9 Of The Top 10 Occupations In America Pay An Average Wage Of Less Than $35,000 A Year

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse blog,

According to stunning new numbers just released by the federal government, that we detailed yesterday, nine of the top ten most commonly held jobs in the United States pay an average wage of less than $35,000 a year.  When you break that down, that means that most of these workers are making less than $3,000 a month before taxes.  And once you consider how we are being taxed into oblivion, things become even more frightening.  Can you pay a mortgage and support a family on just a couple grand a month?  Of course not.  In the old days, a single income would enable a family to live a very comfortable middle class lifestyle in most cases.  But now those days are long gone. 

In 2014, both parents are expected to work, and in many cases both of them have to get multiple jobs just in order to break even at the end of the month.  The decline in the quality of our jobs is a huge reason for the implosion of the middle class in this country.  You can't have a middle class without middle class jobs, and we have witnessed a multi-decade decline in middle class jobs in the United States.  As long as this trend continues, the middle class is going to continue to shrink.

The following is a list of the most commonly held jobs in America according to the federal government.  As you can see, 9 of the top 10 most commonly held occupations pay an average wage of less than $35,000 a year...

  1. Retail salespersons, 4.48 million workers earning  $25,370
  2. Cashiers  3.34 million workers earning $20,420
  3. Food prep and serving staff, 3.02 million workers earning $18,880
  4. General office clerk, 2.83 million working earning $29,990
  5. Registered nurses, 2.66 million workers earning $68,910
  6. Waiters and waitresses, 2.40 million workers earning $20,880
  7. Customer service representatives, 2.39 million workers earning $33,370
  8. Laborers, and freight and material movers, 2.28 million workers earning $26,690
  9. Secretaries and admins (not legal or medical),  2.16 million workers earning $34,000
  10. Janitors and cleaners (not maids),  2.10 million workers earning, $25,140

Overall, an astounding 59 percent of all American workers bring home less than $35,000 a year in wages.

So if you are going to make more than $35,000 this year, you are solidly in the upper half.

But that doesn't mean that you will always be there.

More Americans are falling out of the middle class with each passing day.

Just consider the case of a 47-year-old woman named Kristina Feldotte.  Together with her husband, they used to make about $80,000 a year.  But since she lost her job three years ago, their combined income has fallen to about $36,000 a year...

Three years ago, Kristina Feldotte, 47, and her husband earned a combined $80,000. She considered herself solidly middle class. The couple and their four children regularly vacationed at a lake near their home in Saginaw, Michigan.


But in August 2012, Feldotte was laid off from her job as a special education teacher. She's since managed to find only part-time teaching work. Though her husband still works as a truck salesman, their income has sunk by more than half to $36,000.

"Now we're on the upper end of lower class," Feldotte said.

There is a common assumption out there that if you "have a job" that you must be doing "okay".

But that is not even close to the truth.

The reality of the matter is that you can even have two or three jobs and still be living in poverty.  In fact, you can even be working for the government or the military and still need food stamps...

Since the start of the Recession, the dollar amount of food stamps used at military commissaries, special stores that can be used by active-duty, retired, and some veterans of the armed forces has quadrupled, hitting $103 million last year. Food banks around the country have also reported a rise in the number of military families they serve, numbers that swelled during the Recession and haven’t, or have barely, abated.

There are so many people that are really hurting out there.

Today, someone wrote to me about one of my recent articles about food price increases and told me about how produce prices were going through the roof in that particular area.  This individual wondered how ordinary families were going to be able to survive in this environment.

That is a very good question.

I don't know how they are going to survive.

In some cases, the suffering that is going on behind closed doors is far greater than any of us would ever imagine.

And often, it is children that suffer the most...

A Texas couple kept their bruised, malnourished 5-year-old son in a diaper and locked in a closet of their Spring home, police said in a horrifying case of abuse.


The tiny, blond-haired boy was severely underweight, his shoulder blades, ribs and vertebrae showing through his skin, when officers found him late last week.

You can see some photos of that poor little boy right here.

I hope that those abusive parents are put away for a very long time.

Sadly, there are lots of kids that are really suffering right now.  There are more than a million homeless schoolchildren in America, and there are countless numbers that will go to bed hungry tonight.

