DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Income for Lower 50% of Americans Collapsing: Failure of Supply-Side Economics

Link


--------------------

The peer-review still remains on-going, but researches wouldn't release this without confidence it will pass peer review.

Interesting to see how Carter's year is when income share crested. Since Reganomics, the bottom half of Americans lost 7% in their share.

France, deemed an evil socialst nanny state by many supporters of supply-side economics, kept their levels relatively calm compared to us. 22% ain't the best, but it's sure better than 13%.

George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama did little to address growing income inequality. Find it comical how everyone blasts Carter, but that was the last year for the bottom 50% of Americans of a 20% of the wealth in our country. I know of the gas shortages and such, but I'm not sure that ended up as Carter's fault. He just became the fall guy.

Bernie Sanders preached this very narrative during the primaries, but got labeled as a socialist imbecile; yet, many fail to realize how a social democracy can completely revitalize the economic situation of all Americans. Granted, that'd anger the current plutocrats, but something must give.

i think when it comes to president's, D or R, it's gonna be hard to target them when it comes to income inequality.

they can set the climate for job growth or job loss, sure.

but i think income inequality is more of a congressional responsibility, imo.

also, i get why China is on there, for comparison, but France?

sorry bro, but france only looks good as far as income inequality goes because everybody is broke there.

just so that everyone is aware, the average income for France is 30k. the average income for the US is 51k.

thats a big difference.

Yet people still wonder how Trump won the election.

Don't be so sarcastic and such a liar GM ... come on man ... the economy's humming along ... best recovery ever .... thanks to oBUMa the markets humming along, everyones working less hours and making more money ... EVERYONE'S THRILLED .... BEST RECOVERY EVER ... THANKS O ..... if u don't believe me, just ask Swish ... he'll tell you .... *LOL* ...

Its just one of the great mysteries of my lifetime how Trump won the election with such a BOOMING ECONOMY ....

Thanks for the laugh GM ... that had to be what u were going for ....

This economy belongs to every administration since Reagan. Trump winning had little to do with the creation of this mess. Some voted for him because they think he will fix things; but going backward is not the answer so Trump has little chance to fix anything.

The real problem lies in a Country so evenly divided ( kinda /sorta ) . Half the people think your right , the other half think you live in OZ !

Very bad situation , with very little conversation on middle ground by either party ..

Whats the middle ground dawg? .. love to know where it is ....

Supply side economics/free market principals become less free the more rules and regulations you place on it.

It's interesting you guys blame an economic system yet presumably excuse the laws/rules/regulations put in place by both D's and R's that have made gov't complicit in the very things you guys have criticized the economic system of failing to provide.

In the hopes of constructive conversation, how do you guys reconcile this widening income gap with the implementation of literally thousands of regulations instituted annually by our gov't (spanning multiple Presidents and Parties)?

While I disagree with it, I do understand the desire of some to try and secure an equal outcome which is what these regulations and laws are ultimately supposed to do. Yet Big Business is still a problem. We've even seen where some industries such as the Banks consolidate into fewer and bigger organizations. It then stands to reason that the fewer entities providing a good/service there are, that the wealth generated from providing that good/service is going to be consolidated within those fewer entities.

Thanks!

I would love to find middle ground, have true bipartisan leadership and move the country forward with plans based in reality that we reach through fair thoughtful logical compromise and discussion based in fact and reality.

Good luck getting the GOP on board with that.

At least one of the economists writing the article was French, so he wrote from the perspective of his home country. The US and China are the largest economies on earth so they are pretty commonly used for comparison.

Average income sounds like a great statistic, but it really doesn't tell you a whole lot.

Bill Gates had an annual income of something like $11.5 billion. Combine him with ~287,500 people earning $10k a year and the average is $50k.

It is a little bit old, but over half of Americans make less than 30k a year.

US Income Inequality Link

The biggest problem with our system seems to be that there is little incentive for the people with the lowest incomes to try to improve. There are thresholds where the "free" incentives they would lose greatly outweigh the increase in earnings they can gain. These numbers are made up but if you go from making $28,000 to $35,000, but lose $8,000 in benefits, you are actually worse off.

Here's a link that might explain it a little better.
Link

I don't know how you fix the problem. In a system with a finite money supply, for some people to have more, others are going to have less.

..........................Middle Ground ....................

" Good luck getting the GOP on board with that. "

That my friend is a classic way NOT to start a dialogue ..

Diam , I'm afraid I can't point you in the right direction ..
I have always been ( and that be a long time ,lol ) a States rights , Hands off biz kinda guy .. Much rather be be in charge of my own failures or great deeds .. Now , not only still down on the Fed and over reach . but BIG Biz to boot .. I think many an American will point out the same problems ; But want to solve that problem from totally different angles ..

Another problem is the Establishment branch of both Party's and the lack of really good folks running for office .. How many people want to put themselves and family Through that kind of ringer ..

Lack of trust when it comes to the Media is such a detriment !

I would be happy if the powers that be could at least AGREE on some of the problems .. That in itself would be huge..

Comments like that is exactly why you'll never find the middle ground.

I'd like to see Venezuela on that chart.

I'd like to see Sierra Leone listed as well.

For a family of 4 earning $13 an hour with one person working is considered poverty level and receives full foodstamps and welfare and insurance(if your state provides it). However once you earn more than 2,100 a month you lose almost 800-1200 dollars in monthly benefits. They also don't allow you to save up money to dig yourself out. Once you have a certain amount saved up they kick you off and it's less than $5000 for most states in mine its 2,000$. It's all set up to keep you just inside the poverty level unless you strike it big with a great job. BTW minimum wage is set up so that 2 adults working full time keep the family at poverty level income.

Yep.

I wonder why it gets set up like that? I always assumed it was to keep those in power, and not allow the under class to upset the system which keeps the rich in power.

These graphs always makes me scratch my head. More people need to see it to understand the reality of our situation.




The lower the elasticity means more chance to change your social class. The bit about France actually supports Swish's claim, too. People end up a bit more "equal" in France due to wages, but not many people end up jumping social classes.

We've talked about this a few times before, but I hate to think the only reason the small countries can do this is due to homogenous nationalities in those countries. That whole idea runs a bit counter to the actual idea social democracies fight for.

It's the fault of both parties. Dems want to give them enough to keep them just barely content and willing to vote for them and Pubs either don't care or would rather punish them for being stupid.

This is why college should be free for all because it's the one thing that gives a poor person an actual chance to have hope in their life. Let's also be honest in that most poor kids are poor suited for college due to poor upbringing by either lazy parents who flat don't care or overworked parents that don't have time even if they do care. The same reason High School became free is the same reason college should be made free.

College is not a panacea. Not by a long shot.

The building trades is a FAR better route to a good life than most college pursuits. Additionally, the military is a great way for any kid that wants it to earn their free college.

Agreed, in general.

However, the path taken should be geared to the kid's aspirations. For example, if (s)he wants to code in Silicon Valley, (s)he shouldn't be going to 'H-VAC Tech.'

A boatload of tech sector jobs are being filled by immigrants because our home crop is undertrained/unqualified. That should be remedied along with the high cost of college.

.02

Thats not true Clem ... not calling u a liar ... I'm sure thats what you've been told ... its simply not the case ...

TODAY the tech sector jobs are going to immigrants because there cheaper ... there simply cheap labor ....

U want a real shocker ... go check the laws on the books about hiring college grads ... oBUMa and the Repubs have rewarded american companies for hiring college grads with all kinds of incentives so the foreigners can gain experience to take back to their countries with them ... meanwhile american college grads ESPECIALLY IN THE STEM FIELDS are left w/o jobs while the immigrant gains the experience to take back home and the american is waiting on tables somewhere wondering why they can't find a job and how there going to pay back there student loans ...

Great country this america .,,

No, (s)he should be mainlining Red Bull & Mountain Dew while using coffee grounds like dip and playing with coding on his/her own.

What an intriguing picture you've just painted-

As a programmer and someone who has been in IT/Software for 20+ years, I feel it is fairly accurate

Yep accept Trump as he is. Ask no questions. Say or write nothing negative about his administration. Read and listen to FSN only. Don't watch SNL, Mahr, Oliver or any other comedy shows that lampoon the government.

There, we've reached middle ground, happy?

I would not only make college free but also mandatory unless you're working or retired. Want food stamps? Then get to class and improve yourself. After 50 years of that you will have a nation of scholars instead of poverty stricken kids who have no hope of a future turning to crime. Trade schools are cool too. Just be doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING to provide a solution instead of charity.

