On March 10, 2019, Christopher Ingraham writes on MSN:
Total household net worth in the fourth quarter of 2018 dropped by the largest amount since the fourth quarter of 2008 when the country was amid a steep recession, according to data released Thursday by the Federal Reserve.
Total household net worth is a measure of the assets — such as homes, stocks and bank accounts — owned by American families and nonprofits minus their debts. In the fourth quarter of 2018, it fell by about $3.7 trillion, a 3.5 percent quarterly decline. Going back to 1952, the start of the Fed’s data, only three quarters — the third and fourth quarters of 2008, and the second quarter of 1962 — posted bigger declines in household net worth, percentage-wise.
The data shows that change was driven by the poor performance of the stock market in the fourth quarter of last year. The flailing market erased $4.6 trillion in assets from household and nonprofit balance sheets, which was offset somewhat by gains in real estate and other assets.
The typical American household, however, may not feel much of a financial pinch as a result of the drop. For starters, stocks have since recovered much of their late 2018 losses, although they remain below the record highs set earlier in the year.
More important, most of the household wealth in the United States is owned by the country’s richest families. In 2016, for instance, the top 1 percent of families owned 40 percent of all household wealth, with the next 9 percent of families holding an additional 39 percent. That leaves 21 percent of the country’s net worth for the remaining 90 percent of American families.
Furthermore, about half of American families don’t own any stocks, while the top 10 percent of families control about 84 percent of the stock market.
Taken together, the numbers are a reminder that the stock market is not the economy, and that big national-level data sets may not necessarily reflect financial reality for typical American families, many of whom live paycheck to paycheck and struggle to meet even small unexpected expenses.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated the percent of the nation’s wealth held by families in the 2nd through 10th percentiles: it is 39 percent, not 29 percent.
I like what I see here.
Re socialism, we have a number of models that clearly prove socialist structures may work well within an otherwise capitalist/democratic society. Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security are all examples of this. But so is any form of insurance…life, home, unemployment, auto, etc…where large numbers contribute to a pool from which benefits are paid out based on a number of criteria.
The problem with Socialism as a form of govt is just that…a relative few elected/non-elected officials control the entire apparatus including the authority to modify or abrogate the basic structure and any/all contractual obligations. But socialist structures attract and involve millions of citizens in an otherwise democratic society with access to decisions that directly/indirectly impact these structures. Further, a free media may investigate and report on more subtle efforts to make changes. Such transparency results in a continuous check on any impactful efforts and, ultimately, citizens may accept or reject them at the polls.
I supported Bernie Sanders throughout the primaries last time and was very angry that Hillary Clinton and the DNC hierarchy conspired to increase her chances for the nomination by denying Bernie the same level of support, which he clearly deserved.
That cannot be allowed to happen again. I’m hopeful that you agree and will help to make the benefits of the inherent democracy within socialist structures knoiwn to as many people as you may reach.
Bruce Kettelle