But if you live in wealthy enclaves on the east or west coasts, all of this may sound truly bizarre to you.  Where you live, you may look around and not see any poverty at all.  That is because America has become increasingly segregated by wealth.  Some are even calling this the "skyboxification of America"...

The richest Americans—the much-talked about 1 percent—are a cloistered class. As the Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz scathingly put it, they “have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live.” The Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel has similarly lamented the “skyboxification” of American life, in which “people of affluence and people of modest means lead increasingly separate lives.”


The substantial and growing gap between the rich and everyone else is increasingly inscribed on our geography. There have always been affluent neighborhoods, gated enclaves, and fabled bastions of wealth like Greenwich, Connecticut; Grosse Pointe, Michigan; Potomac, Maryland; and Beverly Hills, California. But America’s bankers, lawyers, and doctors didn’t always live so far apart from teachers, accountants, and small business owners, who themselves weren’t always so segregated from the poorest, most struggling Americans.

Nobody should talk about an "economic recovery" until the middle class starts growing again.

Even as the stock market has soared to unprecedented heights over the past year, the decline of middle class America has continued unabated.

And most Americans know deep inside that something is deeply broken.  For example, a recent CNBC All-America Economic Survey found that over 80 percent of all Americans consider the economy to be "fair" or "poor".

Yes, for the moment things are going quite well for the top 10 percent of the nation, but that won't last long either.  None of the problems that caused the last great financial crisis have been fixed.  In fact, they have gotten even worse.  We are steamrolling toward another great financial crisis and our leaders are absolutely clueless.

When the next crisis strikes, the economic suffering in this nation is going to get even worse.

As bad as things are now, they are not even worth comparing to what is coming.

So I hope that you are getting prepared.  Time is running out.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Skateboarder's picture

Yeah, it's called [Neo-]Feudalism.

(all of your grain are belonging to us)

kliguy38's picture

slavelabor.......we're all debt slaves and those that saved and didn't go into debt slavery are going to be gangraped by the dollar deval

James_Cole's picture


they have the best houses, the best educations, the best doctors, and the best lifestyles, but there is one thing that money doesn’t seem to have bought: an understanding that their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live.

It's definitely a lot of ignorance, people around me don't seem to have any clue what it's like out there for a lot of people - well insulated. Yesterday a colleague complained to the effect of wondering why people were upset / protesting with the economy doing so well. If it wasn't for reading and occasionally venturing into the wilderness I'd think most everyone was doing pretty great too. It's not an American problem either, it's a global problem.  


AldousHuxley's picture

I'm all for meritocracy, but it is really difficult to justify raising the standard of living for the bottom half of 99% when they largely put themselves into it:


  • $ into entertainment and gadgets instead of education...in fact hates smart people, worships celebrities
  • Most of money in "education" is spent in useless shit from podunk sports college
  • plenty of fat and lazy in government
  • lots of delusional republicans believing in after life reward scam and liberals believing hippy crazy yoga PITA all you need is love BS
  • tons of idiots believing in their superiority (example: Obama)
  • all talk no action 
  • no responsibility for future generations (example: boomers)


lordylord's picture

I read that a single mother with children can make $60,000 in welfare and benefits if you live in the right state.  Welfare monkey is a lucrative occupation.

zaphod's picture

We are well on our way to just giving everyone a doctor's salary for free. That will fix everything.

lordylord's picture

I don't know why a single mother on welfare is on Zerohedge, but she just downvoted us.

zaphod's picture

Thank you for the explaination, I was wondering who that might be. :)

JR's picture

Ah,yes. The miracles of Keynes (socialism)…two reports:

“Welfare now pays the equivalent of $30 an hour for a 40-hour week, while the average job pays $25 ($21 after taxes) an hour.” – or $61,320+ per year (2011) for a welfare household

The Senate Budget Committee has released a report showing households living below the poverty line and receiving welfare payments are raking in the equivalent of $168 per day in benefits which come in the form of food stamps, housing, childcare, healthcare and more. The median household income in 2011 was $50,054, totaling $137.13 per day. The worst part? Welfare payments are equivalent to making $30 per hour for 40 hours a week. The median wage for non-welfare recipients is $25 per hour but because they pay taxes, unlike welfare recipients, the wage is bumped down to $21 per hour. From the report:


Second study:

Average Welfare recipient gets $40,000+ per year (CATO considered only six Federal programs and left out all state programs resulting in the lower figure) | Halfway to Concord (September 18, 2013 by Harold Bray)

...In August of this year the institute published a study, The Work Verses Welfare Tradeoff, on the welfare question for all 50 states. The researchers found the Federal government provides 126 separate programs targeted toward low income people. These programs provide cash or in-kind benefits such as food,

housing, or medical care, directly to individuals and community wide programs for low income communities expressly for the purpose of eliminating poverty. The annual cost to the Federal government of these programs, according to CATO, is $668.2 billion. Add in State programs that cost $284 billion and the annual welfare costs in the country often exceeds $1 trillion dollars.

Cato considered only six of the Federal programs and none of the State programs to reach their “average annual welfare benefit” number. The six programs are: Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). TANF is the successor to Aid to Families with dependent Children; the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP (food stamps); Medicaid (MediCal in California); Housing assistance (public housing , Section 8 housing assistance payments, and other rent subsidies); utility assistance, such as LIHEAP or the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.

The women with infants and children program (WIC) is another revenue stream that provides supplemental food assistance, health care referrals, and nutrition education and support for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women and to infants and children up to the age of 5.

CATO used an “average” number for each State calculating the low cost counties benefits (mostly rural) and the higher paying counties (urban) to arrive at an “average” grant for each program. Left out of the study were programs such as job training assistance and child care, such as HeadStart, which has an annual budget of $19 billion. Also left out of the calculation were the Earned Income Tax Credit (maximum benefit last year was $5,372) and the child tax credit. Although not considered in their average benefit calculation, CATO found that “there is a significant tax penalty for those leaving welfare for work.” ...

Overall California ranks eleventh in the study, with an average “benefit” package of $37,160 (Hawaii was first at $60,590!). This does not count State supplemental assistance, job training assistance, child care, transportation assistance, etc.
- The hourly wage equivalent for a California recipient is $17.87 or double the minimum wage.
- The average TANF grant in 2012 was $723.
- The average SNAP (food stamp) grant was $416 per month, $4,992 per year

In Medicaid payments California ranked last among all states, with an average expenditure per household of $4,459 per year...

Housing assistance averaged $1,235 per month ($998 in rural areas, $1,472 in urban areas). CATO notes that only 11.4% of TANF recipients in California receive Housing assistance. The Contra Costa Housing Authority list Section 8 grants for the County as $1,225 for a two bedroom home, $1,711 for 3 bedroom home and $2,099 for a 4 bedroom home plus utility assistance for “heating, cooking, other electric, air conditioning, water heating, water, sewer, trash collection, refrigerator and range/microwave”.

James_Cole's picture

Ah,yes. The miracles of Keynes (socialism)…two reports:

Ah yes, more dumbasses who read a hypothetical report from a right-wing 'thinktank' paid for by oligarchs and believe it be Gawds honest truth'

Can't you drooling idiots use google and look at actual facts..but why do that when you can have rich people tell you how great the poor have it (theoretically)?

Can't get more simple / comprehensive than this:



^ so much irony in that article. No doubt many zh'ers out there exactly like Ki Gulbranson.  Ain't need no stinkin' gumbermint money.. but I do like meh' medicare, earned income tax credit, free kids food...

He says that too many Americans lean on taxpayers rather than living within their means. He supports politicians who promise to cut government spending. In 2010, he printed T-shirts for the Tea Party campaign of a neighbor, Chip Cravaack, who ousted this region’s long-serving Democratic congressman.


How about Social Security? And Medicare? Can he imagine retiring without government help?

“I don’t think so,” he said. “No. I don’t know. Not the way we expect to live as Americans.”


lordylord's picture

James_Cole:  Can you please tell me why it is acceptable for the government to steal, use force/violence/coercion?   Where do you get your morals? By all means, dip into your own pocket and help your family, friends, and neighbors.  Don't stick your blood-stained hands in mine. 

James_Cole's picture

James_Cole:  Can you please tell me why it is acceptable for the government to steal, use force/violence/coercion?


