Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Wealth of most Americans down 55% since recession
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Larry Kudlow
Jun 1, 2013, 3:15:04 PM6/1/13
to
So how's that recovery workin for ya?
The legacy of 8 years of George Monkey Bush and his "War on Americans
(tm)" continues to just keep on giving.
In other news:
America's working mothers are now the primary breadwinners in
a record 40 percent of households with children -- a milestone
in the changing face of modern families, up from just 11
percent in 1960.
The findings by the Pew Research Center, released Wednesday,
highlight the growing influence of "breadwinner moms" who keep
their families afloat financially. While most are headed by
single mothers, a growing number are families with married
mothers who bring in more income than their husbands.
The american male. Being replaced by females. It's the american way.
============================================
MoneyWatch/ May 31, 2013, 12:07 PM
Wealth of most Americans down 55% since recession
(MoneyWatch) Increasing housing prices and the stock market''s posting
all-time highs haven't helped the plight most Americans. The average
U.S. household has recovered only 45 percent of the wealth they lost
during the recession, according to a report released yesterday from the
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
This finding is a very different picture than one painted in a report
earlier this year by the Fed that calculated Americans as a whole had
regained 91 percent of their losses. The writers of the report released
yesterday point out that the earlier number is based on aggregate
household-net-worth data. However, this isn't adjusted for inflation,
population growth or the nature of the wealth. Further, they say much of
recovery in net worth is because of the stock market, which means most
of the improvement has been a boon only to wealthy families.
"Clearly, the 91 percent recovery of wealth losses portrayed by the
aggregate nominal measure paints a different picture than the 45 percent
recovery of wealth losses indicated by the average inflation-adjusted
household measure," the report said. "Considering the uneven recovery of
wealth across households, a conclusion that the financial damage of the
crisis and recession largely has been repaired is not justified," the
researchers said.
Household wealth plunged $16 trillion from the top of the real estate
bubble in the third quarter of 2007 to the bottom of the bust in the
first quarter of 2009. By the last three months of 2012, American
households as a group had regained $14.7 trillion.
The report says almost two-thirds of the increase in aggregate household
wealth is due to rising stock prices. This has disproportionately
benefited the richest households: About 80 percent of stocks are held by
the wealthiest 10 percent of the population.
Much of the total wealth of middle- and lower-income households is based
on home values, not stocks. Even though home prices have increased
nearly 11 percent in the past year, they remain about 30 percent below
their peak.
While Americans continue to pay down their debt, the report says debt
levels and problems with rebuilding net worth are the main reasons the
recovery has been so slow. Also, the people who bore the brunt of the
recession through job losses and reduced income were the ones who had
borrowed the most.
The report found that members of the households that suffered the most
financially were less educated, relatively young or black or Hispanic,
or some combination of these factors. Those families tended to have low
savings and high debt, with much of their wealth based on housing.
The poorest households have felt the sharpest losses as a consequence of
the recession: "While many Americans lost wealth during the Great
Recession, younger, less-educated and nonwhite families lost the
greatest percentage of their wealth," James Bullard, president of the
St. Louis Fed, said in a statement. "Household deleveraging, or paying
down debt, has played a key role in the recent recession and the slow
recovery."
The legacy of 8 years of George Monkey Bush and his "War on Americans
(tm)" continues to just keep on giving.
In other news:
America's working mothers are now the primary breadwinners in
a record 40 percent of households with children -- a milestone
in the changing face of modern families, up from just 11
percent in 1960.
The findings by the Pew Research Center, released Wednesday,
highlight the growing influence of "breadwinner moms" who keep
their families afloat financially. While most are headed by
single mothers, a growing number are families with married
mothers who bring in more income than their husbands.
The american male. Being replaced by females. It's the american way.
============================================
MoneyWatch/ May 31, 2013, 12:07 PM
Wealth of most Americans down 55% since recession
(MoneyWatch) Increasing housing prices and the stock market''s posting
all-time highs haven't helped the plight most Americans. The average
U.S. household has recovered only 45 percent of the wealth they lost
during the recession, according to a report released yesterday from the
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
This finding is a very different picture than one painted in a report
earlier this year by the Fed that calculated Americans as a whole had
regained 91 percent of their losses. The writers of the report released
yesterday point out that the earlier number is based on aggregate
household-net-worth data. However, this isn't adjusted for inflation,
population growth or the nature of the wealth. Further, they say much of
recovery in net worth is because of the stock market, which means most
of the improvement has been a boon only to wealthy families.
