Bottom 60% of Americans lost wealth between 1983 and 2009

[ProSense]

Bottom 60% of Americans lost wealth between 1983 and 2009

by Laura Clawson



Last week, I wrote about the recent collapse of median household wealth and the gaps, or maybe chasms, between races when it comes to wealth. Well, here's another chasm. This EPI graph represents the breakdown of who got the wealth accumulated in the United States between 1983 and 2009. Lawrence Mishel writes:

All of the gains in wealth accrued to the upper fifth, with 40.2 percent of the gains going to the upper 1 percent and 41.5 percent going to the next wealthiest 4 percent of households. This translated to gains of $4.5 million per household in the richest 1 percent and a gain of roughly $1.2 million per household in the next richest 4 percent of households.

In other words, the richest 5 percent of households obtained roughly 82 percent of all the nation’s gains in wealth between 1983 and 2009. The bottom 60 percent of households actually had less wealth in 2009 than in 1983, meaning they did not participate at all in the growth of wealth over this period.

To emphasize, this isn't a measure of what people had in 1983, at the start of the period the graph represents. It says, if you were in the top 5 percent in 1983, how much of the wealth that the country gained went to you? And the answer to that is almost all of it.

more

[Cali_Democrat]

1. This will only continue as we keep going down the same path toward economic destruction. n/t

[indepat]

13. Maybe the framers of the grand bargain used this graph as the basis to not raise taxes on the

uber-wealthy, but rather begin to gut social security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Wonder how that graph will look a decade from now? :patriot:

[MannyGoldstein]

2. Will the three Bush "free" trade agreements that Obama and

the Republicans are trying to pass help to reverse the situation?

[ProSense]

3. So

"Will the three Bush "free" trade agreements that Obama and the Republicans are trying to pass help to reverse the situation?

...if your wishful thinking doesn't materialize are you going to credit Bush and the Republicans or Obama?

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Please answer my question and

I'll be happy to answer yours.

[COLGATE4]

10. Not gonna happen, Manny.

[Cali_Democrat]

11. LOL

No kidding.

[Mimosa]

5. 60% is the majority.

ProSense, this tracks with the 'computer revolution'.

Most people will never understand the computer/tech revolution contributed to decline in employment, decline in local tax bases, the loss of creative jobs.

Politicians won't talk about what bad effects have come from digital technology. It's done. I think you're smart enough to know. But how can it be fixed? how short of excess population 'dying off' can the economic playing field be leveled?

[marginlized]

9. An interesting premise...

I've read Lanier's 'You Are Not a Gadget', and he agrees we're suffering from the digital fall out. But it's an unintended consequences problem. Is there even a bottle to put the genie back into?

[4dsc]

6. 30 years of failed conservative economic policies at work here

I rest my case.

[xchrom]

7. Laissez Faire democrats helped create this factoid.

How are those same democrats going to get us out of it?

Not possible when the leadership relies on council from those who broke it.

[ProSense]

8. Well,

"Not possible when the leadership relies on council from those who broke it."

...let's hope Democrats have learned their lesson.

Former President Bill Clinton: "The American Dream has been under assault for 30 years"

[Supersedeas]

14. maybe it is time to start looking for a third way

[Overseas]

12. K&R. Now we know who "the private sector does things better" for.

Privatization was sold to us as a means of reducing waste. Now we know what it has really been successful at-- wealth transfer to the top.