Not to engage your ridiculous straw-man other than to say, I look forward to your apology tour to the native Americans, Mexicans, Africans, Peutro Ricans…


On the topic at hand, if the poor in the US have it so grand please explain:









lordylord's picture

What part was the straw-man and why must I apologize to these people?   You support the State.  The State uses force to collect taxes.  If you don't think you are supporting a system of theft and violence, you are VERY naive.

I never said the poor have it good.  Being poor is a great motivator to improve yourself.  Maybe having to live without a cell phone or cable will get these people off their asses. 

You still haven't answered:  Why is theft and violence acceptable to achieve your goals of a socialist utopia?  Spoiler alert:  Statists never answer this question.

James_Cole's picture


US was built by slaves on land stolen from Native Americans & Mexicans. You want to bitch about violence / theft re: taxes, be real about your history or don't pretend you give a fuck about violence / theft perpetrated by .gov in a general sense.

As long as one totally ignores history (and most of reality) libertarian viewpoints are quite sensible, yes. 


lordylord's picture

Sorry!  Up until about 1980, I WASN'T ALIVE!!!  Now that I am alive and can vote, I would never support the State and the theft and violence that goes along with it.  However, you do and you perpetuate such behavior through your consent.


Libertarians oppose the violence and force that GOVERNMENTS used against these people throughout history.  I am going to bang my head against a wall now having read your post.


You still haven't answered:  Why is theft and violence acceptable to achieve your goals of a socialist utopia?  Spoiler alert:  Statists never answer this question.

James_Cole's picture



Sorry!  Up until about 1980, I WASN'T ALIVE!!!  Now that I am alive and can vote, I would never support the State and the theft and violence that goes along with it.  However, you do and you perpetuate such behavior through your consent.

Lol gawd did I call that. I'd probably get more intelligent responses talking to a lamppost. 

You still haven't answered:  Why is theft and violence acceptable to achieve your goals of a socialist utopia?  Spoiler alert:  Statists never answer this question.

I have advocated neither. What you are obviously referring to is taxes, and if you feel taxes are theft you are welcome to move to Kuwait, Bahrain, most of Afghanistan or pretty much the rural area of any poor country etc.. Taxes are what you pay to be allowed to live in certain desired areas of the world, they are by no means a requirement of living on Earth. There are plenty of places on Earth where you will be able to get by without paying .gov taxes. Please move to one, take your friends too. 




zaphod's picture

James Cole, 

Please explain to me how and when the United States stole land that naturally belongs to the Mexicans. To do this you are going to have to include in your explaination the fact that Mexicans are largely decendents from Spain, where the Spanish were the wealthy landowners and the native indians the poor. 

To make your argument that any land "naturally" belongs to the mexicans, you are going to have to include the fact that mexicans are europeans who settled into north american territory and displaced native indians but they are "natural" owners. While at the same time argue that another group of europeans who also settled into north america around the same time and displaced native indians are not natural owners. 

Please explain this to prove that you are not an ignorant troll who knows nothing about history and makes illogical arguments that are based on hate of a specific country and people.

James_Cole's picture

Did I say it naturally belonged to the Mexicans? No.

To do this you are going to have to include in your explaination the fact that Mexicans are largely decendents from Spain, where the Spanish were the wealthy landowners and the native indians the poor. 

Like the Americans are naturally the descendents of the British? lol

Your whole argument is another stupid straw-man. And to underline the point, I don't think land 'naturally' belongs to anyone. The history of the world is various peoples fighting and taking things from various other peoples. It's totally idiotic to say oh well that's all in the past, from 1980 on it's a clean slate!






zaphod's picture

1) You clearly do not understand what straw-man means

2) You said "I look forward to your apology tour to the native Americans, Mexicans, Africans, Peutro Ricans…"

What did lordlylord have to appologize to Mexicans for? You said it was not land based, but then quickly pull up a whole bunch of maps on the topic that shows what grade school children already know. 

Keep pushing your ideology to divide people based on false historical naratives to hate each other, where people you say are unworthly must bow down and appologize to you every day while other people you favor do not. It's pretty much all statists like you've got at this point.

