Go Home

Record U.S. Income Gap Growing Again

In June, an analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities confirmed that gap between rich and poor in the United States reached levels not seen since 1929. Between 1979 and 2007, the yawning chasm separating the after-tax income of the richest 1 percent of Americans from the middle and poorest fifths of the country more than tripled. But while the Bush recession which began in December 2007 temporarily halted the stratospheric advance of the wealthy, the rich - and the rich alone - have largely recovered their losses. Which means that the record level of income inequality in America is growing once again.

The CBPP report found a financial Grand Canyon separating the very rich from everyone else. Over the three decades ending in 2007, the top 1 percent's share of the nation's total after-tax household income more than doubled, from 7.5 percent to 17.1 percent. During that time, the share of the middle 60% of Americans dropped from 51.1 percent to 43.5 percent; the bottom four-fifths declined from 58 percent to 48 percent. As for the poor, they fell further and further behind, with the lowest quintile's income share sliding to just 4.9%. Expressed in dollar terms, the income gap is staggering:

Between 1979 and 2007, average after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent rose by 281 percent after adjusting for inflation -- an increase in income of $973,100 per household -- compared to increases of 25 percent ($11,200 per household) for the middle fifth of households and 16 percent ($2,400 per household) for the bottom fifth.

To be sure, the deficit-exploding Bush tax cuts played an essential role in fueling the gap. (This is evidenced by the fact that between 2001 and 2007, the income share of the 400 richest American taxpayers doubled even as their tax rates were halved.) As the New York Times revealed in October, by 2007 the top 1% - the 1.5 million families earning more than $400,000 - reaped 24% of the nation's income. The bottom 90% - the 136 million families below $110,000 - accounted for just 50%.

But with the devastating Bush recession, the upper class joy ride hit a speed bump. As the media last fall lamented the downturn's impact on the tragically rich, David Leonhardt and Geraldine Fabrikant of the New York Times concluded concluded, "After a 30-year run, [the] rise of the super-rich hits a sobering wall."

They began to pull away from everyone else in the 1970s. By 2006, income was more concentrated at the top than it had been since the late 1920s. The recent news about resurgent Wall Street pay has seemed to suggest that not even the Great Recession could reverse the rise in income inequality.

But economists say -- and data is beginning to show -- that a significant change may in fact be under way. The rich, as a group, are no longer getting richer. Over the last two years, they have become poorer. And many may not return to their old levels of wealth and income anytime soon.

As it turned out, that time wasn't just soon. It's already here.

The Los Angeles Times announced the return of record-setting income inequality last month in an article titled, "Millionaires Make a Comeback." After getting pummeled as Wall Street plummeted in 2008, the rich have begun to recoup their losses. The short period of Gilded Interrupted is over:

In 2008, as the financial crisis raged, the stock market hit bottom and the Great Recession ate into the economy, the number of millionaires in the United States plunged.

But last year the number of millionaires bounced up sharply, new data show.

And after that decline and rebound, the millionaire class held a larger percentage of the country's wealth than it did in 2007.

"It's been a recession where everyone took a hit -- with the bottom taking a bigger hit," said Timothy Smeeding, a University of Wisconsin professor who studies economic inequality. But "the wealthy alone have bounced back."

Bounced back, it turns out, with a vengeance. The Boston Consulting Group found that "the number of U.S. households with at least $1 million in "bankable" assets climbed 15% last year to 4.7 million after tumbling 21% in 2008." Despite there being 10% fewer millionaires than in 2007, the percentage of Americans' total wealth held by those households was slightly higher, growing to 55%.

Writing in the Washington Post, Ezra Klein neatly summed up the dynamic which has restored income inequality to record highs:

The basic story here is that assets have recovered so much more quickly than the broader economy that in 2009, "the millionaire class held a larger percentage of the country's wealth than it did in 2007." In other words, inequality has actually gotten worse. If you want to see why that's unexpected, check out the chart I cadged from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities: After the Great Depression, inequality fell and didn't recover until 2007. That's about 80 years. After the Great Recession, inequality fell and didn't recover until ... 2009? That's one year.

For his part, Larry Mishel of the Economic Policy Institute argued, "The recession is going to end up accentuating the inequalities of income and wealth we've seen for 30 years," adding, "This requires attention if we're going to see robust wealth growth going forward."