"Clearly, the 91 percent recovery of wealth losses portrayed by the
aggregate nominal measure paints a different picture than the 45 percent
recovery of wealth losses indicated by the average inflation-adjusted
household measure," the report said. "Considering the uneven recovery of
wealth across households, a conclusion that the financial damage of the
crisis and recession largely has been repaired is not justified," the
researchers said.
Household wealth plunged $16 trillion from the top of the real estate
bubble in the third quarter of 2007 to the bottom of the bust in the
first quarter of 2009. By the last three months of 2012, American
households as a group had regained $14.7 trillion.
The report says almost two-thirds of the increase in aggregate household
wealth is due to rising stock prices. This has disproportionately
benefited the richest households: About 80 percent of stocks are held by
the wealthiest 10 percent of the population.
Much of the total wealth of middle- and lower-income households is based
on home values, not stocks. Even though home prices have increased
nearly 11 percent in the past year, they remain about 30 percent below
their peak.
While Americans continue to pay down their debt, the report says debt
levels and problems with rebuilding net worth are the main reasons the
recovery has been so slow. Also, the people who bore the brunt of the
recession through job losses and reduced income were the ones who had
borrowed the most.
The report found that members of the households that suffered the most
financially were less educated, relatively young or black or Hispanic,
or some combination of these factors. Those families tended to have low
savings and high debt, with much of their wealth based on housing.
The poorest households have felt the sharpest losses as a consequence of
the recession: "While many Americans lost wealth during the Great
Recession, younger, less-educated and nonwhite families lost the
greatest percentage of their wealth," James Bullard, president of the
St. Louis Fed, said in a statement. "Household deleveraging, or paying
down debt, has played a key role in the recent recession and the slow
recovery."
Red Green
Jun 1, 2013, 4:19:13 PM6/1/13
to
Larry Kudlow <La...@Kudlow.Net> wrote in news:51AA4838...@Kudlow.Net:
> So how's that recovery workin for ya?
>
Personally, pretty good the past couple of years except for one thing -
idiots with low IQ's with nothing to do posting OT stuff on NGs.
How's things in the low IQ arena?
> So how's that recovery workin for ya?
>
idiots with low IQ's with nothing to do posting OT stuff on NGs.
How's things in the low IQ arena?
Oren
Jun 1, 2013, 4:37:14 PM6/1/13
to
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:19:13 +0000 (UTC), Red Green
<postm...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>How's things in the low IQ arena?
Canada = 1
<postm...@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>How's things in the low IQ arena?
USA = 0
Ed Pawlowski
Jun 1, 2013, 5:02:08 PM6/1/13
to
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 15:15:04 -0400, Larry Kudlow <La...@Kudlow.Net>
wrote:
>So how's that recovery workin for ya?
Great. Made more money last year than I ever made, this year even
more.
> America's working mothers are now the primary breadwinners in
> a record 40 percent of households with children -- a milestone
> in the changing face of modern families, up from just 11
> percent in 1960.
>
This has much to do with the divorce rate, little to do with economic
recovery. You should start another thread on that.
.
>
>============================================
>MoneyWatch/ May 31, 2013, 12:07 PM
>
>Wealth of most Americans down 55% since recession
>
>(MoneyWatch) Increasing housing prices and the stock market''s posting
>all-time highs haven't helped the plight most Americans. The average
>U.S. household has recovered only 45 percent of the wealth they lost
>during the recession, according to a report released yesterday from the
>Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
I feel bad for those affected, but I'm back where I was in property,
ahead in stocks.
>
>Much of the total wealth of middle- and lower-income households is based
>on home values, not stocks. Even though home prices have increased
>nearly 11 percent in the past year, they remain about 30 percent below
>their peak.
Yes, but the peak was artificial pricing. Wrong, but it happened.
>
>The report found that members of the households that suffered the most
>financially were less educated, relatively young or black or Hispanic,
>or some combination of these factors. Those families tended to have low
>savings and high debt, with much of their wealth based on housing.
See, that is a problem. Many of those people never should have had a
house, but mortgages were too easy to get and the people bought at
grossly inflated prices. Combination of poor lending practices,
predatory realtors/mortgage brokers/banks and consumers that were
willing to pay outrageous prices.
