Connect with us

Economics

Major Wealth Disparity Between the Top 1% and the Bottom 50%

Asset price inflation is the cause of wealth disparity between between the top 1% and the bottom 50%. The more they have, the more they get. The bottom…

Share this article:

Published

on

This article was originally published by Munknee

Last Friday (October 1st), the Fed released detailed data about the wealth of households by wealth category for the 1%, the 2% to 9%, the “next 40%” (the top 10% to 50%) and the “bottom 50%” for the second quarter of 2021 and it showed…It wasn’t households in general that benefited, but only the richest households with the most assets. This article has those details.

My Wealth Effect Monitor divides the wealth (assets minus liabilities) for each wealth category by the number of households in that category, which produces average per-household wealth within each category.

  • The wealth of the bottom 50% – 63.2 million households – is reflected by the jagged green line on the bottom and they are worth on average $47,900 per household. This number, however, includes $25,970 in “durable goods” (cars, phones, furniture, etc.), which for consumers are normally considered consumables, not assets, because their values are declining, and they don’t produce incomes and, of the $7,900 per household gained over the quarter, $2,085 came from purchases of durable goods!

  • Not shown separately in the above graph are the truly rich – the 0.01% – and the Billionaire Class.  The Fed wisely doesn’t provide any information on them separately, but includes them in the Top 1%, but, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, the top 30 US billionaires are worth on average $69 billion per household currently, having gained on average $2.2 billion in wealth each over the quarter.

…The wealth disparity between the top 30 billionaires on average and the bottom 50% grew by yet another $2.2 billion per household, to $69.2 billion…and the wealth disparity within the 1%, from the average top 30 billionaires to the least wealthy among the 1% also grew by around $2.2 billion to $69.2 billion because the bottom end of the 1% still own only peanuts compared to the Billionaire Class…

Among the bottom 50% there are also large differences:

  • At the top end are households perhaps with a modest house weighed down by a big mortgage, a small 401k, plus cars and other durable goods, minus auto loans, student loans, and credit card debt.
  • That category also includes the poorest of the poor who face the soaring housing costs and other costs that are a result of the wealth effect by using their credit cards to tide them over. They have on average very little money left over to put aside and buy stocks with…

The Fed’s doctrine of the “Wealth Effect”

The Fed’s doctrine of the “Wealth Effect” is designed to enrich the top 10%, particularly the top 1%, particularly the top 0.01%, and particularly the Billionaire Class. The more they have, the more they benefit. This is official Federal Reserve policy and during the pandemic, the Fed went all-out: It printed $4.5 trillion in 18 months and repressed short-term interest rates to near-zero, in order to inflate asset prices to the extreme, and it succeeded.

This was the greatest economic injustice committed in recent U.S. history….[and] the bottom 50% don’t understand what the Fed is doing to them, don’t even know what the Fed is and does, and they are too busy trying to survive in this economy that the Fed has so powerfully rigged against them.

…My Wealth Effect Monitor tracks that economic injustice. Below, it shows the difference in wealth between the 1% and the bottom 50%.

Asset price inflation is the cause of the disparity illustrated above. The more they have, the more they get. The bottom 50% don’t have anything and need not apply…

Editor’s Note:  The original post by Wolf Richter has been edited ([ ]) and abridged (…) above for the sake of clarity and brevity to ensure a fast and easy read.  The author’s views and conclusions are unaltered and no personal comments have been included to maintain the integrity of the original article.  Furthermore, the views, conclusions and any recommendations offered in this article are not to be construed as an endorsement of such by the editor. Also note that this complete paragraph must be included in any re-posting to avoid copyright infringement.

A Few Last Words: 

  • Click the “Like” button at the top of the page if you found this article a worthwhile read as this will help us build a bigger audience.
  • Comment below if you want to share your opinion or perspective with other readers and possibly exchange views with them.
  • Register to receive our free Market Intelligence Report newsletter (sample here) in the top right hand corner of this page.
  • Join us on Facebook to be automatically advised of the latest articles posted and to comment on any of them.
 munKNEE.com has joined eResearch.com to provide you with individual company research articles and specific stock recommendations in addition to munKNEE’s more general informative articles on the economy, the markets, and gold, silver and cannabis investing.
Check out eResearch. If you like what you see then…

 

 

The post Major Wealth Disparity Between the Top 1% and the Bottom 50% appeared first on munKNEE.com.

Economics

Slowing Down, Yes, But To What?

A couple of Economists have caused some noise by reviewing consumer confidence estimates in the United States, associating big declines in them with imminent…

Share this article:

A couple of Economists have caused some noise by reviewing consumer confidence estimates in the United States, associating big declines in them with imminent recession, and then pointing out such substantial drops in both of the major consumer sentiment surveys just recently. If valid, their correlations would seem to suggest a US contraction.