Which is exactly right. Sadly, Republican obstructionists in Washington are only paying attention to those who need it least. Before they united to block the extension of unemployment benefits to the long-term jobless, Republicans delivered a one-year suspension of the estate tax. And even as that gambit drains billions from the U.S. Treasury to produce a one-year windfall for the heirs of the richest Americans, the GOP and its Tea Party shock troops insist on making the expiring Bush tax cuts for the wealthy permanent.

As the numbers on income inequality clearly show, only one side is fighting the class war in America. It should come as no surprise that they are winning it.

(This post also appears at Perrspectives.)

Share This Post

Link To This Post


42 Comments
RuperttheBear's picture

Two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and Suckers

RickBeagle's picture

.

freequark's picture

....Republicans and Democrats.

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Mon, 07/12/2010 - 09:03 — RuperttheBear
Two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and Suckers
______________________________________________________

I'm turning that into a bumpersticker.

Or republicanism: The Political version of a Ponzi Scheme.

(Might need a extra bumper to continue that last one).


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

hackenbush's picture

“Don’t forget that most men with nothing would rather protect the possibility of becoming rich than face the reality of being poor.” – John Dickinson

Trittydi's picture

Good one - and all too true.
*

Trittydi's picture

Sociopaths
*

Nangleator's picture

Sure would be nice to see (recently) rich people jumping out of skyscrapers again... but I fear they learned how to let the axe fall on the poor people instead.

Amitola's picture

the greedy bastards just figured how to do the financial scams on a much greater scale; affecting more people more quickly and stealing more billions for themselves.

"Those who do not know when enough is enough, can never have enough."
Lao Tzu


"Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of Stupidity" - Frank Leahy

ricky's picture

Envy, too, is a deadly sin.


"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter

Powkat's picture

What's that supposed to mean. I don't want to be rich, never have - but the money the ultra rich and the banksters stole doesn't belong to them, and they should be forced to give it back.

ronspri's picture

ricky, some people really do find rapacious greed disgusting and not in the our countrys best interests, economically and otherwise. I would be among them.

Blue Lensman's picture

Everybody wants it and it's killing us.

Samson-'s picture

you're welcome.

signed,

US taxpayers

aarrgho's picture

P.S. - FYYFF!


all it takes is all of us

going on. I'd like to see another that shows how people in the "other" fifths are being forced into lower and lower brackets. Being a small business owner, everyone I know (other s.b. owners) are having to work ten times as hard for much, much less money, maybe even half.

surfjac's picture

..with all that income, surely they're putting that into more jobs for the lower classes? Isn't that what st. ronnie the traitor wanted them to do? Maybe I'm reading from a different book of fables.


Mickey: "It was an epiphany. Do you know what an epipany is?"
Keoni: "NOT NOW MICKEY!"

ron's picture

The problem is that the lower classes are in other countries.

JudyLou's picture
[Comment Deleted By Administration For Violation Of Terms Of Service]
ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Diabolus est Deus Inversus

Read the comments on this piece. A lot of pigheaded opinions that don't get Reich's point: income gaps are pure-and-simple an issue of equality.

one sided affair.

Since the '80's the middle class keeps giving and the wealthy keep taking.

The American middle class eats shit continually without even making a whimper.
How the hell did we get like this?

ricky's picture

Helper? You'll find it on most fine supermarket shelves.


"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter

hackenbush's picture

And if you're upper middle class, Shit Helper with Cheese.

ysbaddaden's picture

The gap is growing wider than a hillbilly's teeth...


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

ricky's picture

questionable.


"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter

RickBeagle's picture

no gap in that tooth.... easy to floss though

ysbaddaden's picture
)O(

Is class war who can raise their pinkie the highest whilst sipping tea, and nibbling on decrusted, mini-triangles, of watercress sandwiches and lady fingers?

I LIKE sucking on lady fingers...


Diabolus est Deus Inversus

lets roll back the tax rate on the rich to pre-reagan levels 70%....NOW!


Cue the Kabuki....

hackenbush's picture

I don't see this happening, mainly because the rich control the media, and the media controls the perception of reality in this country.

Look at the following story. Obama says the GOP have been selling a certain bad philosophy which is damning us all, George Will says, "no, it's Obama's philosophy that's getting us in this mess". The second statement is not more valid than the first, but it is treated with equal weight.