My house is worth 3X what I paid for it years ago. At one time, I
could have sold it for 4X, but it was just a bubble. Since it went
from 4X to 3X, the government is counting that as a 25% loss of value,
but it never truly had that value. The 3X number is about right for
normal inflation over the years.
Conclusion:
Economists and Pundits can come up with a set of numbers to make any
argument you want.
wrote:
>So how's that recovery workin for ya?
more.
> America's working mothers are now the primary breadwinners in
> a record 40 percent of households with children -- a milestone
> in the changing face of modern families, up from just 11
> percent in 1960.
>
recovery. You should start another thread on that.
.
>
>============================================
>MoneyWatch/ May 31, 2013, 12:07 PM
>
>Wealth of most Americans down 55% since recession
>
>(MoneyWatch) Increasing housing prices and the stock market''s posting
>all-time highs haven't helped the plight most Americans. The average
>U.S. household has recovered only 45 percent of the wealth they lost
>during the recession, according to a report released yesterday from the
>Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
ahead in stocks.
>
>Much of the total wealth of middle- and lower-income households is based
>on home values, not stocks. Even though home prices have increased
>nearly 11 percent in the past year, they remain about 30 percent below
>their peak.
>
>The report found that members of the households that suffered the most
>financially were less educated, relatively young or black or Hispanic,
>or some combination of these factors. Those families tended to have low
>savings and high debt, with much of their wealth based on housing.
house, but mortgages were too easy to get and the people bought at
grossly inflated prices. Combination of poor lending practices,
predatory realtors/mortgage brokers/banks and consumers that were
willing to pay outrageous prices.
My house is worth 3X what I paid for it years ago. At one time, I
could have sold it for 4X, but it was just a bubble. Since it went
from 4X to 3X, the government is counting that as a 25% loss of value,
but it never truly had that value. The 3X number is about right for
normal inflation over the years.
Conclusion:
Economists and Pundits can come up with a set of numbers to make any
argument you want.
Larry Kudlow
Jun 1, 2013, 10:43:39 PM6/1/13
to
Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > So how's that recovery workin for ya?
>
> Great. Made more money last year than I ever made, this year even
> more.
How much did you lose in 2007/2008?
> > So how's that recovery workin for ya?
>
> Great. Made more money last year than I ever made, this year even
> more.
Where are you now compared to the crash in 2007?
Ed Pawlowski
Jun 1, 2013, 11:10:32 PM6/1/13
to
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 22:43:39 -0400, Larry Kudlow <La...@Kudlow.Net>
wrote:
Lost no income. not sure about property value, but that was all on
paper as I was not buying or selling so I was not affected. Mortgage
was paid so that was not an issue.
Stocks are ahead now by about 18%, but some of that was new
investment, not just growth. Income up by $37,000. My best year
ever last year, a bit better this year.
wrote:
paper as I was not buying or selling so I was not affected. Mortgage
was paid so that was not an issue.
Stocks are ahead now by about 18%, but some of that was new
investment, not just growth. Income up by $37,000. My best year
ever last year, a bit better this year.
Stormin Mormon
Jun 2, 2013, 8:31:16 AM6/2/13
to
Remember, Obama has had seven years to improve on Bush's 5% unemployment rate, and robust economy. After seven years of Obama admin:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2013/02/04/the-growth-recession-on-president-obamas-watch-continues/
|
2/04/2013 @ 8:21PM |1,110 views
The Growth Recession On President Obama's Watch Continues
The U.S. economy remains in the grip of a growth recession, and there is no relief in sight. Slow growth means continued high unemployment as workers bear the brunt of the burden of President Obama's failed economic policies. Continued slow growth also means trillions of dollars will be added to projected deficits and more contentious battles over spending and taxes. But, corporations appear to have adjusted to a plodding economy by cutting costs enough to be on their way to reporting record profits, driving stock prices to within reach of their highs hit before the Great Recession.
Economic activity in the fourth quarter was flat, as overall GDP contracted at a teeny tiny 0.1% annual rate. Two one-time events - a 22% annual rate of decline in defense spending and a reduction in inventories subtracted about 2.5 percentage points from the growth rate. But, these were offset by the recovery in residential investment and consumer spending on durable goods which was boosted in part by an aging auto fleet feeding new car sales. Accelerated bonus payments of $45 billion (at annual rates) and dividend payouts of - get this - $317 billion artificially inflated personal income and the savings rate during the quarter as individuals scramble to protect as much income as possible from the Obama tax increase.