James_Cole's picture

1) You clearly do not understand what straw-man means

You brought up the issue of 'natural' ownership, which plays into cetain peoples beliefs around natural rights etc., something I did not bring up nor worth arguing. I never said the Mexicans 'naturally' owned the land, just alluded to the fact that they were forced off the land by the Americans. If you were forced off your land by the Mexican .gov you would probably consider it theft as well. 

2) You said "I look forward to your apology tour to the native Americans, Mexicans, Africans, Peutro Ricans…"

LL said they're totally against .gov theft to which I suggested an apology tour to a small handful of the peoples the US has stolen from in the past to which LL clarified they're against government theft... after ~1980. 

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

That is completely untrue.

The majority of Mexicans have lineage like the Central and South American peoples dating back to the first days humans ever existed in those lands, pre-dated only by the Asian migration when no humans were on North American soil and the dominant species were large hunter cats.

You appear to me to be the ignorant troll.

zaphod's picture

lordylord, you have nothing to say your are sorry for. It is unfortunate that racists like James Cole have hounded you since birth to make you think you have anything to say you're sorry for. 

Just remember that James Cole's entire ideology is based on hatred for a specific people. People like him hate you for who you are while professing they are the moral ones. 

lordylord's picture

I'm not sure of this guy's ideology.  It seems like he is saying that theft and violence has always been apart of history, so well fuck it, lets continue doing it.   And the funny part is that he probalby doesn't even know it himself.

James_Cole's picture

 It seems like he is saying that theft and violence has always been apart of history, so well fuck it, lets continue doing it.  

No, I'm saying history is painted gray not black and white - meaning the only appropriate response to the present is consideration of the moral ambiguity which produced it. Taking absolutist positions in the way you have here (and libertarians tend to generally) is ahistorical and nonsensical. 

lordylord's picture

Thruthfully, it sounds like you tried really hard to defend your way of thinking while giving what appears to be some factual or intellectual response.  But really all you said was nonsense.  That statement says nothing.  Pseudo-intellectual babble. It doesn't explain the fact that you still support a govenment which like all governments are  good at nothing but theft, violence, intimidation, murder, and destruction.  Apparently, in your mind this is acceptable in the name of "progress" or "socialism".

James_Cole's picture

History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices. - Watterson

It doesn't explain the fact that you still support a govenment which like all governments are  good at nothing but theft, violence, intimidation, murder, and destruction.  Apparently, in your mind this is acceptable in the name of "progress" or "socialism"

No, it's just much more complicated than the moral absolutes you pretend exist. Why do you have any freedom at all? Is it a natural right? History proves otherwise. 


Doubt is an uncomfortable condition, but certainty is a ridiculous one.


To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child.



JR's picture

I wonder what’s your purpose of colossally misrepresenting American history? The slaves and the Mexicans were not there when the major developments of this nation took place.

Your LaRaza/American Indian history does not account for the massive developments of this nation.

In short, this was not their country any more than it was anyone else's.

“There has been so much concentration on the native Americans found in possession when the white man came that little thought has been given to those who preceded them (such as the Anasazi)… It is time white men understand that most of the Indians found in possession were latecomers, and all too little was known and who had preceded them.” – Louis L’Amour, Jubal Sackett

“The Indians that the white man met were no more the original inhabitants of the country than were the Normans and Saxons the original inhabitants of England. Other peoples had come and gone before, leaving only their shadows upon the land…” –Louis L’Amour, Haunted Mesa

As to the claim that America’s southwest was Mexican territory, it was not. It was New Spain territory, defined as “the former Spanish viceroyalty (1521-1821) in North America including the southwest United States.”

from Encyclopedia Britannica Colonial Period 1519-1821:  

“Near the end of the 16th century the northern frontier of New Spain in most areas was close to the present Mexican-United States boundary line

As for slavery, it has existed since the time of man and it was western civilization from England to the United States that finally put it down. The word slave comes from Slav because of the early Roman slaves who were from Slavic countries.  There were white slaves long before any blacks were enslaved, except by their own people.

For you to include this in America’s “founding,” makes one wonder about your real motivation.

And speaking again of the established indigenous cultures in North America, neither were they “eliminated” by the white man any more than by their own warring tribes eliminating one another. As just one example, it was the Navajo-Apache tribes that eliminated the good planting Indians who lived in peace and bothered nobody, the Navajo-Apaches migrating down the east side of the Rockies to destroy the peaceful tribes along the Rio Grande.

