Source:
NY Times<snip>
The Midwest is battered, but the Northeast escaped with a lighter knock. The incomes of young adults have plunged — but those of older Americans have actually risen. On the whole, immigrants have weathered the storm a bit better than people born here. In rural areas, poverty remained unchanged last year, while in suburbs it reached the highest level since 1967, when the Census Bureau first tracked it.
Yet one old problem has not changed: the poor have rapidly gotten poorer.
<snip>
Perhaps no households have weathered the downturn better than those headed by people 65 and older, whose incomes rose 5.5 percent from 2007 to 2010. By contrast, household income for every other age group fell. Among people ages 15 to 24, it plunged 15.3 percent
<snip>
Household income fell in every region of the country from 2007 to 2010. But it fell much less in the Northeast (3.1 percent) than in the South (6.3 percent), the West (6.7 percent) or the Midwest (8.4 percent). And the Northeast was the only region where household income did not fall last year.
Read more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/15/us/poor-are-still-getting-poorer-but-downturns-punch-varies-census-data-show.html?_r=2
Their guess as to why the 65+ income did so well is pension income with the generation now hitting that age being historically the most prosperous one, thus poorer Americans before them have died and the income is greater in this cohort. We can be sure THAT won't be the case for the generation following them! Ugh, that would be my generation. And it's looking even worse for those that follow my generation.
Look at those data and then tell me that the rich need to have their taxes lowered and all deductions spared. How pathetic those who argue that are. Too bad teabaggers won't bloody well understand all of this and challenge their moronic notions and that of the "leaders" they're touting. Aaaaarrrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh!!