Slow growth is better than contraction, but otherwise, there is little to celebrate. In the 3.5 years since the economy bottomed in the second quarter of 2009, economic output has grown by a paltry total of 7.5%, or at a 2% average annual rate, only twice posting a quarterly growth rate of 4.0%
Blaming the slow recovery on the severity of the recession is a phony excuse - in every prior recovery, the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. For example, in the 3.5 years after the end of the 1982 recession, the economy grew 20% -nearly three times more, posting an average annual growth rate of 5.4%, including six quarters with growth rates above 6.0%.
Sadly, the heaviest burden of the Obama Administration's failed economic policies have fallen on the American work force, who continue to face high unemployment rates and limited opportunity for upward mobility. Jobs grew by 157,000 in January, its slowest rate since last September, and the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9%. Since the Obama recovery began, monthly job growth has averaged only 98,000. By contrast, during the Reagan recovery, job growth (adjusted for today's economy) averaged 354,000 a month. Comparing the two, the Obama Administration's policies have produced an 11 million jobs gap.
Moreover, the brunt of the poor jobs picture has fallen on the least advantaged. The black unemployment rate is 13.8%, and nearly 40% of black teenagers who are looking for jobs out of work.
Inevitably, continued slow growth will intensify the fiscal policy debate. Slower growth and fewer jobs means less income for American workers and fewer tax dollars for governments at all levels. Higher unemployment and lower wages also mean increased spending on means tested transfer payments including unemployment benefits and food stamps. Democrats demand higher taxes; Republicans less spending. But, neither party is offering policies that would spur private sector growth enough to increase revenues and reduce spending through private sector job creation.
Instead, the Obama tax increase will continue to weigh on U.S. employment gains. And, a new onslaught of expensive, anti-growth regulations on energy production and financial services will reduce the opportunities to expand high-paying jobs of all kinds. According to the American Action Forum, the cost of regulations increased $236 billion last year. That includes 44.6 million hours of paperwork just to comply with the new rules for ObamaCare, and another 33 million hours of paperwork created by the Dodd-Frank regulations. The millions of hours consumed by these regulations destroy wealth and reduce the resources available for companies big and small to generate revenue and thereby increase investment and employment necessary for growth.
As a consequence, the growth recession is likely to persist until the Washington political establishment discovers again the importance of private sector growth as the foundation for prosperity, economic security and fiscal balance in the years ahead.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"Larry Kudlow" <La...@Kudlow.Net> wrote in message news:51AA4838...@Kudlow.Net...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2013/02/04/the-growth-recession-on-president-obamas-watch-continues/
|
2/04/2013 @ 8:21PM |1,110 views
The Growth Recession On President Obama's Watch Continues
The U.S. economy remains in the grip of a growth recession, and there is no relief in sight. Slow growth means continued high unemployment as workers bear the brunt of the burden of President Obama's failed economic policies. Continued slow growth also means trillions of dollars will be added to projected deficits and more contentious battles over spending and taxes. But, corporations appear to have adjusted to a plodding economy by cutting costs enough to be on their way to reporting record profits, driving stock prices to within reach of their highs hit before the Great Recession.
Economic activity in the fourth quarter was flat, as overall GDP contracted at a teeny tiny 0.1% annual rate. Two one-time events - a 22% annual rate of decline in defense spending and a reduction in inventories subtracted about 2.5 percentage points from the growth rate. But, these were offset by the recovery in residential investment and consumer spending on durable goods which was boosted in part by an aging auto fleet feeding new car sales. Accelerated bonus payments of $45 billion (at annual rates) and dividend payouts of - get this - $317 billion artificially inflated personal income and the savings rate during the quarter as individuals scramble to protect as much income as possible from the Obama tax increase.
Slow growth is better than contraction, but otherwise, there is little to celebrate. In the 3.5 years since the economy bottomed in the second quarter of 2009, economic output has grown by a paltry total of 7.5%, or at a 2% average annual rate, only twice posting a quarterly growth rate of 4.0%
Blaming the slow recovery on the severity of the recession is a phony excuse - in every prior recovery, the deeper the recession, the stronger the recovery. For example, in the 3.5 years after the end of the 1982 recession, the economy grew 20% -nearly three times more, posting an average annual growth rate of 5.4%, including six quarters with growth rates above 6.0%.