It is far cheaper to pay someone to go to college with free food than it is to keep them in prison. It's not even a tough choice.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish for himself and he will never go hungry.

It should be set up that way. Who the hell starts at minimum wage and stays at minumum wage? You'd have to be incompetent to stay at the wage a 16 year old starts out at on his or her first job. Let's be real here.


Some jobs are meant to be starter jobs. You can't pay the grill person at Burger King $35,000 a year just because they didn't show any gumption earlier on to do better v the kid who decided to make a go at making some money being a dental tech or land surveyor on a 2 year degree.


In my day it was called "make a living". If it didn't pay, you best find something else to do. Society or Corporations don't owe you anything. You earn your worth.

This is asking a lot!

Good point!

Well, the problem becomes is there that many spots for the people that need them? Why should live in poverty just because they work full time?

Does anyone work in fast food because they want to? You end up there because nothing else was available. Those "better jobs" are few and far between these days. Then when you find one there are 10,000 people ahead of you. Some have more experience or have an inside angle where they know someone on the inside that recommends them. Some even pay a bribe to get the job.

Back at burger king if you stick around long enough one of two things will happen to you. 1. Once you max out on pay they simply fire you and let you come back after 6 months to a year at starting pay. 2. "PROMOTE" you to assistant manager and force you onto a salary and work you so many hours you actually earn less than minimum wage.

That's how it works for the poor. Over and over again. No connections, no degree, and no hope. Then people act surprised when they give up and live on welfare or turn to violence.

College and vocational schools should just flat out be free. We need to invest in our people if we want then to rise up from the muck. Educating them is by FAR the best solution. Once schools are nonprofit the cost of educating them will plummet too. 50,000 to 300,000 in student loans that can never go on a bankruptcy for a 4 year degree is just ridiculous. This early life debt is destroying our young adults especially if they don't find a job quick enough.

I agree totally. Being in massive student debt while just starting out your life and getting into the workforce is just crazy, especially these people that taking art degrees or even teachers...spend 40k a year to learn how to make 30k a year...how does that make sense. Colleges run more like business than educational institutions. I'm luck because I had GI and ACF to pay for my schooling and great programs on post that catered to GI's, but education costs and loans are a crazy deal.. I have friends that post on the book of face about making their last student loan payment..15-18 years later

They run like businesses who have been subsidized by the gov't without accountability and there for zero motivation to reduce costs or ensure quality.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...-in-their-401-k


Two-Thirds of Americans Aren’t Putting Money in Their 401(k)

A dark, detailed new look at why many employees may never be able to retire.

by
Ben Steverman


‎February‎ ‎21‎, ‎2017‎ ‎4‎:‎00‎ ‎AM


Americans aren’t saving enough for retirement.

True, this has been a refrain for longer than many can remember. But now some disturbing numbers show exactly how bad it’s gotten. Two-thirds of all Americans don’t contribute anything to a 401(k) or other retirement account available through their employer.

Millions aren’t saving on the job because they either don’t have access to a workplace retirement plan or they do but aren’t putting money in it. Many just can’t spare the cash, but a new analysis shows there are other reasons, too.




Until now, the exact size of the problem has been unclear. Surveys can be unreliable: Small businesses are difficult to assess, and many workers just don’t know what plan options they have, especially if employers aren’t making much effort to sign them up. Information on a 401(k) may be part of a stack of paper handed out on their first day, that they don’t read or understand, and ultimately set aside and never think about again.

Now, U.S. Census Bureau researchers have come up with estimates that rely on tax data, which should be more reliable than surveys. Their conclusion: Only about a third of workers are saving in a 401(k) or similar tax-deferred retirement plan. Also, the gap is far wider than expected between the number of employers offering retirement plans, and the number of workers saving in them.

Only 14 percent of employers offer plans

Census researchers Michael Gideon and Joshua Mitchell analyzed W-2 tax records from 2012 to identify 6.2 million unique employers and 155 million individual workers, who held 219 million distinct jobs. 1 This data produced estimates starkly different from previous surveys.

For example, previous estimates suggested more than 40 percent of private-sector employers sponsored a retirement plan. Tax records uncovered a much bigger pool of small businesses, showing that, overall, just 14 percent of all employers offer a 401(k) or other defined contribution plan to their workers.




