equations were specified, producing the results described in this section:
Please see Appendix A for the multiple regression outputs.
The model explains 46 percent of the variance in salary for degree holders (Prob> F = 0.0000) in the labor force. All of the covariates are statistically significant.
In the following section, I provide graphs for each covariate effect on predicted salary, controlling for all the other covariates. In each case, I plot the predictive margins against age distribution on the horizontal axis.
Highest Attained Degree – ‘DGRDG’
Individuals who attain a doctorate or professional degree can expect a higher predicted salary, holding all other variables constant. Master degree, doctorate and professional degree holders are predicted to make $8,428, $16,144 and $19,328, respectively, more than individuals with the baccalaureate degree as their highest degree.
Nowadays, we have more and more examples of economic and income inequality. This gap between rich and poor is enormous all over the world, and it is getting bigger. Some research proves that the gap is bigger and developing if the leader party is republican. However, democrats are well known as the famous fighter against economic inequality.Somehow, they manage to control this gap under control.
Some people would cite many reasons why presidential terms are an imperfect paradigm for tracking economic trends. Conventional wisdom suggests that the business cycle doesn’t follow the electoral cycle. A president’s economic record is heavily influenced by factors out of his control. Timing matters and so does good fortune.
Nowadays worldwide political picture
Bartels acknowledges that there can be many explanations for growing income inequality, from globalization and structural changes in the U.S. economy to technological and demographic shifts. But he argues that it is wrong to assume there is no cause-and-effect relationship between government policies and income distribution. In fact, he asserts, “economic inequality is, in substantial part, a political phenomenon.”Trump, the current president of United States, is one of the best examples for this case. He obviously affected the entire economic situation in his advantage and used the political power to enhance his position in the world.
Republican affect to society vs. Democratic influence
At least that was the conventional wisdom before Princeton professor Larry M. Bartels, one of the country’s leading political scientists, studied the relationship between economic outcomes and which party occupied the President’s office. His most significant finding is that there is a partisan pattern to the size of the gap between the rich and the poor. Over the past half-century, he concludes, Republican presidents have allowed income inequality to expand, while Democratic presidents have not.
Lest anyone think this book, Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age, is a partisan hit job by a left-wing academic, Bartels goes to great pains in his introduction to preempt the counterattack he expects from critics on the right. “I began the project as an unusually apolitical political scientist,” he writes, noting that the last time he voted was in 1984, “and that was for Ronald Reagan.” He adds that in doing this work, “I was quite surprised to discover how often and how profoundly partisan differences in ideologies and values have shaped key policy decisions and economic outcomes. I have done my best to follow my evidence where it led me.”