We’re meant to take these seriously for one of those academics, David Blanchflower of Dartmouth, had once “set interest rates at the BOE during the 2008 financial crisis.” Hardly a good place to start winning converts.

He and his co-author Alex Bryson of UCL are pretty adamant:

The economic situation in 2021 is exceptional, however, since unprecedented direct government intervention in the labor market through furlough-type arrangements has enabled employment rates to recover quickly from the huge downturn in 2020. However, downward movements in consumer expectations in the last six months suggest the economy in the United States is entering recession now.

The Conference Board’s more optimistic measure has indeed become far less lofty very quickly. And while the University of Michigan’s sentiment index never rebounded near as much, it has likewise fallen backward when it should be surging in recovery. The latter’s newly released preliminary assessment for October 2021, increasingly free from delta COVID’s influences on governments, wasn’t good; slightly lower after a slight gain in September.

Scraping along the bottom:



Whether this means recession or not may be beside the point. What is the point is how even academic Economists can’t help but notice how the US and global Economy is not in any shape like what’s been said all year and predicted for the rest. I seem to recall the term “red hot” being thrown around by unassailable luminaries as if a certainty.

The economy certainly had accelerated earlier but not for economic reasons; the non-economic interference of global fiscal policies, especially those of the US federal government.

Typically, academics see such intervention as thoroughly positive not just in the short run more so believing these programs dependably contribute much to the intermediate and longer-term trajectory – even as experience consistently shows they never do.

Since April or May, a global slowdown at first denied has slowly become practically undeniable as more and more the weak data comes back and sticks around. This is also true of “inflation”, the other side of transitory, the downslide of the camel humps in whichever consumer, producer, or now trade price index.



The third of the BLS’s series after first the CPI then next PPI is import prices, along with export prices. Even the latter, export prices, which have been more impressive than the far less impressive import index (though it might seem from mainstream commentary it would be the other way around), these indices are more clearly bending.

Toward what? Recession?

Not necessarily. Given consumer confidence as well as more substantial indications like real yields (TIPS; see: below), it may be a more reasonable question to ask whether or not the global economy ever actually got out of the last one.

If that’s really the case, then for all Uncle Sam’s efforts all it did was fool people into believing inflation and recovery (which many, maybe the vast majority still believe) when in fact those weren’t really happening. That technically makes this current weak spot at least a slowdown, but more appropriate one toward an economy merely reverting to its actual economic state increasingly unbound by non-economic interventions.



The growing response to the downshift is somewhat interesting; “everyone” is beginning to sense and admit the weakness, but they won’t let go of the inflation. Therefore, more and more the term stagflation is being thrown around regardless of the recession question – because people have been led to believe inflation is something it is not.

As I noted recently, however, if this really is serious and enduring weakness, a reversion back to the non-recovery state, the type of “flation” has already been decided.

The Economist considers this as higher potential for “stagflation”, a term popularized during and about the Great Inflation of the 1970’s. It also made a comeback around 2010 and 2011 – not that anyone remembers now. Quite simply, without the money for inflation what’s left is just the stagnation; which very succinctly and accurately describes the decade which followed 2010 and 2011.

Is this time really different? So far, the stagnation is proceeding almost as if right on schedule; the non-central bank schedule.

No need to call it stag-deflation because that’s just redundant. In other words, as the renewal of stagnation grows larger on the horizon, settling the label’s other half is already being taken care of.

Continue Reading

Economics

China Coal Prices Soar To Record As Winter Freeze Spreads Cross The Country

China Coal Prices Soar To Record As Winter Freeze Spreads Cross The Country

One week ago we discussed why the "worst case" scenario for China’s…

Share this article:

China Coal Prices Soar To Record As Winter Freeze Spreads Cross The Country

One week ago we discussed why the "worst case" scenario for China's property crisis is gradually emerging; to this we can now add that China's worst case energy crisis scenario is also about to be unleashed as cold weather swept into much of the country and power plants scrambled to stock up on coal, sending prices of the fuel to record highs.

Electricity demand to heat homes and offices is expected to soar this week as strong cold winds move down from northern China, according to Reuters with forecasters predicting average temperatures in some central and eastern regions could fall by as much as 16 degrees Celsius in the next 2-3 days.

Shortages of coal, high fuel prices and booming post-pandemic industrial demand have sparked widespread power shortages in the world's second-largest economy. Rationing has already been in place in at least 17 of mainland China's more than 30 regions since September, forcing some factories to suspend production and further disrupting already broken supply chains.

On Friday, the most-active January Zhengzhou thermal coal futures closed at a record high of 2,226 per tonne early. The contract has risen almost 200% year to date.

China's three northeastern provinces of Jilin, Heilongjiang and Liaoning - also among the worst hit by the power shortages last month - as well as several regions in northern China including Inner Mongolia and Gansu have started winter heating, which is mainly fuelled by coal, to cope with the colder-than-normal weather.