Bigger companies are the likeliest to offer 401(k) plans, and since they employ more people than small firms, skew the overall number of U.S. workers who have the option. Gideon and Mitchell estimate 79 percent of Americans work at places that sponsor a 401(k)-style plan. The good news is that’s more than 20 points higher than previous estimates. The bad news is that just 41 percent of workers at those employers are making contributions to such a plan—more than 20 points lower than previous estimates.

The combined result of those two numbers is that just 32 percent of American workers are saving anything in a workplace retirement account. Four out of five workers are employed by companies that offer a 401(k) or similar plan, but most workers aren’t using them—either because they’re not eligible or because they aren’t signing up.

Lawmakers have proposed a variety of ways to get more people to save. Several states are experimenting with strategies to get every worker signed up for a retirement account. But they face serious pushback from the Republican-controlled Congress and the financial industry.

The demise of the pension

Census researchers are still studying the tax data, cross-referencing it with other databases to get a fuller picture of how Americans are saving. For example, researchers are using retirement plan filing documents to get a better sense of how many workers are still covered by traditional pensions, also known as defined benefit plans. According to a Pew Charitable Trusts analysis of survey data released Feb. 15, only 10 percent of workers over age 22 have a traditional pension. Just 6 percent of millennials have a pension while 13 percent of baby boomers do.

Not surprisingly, the Census data suggest well-paid workers find it easier to save than the lowest-paid. But income isn’t the only factor. Eligibility is also a major issue for part-time workers and people who change jobs frequently. Companies often require employees to work for a certain amount of time before they can sign up for a 401(k), and employers aren’t required to allow part-time workers into a plan until they’ve worked 1,000 hours during the previous year.

Another problem made clear by the new report is that many workers simply don’t know their company 401(k) exists. Workers also might never get around to filling out the paperwork, or could be intimidated and confused by the need to make investment decisions. Companies can help solve all those problem by automatically signing up eligible workers, and requiring them to opt out if they don’t want to participate. Doing so has been proven to boost enrollment, but momentum has now stalled for automatic 401(k) features.

House moves to block auto-enrollment


California, Oregon, Illinois, Maryland, and Connecticut have started programs designed to encourage workers to save. Employers in those states would be required to either offer a retirement plan, or automatically enroll their workers in a state-sponsored individual retirement account. The states had the blessing of the Obama administration, which issued rules allowing states and even large cities to create portable retirement accounts if they want.

On Feb. 15, however, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to rescind those rules. Echoing the arguments of the financial industry, Republicans argued state auto-enrollment plans constitute unfair competition to the financial industry. If the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate and President Donald Trump also sign off, any state and city auto-IRA plans would be placed in jeopardy.

Whatever the outcome, any effort to get workers to save for retirement faces a daunting challenge: Can Americans spare the money? Student debt and auto loans are at record levels, according to Federal Reserve data released Feb. 16, and overall consumer debt is rising at the fastest pace in three years.

Retirement is an important goal, but many Americans seem to have more pressing financial concerns.

Also many middle class people had to spend chunks of their 401K savings just to remain middle class during the Obama years.

I blew through all of my savings in the time when I was waiting for my SS hearing, and being awarded my claim.

Really, one really bad medical issue and many people could be absolutely broke, retirement and all, especially with the high deductibles and co-pays in insurance today. Being unable to work, I went from making almost $50K to $17K. That meant a lot of difficult changes in my life. However, I also had my father and step-mother reenter my life, and he has sent me money a few times to help. I have also had money literally fall out of nowhere on several occasions. Thankfully, the Lord had always provided when I needed him most.

It can be a really fast and hard fall, financially, if you are ill, or have major medical issues. I have a couple of friends who can also definitely attest to this.

This statement really stuck out to me.

If I were to do everything by the "book", as far as health ins., home/auto insurance, life insurance, maxing out 401k every year, nursing home/long term care insurance, business insurance, prop. tax, and income tax, we'd be broke.

Is America great again yet? I'm not feeling it. But I am feeling the Bern!

If Bernie wants to pay your bills, and my bills, where's he getting the money?

So how soon until we start to see Retirement being labeled a Right like healthcare?