As a matter of fact, the Indians were defeated by the traders; they made him want things he could not produce himself – like rifles and ammunition.  As western historian Louis L’Amour put it: “The Indian had to trade or steal to get the rifles and other things he wanted that the white man had…The first white trader who came to the Indians brought their doom in his pack.”

And it was not the buying or taking of the Indians’ land that ruined him. It was the settlement of the land. It was the fact that an “Indian couldn’t live on a fixed ten acres or a hundred acres and live as he liked. He needed lots of hunting ground, and country that would support 50 Indians would support 10,000 planting white men.

Stuck on Zero's picture

Good job JR.  You've obviously studied more history than new age dogma.  There was a reason so many Indians lived in protected cliff dwellings.  It was to be avoid extermination by the other tribes.


MeelionDollerBogus's picture

"Other peoples had come and gone before, leaving only their shadows upon the land…”

Nope. That lineage of race was the very first human segment to ever step foot on North America, period.

You can argue which tribes killed each other but all the tribes came of ONE racial lineage departed from Asia since before there ever existed such things as pyramids, coins or writing.

Kobe Beef's picture


The Clovis Culture was not in North America first, nor were they the only hominids present. I suggest you do some research. There's a lot about ancient history that is not known or understood. Here's a few non-Clovis artifacts found across North America to get you started...





Kobe Beef's picture

Still more...



But you knew all this and decided on the the appropriate La Raza/Social Justice talking points anyway, right?

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

Nope, you're still wrong and -1 for both your comments.

MeelionDollerBogus's picture


I've had enough of this.

Enough research has been performed over the last century to confirm it isn't true.

We're done.

Kobe Beef's picture

No, we're not.

You're done. You have no facts beyond what you want them to be. You have no truth beyond what you demand others believe. Quote the research performed. Explain the existence of sites that contradict your convenient political interpretation of the "original owners" of this continent.

I will always be here to prove otherwise.

Run, if you must, but your lies will not escape their undoing.

BooMushroom's picture

Shorter: those old white guys used violence, so we must support more violence!

MeelionDollerBogus's picture

more honest: a true libertarian will take full account of all his/her personal property & income that is the product of theft & return everything that is in fact the product of theft, the rest being free & clear as per true libertarian values. If you're in the USA that leaves very little but not precisely zero. In America land either belongs to First Nations people or is stolen. Period. There's no grey area.

adr's picture

I had a welfare neighbor. Six kids, $3500 a month in direct payments. $480 in food stamps, plus WIC. She would get a $3500 EIC each year as well. With the HEAP program they never paid over $20 a month for combined utilities and got free trash pickup. She always complained it wasn't enough. They got free cable internet and Obama Phones.

She pulled in more money than I did after taxes and drove a $45k Pathfinder. Total bullshit.

lordylord's picture

As Harry Reid would say, you must be lying.  But in all seriousness, how many times did she vote for Obama in 2012?


lordylord's picture

"no responsibility for future generations"

More like no responsibility for themselves.

Murf_DaSurf's picture



Joseph Stiglitz is first on my Tree Branch LIST.

Ignatius's picture

Good thing we got the Affordable Care Act just in time.  Whew, that was close.

NMC_EXP's picture

"...it's called [Neo-]Feudalism."


It is inevitable that the top economic tier will siphon wealth out of a system.  This is tolerable so long as wealth is being created and dispersed in the lower tiers.

There are three ways to create wealth:  agriculture, mining, and manufacturing.  There is not enough of this going on to replace what is drained away. 

Cheap credit fueled consumerism has maintained the middle class illusion.  That fiction is nearly over.

Neo-feudalism is the future.



pragmatic hobo's picture

average can be misleading ... what's the median salary?

Peter Pan's picture

How is it that bankers and politcians are not in the top ten list?

ElvisDog's picture

That's household income, but many (most?) households will have 2 wage earners.

Jumbotron's picture

Ahhh......you are correct.  Sped read it.....and missed that part.  Apologies.  Quite right on the 2 wage earners.

ElvisDog's picture

Well, the median will almost certainly be less because the sky-high salaries of the oligarchs will skew the average values higher.