Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

American families median net worth falls nearly 40%

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
No_hite_pls



Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right

PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:31 pm    Post subject: American families median net worth falls nearly 40% Reply with quote

American families median net worth falls nearly 40%, 2007 to 2010 from 126,400 USD to 77,300 USD.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/bulletin/2012/pdf/scf12.pdf

This Fed report was released yesterday and really helped the market drop. Crying or Very sad

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2012/06/family-net-worth-down-to-early-90s-level/

In 2011, "The median net-worth per adult in Canada is $89,014 USD, but in America, it's $52,752 USD." I think Canadian families median net worth is nearly double Americans now.

http://lsminsurance.ca/life-insurance-canada/2011/12/canadas-net-worth-tops-the-united-states


Last edited by No_hite_pls on Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:50 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
No_hite_pls



Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right

PostPosted: Mon Jun 11, 2012 11:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trickle down economics and lack of affordable healthcare have finally made there mark on America. Most forclosures have healthcare expenses as a major factor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/01/health-care-horror-story_n_306572.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rollo



Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China

PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Decline in housing prices mostly. The attack on unions by Republicans begininning in the 90's has not helped.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
No_hite_pls



Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right

PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rollo wrote:
Decline in housing prices mostly. The attack on unions by Republicans begininning in the 90's has not helped.


But why was there a decline in housing prices? I think it was stagnate wages, rising health care costs and easy credit.

It's interesting that America offers basically the lowest worker benefits in the industrialized world (maternity, holidays, overtime, health care benefits, minimum wage) and also has a horrible median net worth (saves rate) too.

I wish something was being done in America to address these issues but the minute someone brings them up they are called anti-American. How are we ever going to fix America's problems without even being able to address them?

Wages in the states stagnated for the bottom 90% of earners near 1980 adjusted for inflation, then the easy credit times were established during the 80's and 90's for the "boom times". Presently, there is no credit left to expand and still stagnate or even declining wages. The future does not look bright even for the wealthy unless worker wages increase.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
comm



Joined: 22 Jun 2010

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No_hite_pls wrote:
Wages in the states stagnated for the bottom 90% of earners near 1980 adjusted for inflation, then the easy credit times were established during the 80's and 90's for the "boom times". Presently, there is no credit left to expand and still stagnate or even declining wages. The future does not look bright even for the wealthy unless worker wages increase.

Naturally, it doesn't help that inflation hurts those with a low net-worth much more than those with a high net-worth, in addition to your statistic.

I'm pretty deep in libertarian philosophical territory, particularly economically. Howerver, the supply of labor simply does not fit on a supply/demand graph. We are not going to stop producing more labor just because the demand for labor is low. At the same time, I'm hesitant to use the State to treat one individual differently from another.

In the end, I think a positive solution would be a combination of progressive sales taxes and progressive capital gains taxes. Because if technology fails to continue providing a better and better life for the average person (due to insufficient wages or overwork), we could eventually end up with a rejection of Capitalism...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wishfullthinkng



Joined: 05 Mar 2010

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No_hite_pls wrote:
It's interesting that America offers basically the lowest worker benefits in the industrialized world (maternity, holidays, overtime, health care benefits, minimum wage) and also has a horrible median net worth (saves rate) too.


orly?

definitely don't work for anything in korea besides teaching then because you might be in for a rude awakening...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Unposter



Joined: 04 Jun 2006

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very interesting analysis Comm. In some sense don't you think that part of our rise of social programs starting in the 1930s was in response to a worry about a rejection of capitalism?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

comm wrote:


In the end, I think a positive solution would be a combination of progressive sales taxes and progressive capital gains taxes. Because if technology fails to continue providing a better and better life for the average person (due to insufficient wages or overwork), we could eventually end up with a rejection of Capitalism...


Capital gains taxes are progressive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
comm



Joined: 22 Jun 2010

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kuros wrote:
Capital gains taxes are progressive.

Indeed, though they could stand to be more progressive. Rather than giving mega-corporations tax incentives to make massive profits, we should give the poor and middle class tax incentives to invest for their future. Something more along the lines of 0-20%, with the majority of the population at the 0% rate.

Unposter wrote:
Very interesting analysis Comm. In some sense don't you think that part of our rise of social programs starting in the 1930s was in response to a worry about a rejection of capitalism?

I'm sure they were. I think that the current income inequality and lack of social mobility is tolerated because every year there's new spiffy technology to make people's lives "better". Their income may be flat, but the 60-inch flatscreen TV that was $2,000 last year is affordable now... so they tolerate it. Without that technological largess, I think the dissatisfaction would mount very quickly.

Capitalism may be forced to bend to Socialism, or be broken by it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
slothrop



Joined: 03 Feb 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

edit

Last edited by slothrop on Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:22 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ontheway



Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What we are seeing is a very large scale macro-economic adjustment. It is beyond the understanding of those whose background is in the non-economic field of Keynesian studies.

What has happened is that since 1913, the Federal Reserve has inflated the currency far beyond what is reflected in the CPI (which doesn't measure inflation at all). At the same time, the US government has run up massive debt - far beyond the official $14 trillion or so.

The real inflation rate has caused the dollar to lose approximately 99% of its value at the same time that the TOTAL US Federal Government Debt according to the Federal Reserve itself has surpassed $100 trillion - Yes, more than $100,000,000,000,000. The debt is still snowballing and the dollar is still declining at an accelerated pace - not reflected in the CPI.

Some of that debt could be undone by repealing entitlements and repealing numerous governmental financial guarantees. Most of it can be, and eventually will be, elimiated by default.