Meanwhile, even though Beijing has taken a slew of measures to contain coal price rises including raising domestic coal output and cutting power to power-hungry industries and some factories during periods of peak demand, so far all measures have failed with coal surging by 40% in just the past three days. Beijing has also repeatedly assured users that energy supplies will be secured for the winter heating season, and went so far as to order energy firms to "secure supplies at all costs." Well, the energy firms heard it, because on that day, thermal coal closed at 1,436 yuan. Two weeks later it is some 800 yuan higher.

Unfortunately for Beijing, the power shortages are expected to continue into early next year, with analysts and traders forecasting a 12% drop in industrial power consumption in the fourth quarter as coal supplies fall short and local governments give priority to residential users.

Earlier this week, we reported that China undertook its boldest step in a decades-long power sector reform when it allowed coal-fired power prices to fluctuate by up to 20% from base levels from Oct. 15, enabling power plants to pass on more of the high costs of generation to commercial and industrial end-users. read more

Steel, aluminium, cement and chemical producers are expected to face higher and more volatile power costs under the new policy, pressuring profit margins.

Meanwhile, the latest Chinese "data" on Thursday showed factory-gate inflation in September hit a record high; but since thermal coal is the one commodity that correlates the closest to PPI, absent a sharp drop in coal prices in the next few weeks, expect the next PPI print to be far higher. Meanwhile as the power crisis leads to further shutdowns in domestic production, some banks - such as Nomura - have gone so far to predict that China's GDP is set to shrink in coming quarters.

China, which laughably aims to be "carbon neutral" by 2060 even as its president announced he will skip the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, has been "trying" to reduce its reliance on polluting coal power in favor of cleaner wind, solar and hydro. But coal remains the source for some 70% of China's electricity needs.

Of course, China is not the only nation struggling with power supplies, which has led to fuel shortages and blackouts in many European countries. and threatens to send US heating bills up as much as 50% this winter. he crisis has highlighted the difficulty in cutting the global economy's dependency on fossil fuels as world leaders seek to revive efforts to tackle climate change at talks next month in Glasgow.

China will strive to achieve carbon peaks by 2030, Vice Premier Han Zheng said in a video message at the Russian Energy Week International Forum, according to state-run news agency Xinhua late on Thursday. He also said that China and Russia are important forces leading the energy transition and they should cooperate and ensure smooth progress of major oil and gas pipeline and nuclear power projects.

Translation: Russia better save that nat gas and not ship it to Europe as China will soon be needed even BCF Russia an provide. As for China

 

Tyler Durden Fri, 10/15/2021 - 22:50
Continue Reading

Economics

Aluminum Shortages Next As “Magnesium Supply Dries Up”

Aluminum Shortages Next As "Magnesium Supply Dries Up"

This week, the largest US producer of aluminum billet used to make automobiles and…

Share this article:

Aluminum Shortages Next As "Magnesium Supply Dries Up"

This week, the largest US producer of aluminum billet used to make automobiles and building supplies told customers and business associates that output capacity might be curtailed in 2022 due to a lack of magnesium supply.

"In the last several weeks, magnesium availability has dried up, and we have not been able to purchase our required magnesium units for all of 2022," Matalco Inc. President Tom Horter said in the letter obtained by S&P Global Platts

Difficult-to-source supplies of raw materials and soaring energy prices are adding to the headwinds, Horter said in the letter. 

"The purpose of this note is to provide this advanced warning that, if the scarcity continues, and especially if it becomes worse, Matalco may need to curtail production in 2022, resulting in allocations to our customers," he said. 

Horter said his company will source as much magnesium as possible and other raw materials, such as silicon, to maintain its planned production output for 2022. The warning comes as he told customers they should have contingency plans if supplies tighten. 

Aluminum billet cannot be produced without magnesium, which is a strengthening agent and allows it to be strong enough to be used in structural applications, such as automobile frames, engine blocks, and body panels. 

"We will provide an update in a couple of weeks," Horter said. "In the meantime, you may want to consider letting your customer base know of this silicon and magnesium availability crisis and also let them know that other products or inputs needed for making billet or slab may also reach a crisis point."

Horter added other challenges such as the cost of energy, labor, and shipping are increasingly mounting. 

Alcoa is another major US aluminum producer that also warned about shortages of magnesium and silicon. Without these two ingredients, both manufacturers cannot produce aluminum billet products. A reduction in US output would tighten global supply even further. 

The macro backdrop of the aluminum industry is a complicated one. First, a military coup in Guinea last month stoked concerns over the supply of bauxite, a sedimentary rock with high aluminum content. Then the closure of energy-intensive smelters in Asia and Europe have tightened global supplies and forced LME prices to record highs. 

The latest surge in industrial metals will continue to pressure inflation higher. 

So much for the Federal Reserve's "transitory" narrative. Higher costs will push up prices for new cars and other products made of aluminum.

Tyler Durden Fri, 10/15/2021 - 22:10
Continue Reading

Trending