Sadly, the heaviest burden of the Obama Administration's failed economic policies have fallen on the American work force, who continue to face high unemployment rates and limited opportunity for upward mobility. Jobs grew by 157,000 in January, its slowest rate since last September, and the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9%. Since the Obama recovery began, monthly job growth has averaged only 98,000. By contrast, during the Reagan recovery, job growth (adjusted for today's economy) averaged 354,000 a month. Comparing the two, the Obama Administration's policies have produced an 11 million jobs gap.
Moreover, the brunt of the poor jobs picture has fallen on the least advantaged. The black unemployment rate is 13.8%, and nearly 40% of black teenagers who are looking for jobs out of work.
Inevitably, continued slow growth will intensify the fiscal policy debate. Slower growth and fewer jobs means less income for American workers and fewer tax dollars for governments at all levels. Higher unemployment and lower wages also mean increased spending on means tested transfer payments including unemployment benefits and food stamps. Democrats demand higher taxes; Republicans less spending. But, neither party is offering policies that would spur private sector growth enough to increase revenues and reduce spending through private sector job creation.
Instead, the Obama tax increase will continue to weigh on U.S. employment gains. And, a new onslaught of expensive, anti-growth regulations on energy production and financial services will reduce the opportunities to expand high-paying jobs of all kinds. According to the American Action Forum, the cost of regulations increased $236 billion last year. That includes 44.6 million hours of paperwork just to comply with the new rules for ObamaCare, and another 33 million hours of paperwork created by the Dodd-Frank regulations. The millions of hours consumed by these regulations destroy wealth and reduce the resources available for companies big and small to generate revenue and thereby increase investment and employment necessary for growth.
As a consequence, the growth recession is likely to persist until the Washington political establishment discovers again the importance of private sector growth as the foundation for prosperity, economic security and fiscal balance in the years ahead.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"Larry Kudlow" <La...@Kudlow.Net> wrote in message news:51AA4838...@Kudlow.Net...
Stormin Mormon
Jun 2, 2013, 8:34:18 AM6/2/13
to
During the Reagan recovery years, I had a lot of work, and hired help.
Unemployment about 4%.
During the Bush II stability years, I had enough work, and worked alone.
Unemployment was about 5%.
During the Obama recession, I am up to my eyes in debt, and
ought to go on food stamps.
Unemployment as high as 15% by some estimates.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"Larry Kudlow" <La...@Kudlow.Net> wrote in message news:51AA4838...@Kudlow.Net...
Unemployment about 4%.
During the Bush II stability years, I had enough work, and worked alone.
Unemployment was about 5%.
During the Obama recession, I am up to my eyes in debt, and
ought to go on food stamps.
Unemployment as high as 15% by some estimates.
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
.
"Larry Kudlow" <La...@Kudlow.Net> wrote in message news:51AA4838...@Kudlow.Net...
So how's that recovery workin for ya?
Home Guy
Jun 2, 2013, 10:35:52 AM6/2/13
to
Big Al wrote:
> Every time we buy something made in China, another person here in
> the US loses their job.
>
> So let's all look for that China label, close another US factory and
> lay off our neighbors. Our grandkids can find jobs at McLowes Depot
> and Walmart, right?
You people are so stupidly blind.
The root cause of why you buy so much shit made in China is because your
congress gives China most-favored-nation status in terms of import and
trade.
Ask you politicians why they dropped import taxes on stuff from China
years ago.
The answer they won't tell you is that if you don't want a world-war
involving China, you'd better find a way to keep a billion people
employed. One way to keep them employed is to buy their shit - hand
over fist, at a furious rate.
That's what you're doing, and that's really why you're able to do it.
Then the Chinese loan you back that money because your congress is
making your national debt balloon to ridiculous proportions.
> Every time we buy something made in China, another person here in
> the US loses their job.
>
> So let's all look for that China label, close another US factory and
> lay off our neighbors. Our grandkids can find jobs at McLowes Depot
> and Walmart, right?
You people are so stupidly blind.
The root cause of why you buy so much shit made in China is because your
congress gives China most-favored-nation status in terms of import and
trade.
Ask you politicians why they dropped import taxes on stuff from China
years ago.
The answer they won't tell you is that if you don't want a world-war
involving China, you'd better find a way to keep a billion people
employed. One way to keep them employed is to buy their shit - hand
over fist, at a furious rate.
That's what you're doing, and that's really why you're able to do it.
Then the Chinese loan you back that money because your congress is
making your national debt balloon to ridiculous proportions.
0 new messages