If one guy says "2 + 2 = 4", and other guys says "2 + 2 = 6", the correct answer is *not* "2 + 2 = 5". We wonder why Americans are becoming more fundamentally stupid, and the root of this may be somewhat rooted in our inability to understand why a compromise is not always the correct solution.

All that being said, roll it back to FDR-era levels. Rich people become rich off the backs of the poor/lower class in this country -- they should at least have to help support the social network which keeps them alive.

to 70% they will just move up the retirement age up to age 70 instead. Cause the 'experts' in/on the media say it is the "right thing to do do save the economy"
Fuck the corrupt media, and the greedy rich that control them.


Cue the Kabuki....

Trittydi's picture

As they planned ... we're screwed. Congratulations on taking down one of the greatest countries ever, you greedy bastards.
*

ronspri's picture

Numbers I've seen is 10% have 85% of the wealth. That means 15% and it's game over. Whatever it was is gone. We can let it continue or we can give in to their crys of redistributing wealth. That's a weak argument but the get away with it all the time.

researcher's picture

the rich always know now to milk the middle class.

this is why nations have revolutions.

the rich get richer until there is no middle class then here comes the revolution.

we are decades away from such a revolution.

americans still hold out hope that things will turn around for them.

history tells us all of these things but americans are not into history lessons. just greed.

a capitalist system will create untold greed.

the purer the form of capitalism the more greed and the faster the self destruction.

reagan put our form of capitalism on steroids.

and we have seen the results.

here is the interesting part.

most americans want more of the same.

wars for profits and tax cuts for the rich and the corps.

this is called paradigm paralysis and americans are neck deep into paradigm paralysis.

oh really's picture

...it's just the system working as it was designed to work -- a government (and economy) of rich people, by rich people, and FOR rich people. The rich get the money, the poor get the right to bear arms (if they can afford a gun).

Powkat's picture

So, the top 1% stole all our money. Let's go get it back. I don't want to wait decades. I want my money back.

jupiter2's picture

The demand to please shareholders gets too much attention as a reason for the current compensation gap and executives now making over 300 times the wages that the lowest-paid worker receives.

Comparing the wage gap now to 30 or 40 years ago assumes that executives are the same people with the same values now as they were then.

Nothing could be further from the truth. There is less esprit d'corps, less respect from the top for the work that everyone in the company performs. Corporate leaders, especially in big corporations, are now by and large sociopaths who are contemptuous of their employees, who see employees as just a financial drain on the company, instead of as coworkers who account for the company's successes. No wonder they get a good night's sleep knowing that they have fleeced their fellow men and women by underpaying them for their labor. They don't see the dignity in the work a person does. They don't see their employees as human beings who deserve wages that can make a better life for their families and can provide financial security for old age.

When you diminish the work a person does, then it's easy to diminish that person's wages.

I'm not surprised now when an executive before a congressional committee answers questions with "I didn't know about that" or "I wasn't aware of X, Y or Z". They're probably answering accurately. Corporate executives are now the American aristocracy. They don't do the hard work in their organizations, so they are clueless about what's going on. And their superciliousness is to the point of thinking that people who do hard work are fools who deserve low wages, long hours and a life of insecurity and want.

It's time for government to step in with policies that correct a problem that will only get worse, that threatens the bedrock principle that we are a nation of equality that respects the dignity of every woman and man. Among other correctives, it's time for tax laws to account for income disparities by applying a wage-gap tax on wages and other compensation from work, so that those corporations are taxed the highest that have the highest compensation gaps.

Powkat's picture

Nah - they never cared about their workers much. But Henry Ford was smart enough to understand that if he paid his employees enough to afford a Model T, HE would sell more Model T's. That's what the non-manufacturing economy has given these sociopaths - they can make money without needing to create a market.

Plus the CEOs of today aren't people who started in the mail room or the steno pool and learned the business from the ground up. They are hired guns who move from company to company, hired to come up with 2 or 3 big earning quarters, then they move on and let it all go to hell.

derekthered's picture

this is how.

http://nypress.com/article-21342-the-making-o...

yet another reason for the income gap, and you thought halliburton got all the giveaways.

bbk's picture

starting with solid, quality estate and capital gains taxes. But the more important point is that there's nothing natural about the growing income gap. There is no market-based strategy of making that much money that doesn't involve stealing it.

Comments are closed on this entry