In the meantime, the market has to adjust to reflect the reality of the money already having been spent. As long as these governmental liabilities are due to be collected from the income producing and asset holding members of society, the income levels and asset values of these productive citizens have to take a major hit. That is what we are seeing in stagnant wages and falling property values. The stock market, adjusted for inflation, has also fallen, but it is up in nominal terms due to the massive inflation injected into the marketplace by the Fed. This inflation hasn't yet impacted other prices, due to structural factors, but it will.

Eventually, we will see housing prices rising in nominal terms. However, adusted for the real inflation rate, they will still be 50% or more below what they were.

Finally, because of the destruction of the US capital asset base and the worldwide shortage of investment capital relative to the supply of labor, capital asset values and returns on investments will have to rise greatly relative to a falling value of labor. This condition must continue until a healthy savings and investment climate is created and enough years pass to establish a rising base of investment capital relative to the available labor. At that point labor values can rise and the money individuals have available for housing can rise.

This entire collapse - 100 years in the making - is a result of the expanding stupidity of following a socialist economic governmental system including: going off the gold standard, income taxes, property taxes, socialist entitlement programs and deficit spending.

Socialism always fails.

There are no exceptions to the rule that socialism always fails. In cases where we have a mix of socialist policies and free market policies, the free market policies succeed and are used to fund, support and offset the socialist failures. And of course, lying politicians whose carreers depend on continued expansion of their power and pelf will lie to the public, supported by lickspittle, benighted Keynesian and other socialist non-economists who fool easily a compliant, economically illiterate, star-struck media, and make scapegoats out of the innocent producers in public, while privately apologizing for having done so.

The solution remains:

We must repeal all taxes on income and property and institute a national consumption tax of 10% to be shared by all levels of government. No other taxes allowed beyond the single consumption tax. Deficits prohibited. Printing money not backed by gold prohibited. Cut all government spending to live within the constitutionally capped 10% consumption tax and mandate a balanced budget. Cap government salaries at $100,000 per year and cut all government workers salaries on a progressive sliding scale below $100,000. Massively reduce the number of goverment workers and eliminate most of the current departments. Repeal the expensive war on drugs and other victimless crimes. End the empire and bring the troops home from around the world. Repeal all entitlements and return government to its constitutionally allowed functions. Go on a 100% gold backed currency to replace the current dollar.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
No_hite_pls



Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Location: Don't hate me because I'm right

PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Rarely in history has the cause of a major economic problem been so clear yet have so few been willing to see it.

The major reason this recovery has been so anemic is not Europe's debt crisis. It's not, as right-wing economists tell us, because taxes are too high on corporations and the rich, safety nets are too generous to the needy, and regulations on business are too onerous.

It's not even, as some liberals contend, because the Obama administration hasn't spent enough on a temporary Keynesian stimulus.

The answer is in front of our faces. It's because American consumers, whose spending is 70 percent of economic activity, don't have the dough to buy enough to boost the economy - and they can no longer borrow like they could before the crash of 2008.

If you have any doubt, just take a look at the Survey of Consumer Finances, released last week by the Federal Reserve. Median family income was $49,600 in 2007. By 2010 it was $45,800 - a drop of 7.7 percent.

All of the gains from economic growth have been going to the richest 1 percent - who, because they're so rich, spend no more than half what they take in. They send the rest around the world wherever it can get the highest return.

Can I say this any more simply? The earnings of the great American middle class fueled the great American expansion for three decades after World War II. Their relative lack of earnings in more recent years set us up for the great American bust.

Starting around 1980, globalization and automation began exerting downward pressure on median wages. Employers broke unions in order to make more profits. And increasingly deregulated financial markets began taking over the real economy.

The result was painfully slow wage growth for most households. Women surged into paid work in order to prop up family incomes. When that stopped working, families went deep into debt, using the rising values of their homes as collateral. Then the housing bubble popped.

The Fed's latest report shows how loud that pop was. Between 2007 and 2010 (the latest data available) American families' median net worth fell almost 40 percent - down to levels last seen in 1992. The typical family's wealth is their home, not their stock portfolio - and housing values have dropped by a third since 2006.

Bottom line: The American economy is still struggling because the vast American middle class can't spend more to get it out of first gear.

What to do? There's no simple answer in the short term except to hope we stay in first gear and don't slide backward. Over the longer term, the answer is to make sure the middle class gets far more of the gains from economic growth.

How? We might learn something from history. During the 1920s, income concentrated at the top. By 1928, the top 1 percent was raking in an astounding 23.94 percent of the total (close to the 23.5 percent the top 1 percent got in 2007). At that point the bubble popped and we fell into the Great Depression.

But then came the Wagner Act, requiring employers to bargain in good faith with organized labor. Social Security and unemployment insurance. The Works Projects Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps. A national minimum wage. And to contain Wall Street, the Securities Act and Glass-Steagall Act.

In 1941, America went to war - a vast mobilization that employed every able-bodied adult American, and put money in their pockets. And after the war, the GI Bill, sending millions of returning veterans to college. A vast expansion of public higher education. And huge infrastructure investments, such as the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act. Taxes on the rich remained at least 70 percent until 1981.

The result: By 1957, the top 1 percent of Americans raked in only 10.1 percent of total income. Most of the rest went to a growing middle class - whose members fueled the greatest economic boom in the history of the world.

Get it? We won't get out of first gear until the middle class regains the bargaining power it had in the first three decades after World War II to claim a much larger share of the gains from productivity growth.


http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Recovery-depends-on-middle-class-spending-power-3656031.php

Robert Reich writes better than I do.

We need rising wages for lower and middle classes for an economic recovery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International