Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Wealth Inequality in America

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:09 PM
Original message
Wealth Inequality in America
Edited on Sat Sep-17-05 12:28 PM by joemurphy
Edward Wolff is a professor of economics at New York University. He is the author of Top Heavy: The Increasing Inequality of Wealth in America and What Can Be Done About It. I got the following information from some comments Wolff makes at this website:

<http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03may/may03interviewswolff.html]

Or, if you like graphics, it’s all here:

<http://www.inequality.org/facts.html >

The Rich basically own this country. In the United States, in the last survey year, 1998, the richest 1 percent of households owned 38 percent of all wealth. The top 5 percent own more than half of all wealth. In 1998, they owned 59 percent of all wealth. Or to put it another way, the top 5 percent had more wealth than the remaining 95 percent of the population, collectively. The top 20 percent owns over 80 percent of all wealth. In 1998, it owned 83 percent of all wealth. This is a very concentrated distribution.

The bottom 20 percent basically have zero wealth. They either have no assets, or their debt equals or exceeds their assets. The bottom 20 percent has typically accumulated no savings. A household in the middle — the median household — has wealth of about $62,000. $62,000 is not insignificant, but if you consider that the top 1 percent of households’ average wealth is $12.5 million, you can see what a difference there is in the distribution.

The richest 10 percent of families own about 85 percent of all outstanding stocks. They own about 85 percent of all financial securities, 90 percent of all business assets. These financial assets and business equity are even more concentrated than total wealth.

If you break things down by race, you find something very striking. Most people are aware that African-American families don’t earn as much as white families. The average African-American family has about 60 percent of the income as the average white family. But the disparity of wealth is a lot greater. The average African-American family has only 18 percent of the wealth of the average white family

We are much more unequal than any other advanced industrial country. Perhaps our closest rival in terms of inequality is Great Britain. But where the top percent in this country own 38 percent of all wealth, in Great Britain it is more like 22 or 23 percent.

What is remarkable is that this was not always the case. Up until the early 1970s, the U.S. actually had lower wealth inequality than Great Britain, and even than a country like Sweden. But things have really turned around over the last 25 or 30 years. In fact, a lot of countries have experienced lessening wealth inequality over time. The U.S. is atypical in that inequality has risen so sharply over the last 25 or 30 years.

One reason we have such high levels of inequality, compared to other advanced industrial countries, is because of our tax and, I would add, our social expenditure system. We have much lower taxes than almost every Western European country. And we have a less progressive tax system than almost every Western European country. As a result, the rich in this country manage to retain a much higher share of their income than they do in other countries, and this enables them to accumulate a much higher amount of wealth than the rich in other countries.

Certainly our tax system has helped to stimulate the rise of inequality in this country. We also have a much lower level of income support for poor families than do Western European countries or Canada. Social policy in Europe, Canada and Japan does a lot more to reduce economic disparities created by the marketplace than we do in this country. We have much higher poverty rates than do other advanced industrialized countries.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Angry Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. First link no good... Second article is terrific!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Thanks for the heads up. Link is fixed. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. thanks! :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joemurphy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. BTW Nice site, Angry Girl n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. thanks! Now if only the "right" people would read it! :-) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1932 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Sweden actually has higher pre-tax income inequality than the US
but much lower after-tax income inequality.

An argument can be made that it's the tax code and the investment in infrastructure and social safety net which allows Sweden to produce people who can really see their talents bear financial fruit.

And Sweden, by almost every measure, has happier, healthier citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trillo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
5. First link is broken
Maybe this is it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
6. The top 1 percent corporate policy
Import cheap foreign labor, shift the tax burden from corporations and the rich to the working class, export capital and industry.

It is a formula for economic diaster for the typical American.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wurzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-17-05 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
7. Taxation or unons are the way to maintain economic balance in Capitalism.
Any economic system that results in the gap of income in our country cannot possibly be described as "working". Obviously it is not working. The job of the government is to "govern". That is to maintain a social balance. That is not happening either. One way is wealth redistribution through a tax system. Or a strong labor movement to represent labor economic interests. It isn't rocket science. If, as if often claimed, "Socialism shares the poverty", then it is equally true that Capitalism does not share the wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC