Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Americans saw wealth plummet 40 percent from 2007 to 2010, Federal Reserve says

  1. #1

    Americans saw wealth plummet 40 percent from 2007 to 2010, Federal Reserve says

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...CVV_story.html

    The recent recession wiped out nearly two decades of Americans’ wealth, according to government data released Monday, with *middle-class families bearing the brunt of the decline.

    The Federal Reserve said the median net worth of families plunged by 39 percent in just three years, from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010. That puts Americans roughly on par with where they were in 1992.

    The data represent one of the most detailed looks at how the economic downturn altered the landscape of family finance. Over a span of three years, Americans watched progress that took almost a generation to accumulate evaporate. The promise of retirement built on the inevitable rise of the stock market proved illusory for most. Homeownership, once heralded as a pathway to wealth, became an albatross.

    The findings underscore the depth of the wounds of the financial crisis and how far many families remain from healing. If the recession set Americans back 20 years, economists say, the road forward is sure to be a long one. And so far, the country has seen only a halting recovery.

    “It’s hard to overstate how serious the collapse in the economy was,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. “We were in free fall.”

    The recession caused the greatest upheaval among the middle class. Only roughly half of middle*-class Americans remained on the same economic rung during the downturn, the Fed found. Their median net worth — the value of assets such as homes, automobiles and stocks minus any debt — suffered the biggest drops. By contrast, the wealthiest families’ median net worth rose slightly.

    Americans have tried to re*balance the family budget but have found it difficult to reverse the damage.

    The survey showed that fewer families are carrying credit card balances, and those who do have less debt. The median balance dropped 16 percent, from $3,100 in 2007 to $2,600 in 2010. The Fed also found that the percentage of Americans who have no debt rose to a quarter of families.

    But that progress was undermined by other factors, leaving the median level of family debt unchanged. The report said more families reported taking out education loans. Nearly 11 percent said they were at least 60 days late paying a bill, up from 7 percent in 2007. And the percentage of families saddled with debts greater than 40 percent of their income stayed the same.

    Not only were Americans still facing significant debts, but they were making less money. Median income fell nearly 8 percent, to $45,800, in 2010. The median value of stock-market-based retirement accounts declined 7 percent, to $44,000.

    But it was the implosion of the housing market that inflicted much of the pain. The median value of Americans’ stake in their homes fell by 42 percent between 2007 and 2010, to $55,000, according to the Fed.

    The poorest families suffered the biggest loss of wealth from the drop in real estate prices. But middle-class Americans rely on housing for a larger part of their net worth. For some, it accounts for just more than half of their assets. That means every step downward is felt more acutely.

    Rakesh Kochhar, associate director of research at the Pew Hispanic Center, calls this phenomenon the “reverse wealth effect.” As consumers watched the value of their homes rise during the boom, they felt more confident spending money, even if they did not actually cash in on the gains. Now, the moribund housing market has made many Americans wary of spending, even if their losses are just on paper.

    According to the Fed survey, that paper wealth — or what is officially called unrealized capital gains — shrank 11 percentage points, to about a quarter of Americans’ assets.

    The findings track research Kochhar released last year that showed a dramatic drop in household wealth during the recession, particularly among minorities. That study found record-high disparities between whites’ wealth and that of blacks and Hispanics.

    “It was turning the clock back quite a bit,” Kochhar said.

    The Fed’s survey is conducted every three years. Although there have been some signs that the recovery has picked up — housing prices have begun to stabilize and unemployment has fallen — Fed economists said those improvements largely do not change the survey results.

    “Recovery from the so-called Great Recession has also been particularly slow,” the report said.
    Like we trust anything that comes from the Fed. If they say it is that bad, we know the truth to be much much worse. Explains why not a single person I know that lives in this state has a job, and the rest arent sure about how much longer theirs will last.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    The median value of stock-market-based retirement accounts declined 7 percent, to $44,000.
    That's pretty dismal. Assume you are actually trying to draw on that for retirement.

  4. #3
    I hear all the time that people have to retire on only X ammt of money. In 1975, money (well, the ghost of) went about 10 times further. If people had not been robbed of the value of their money, they would not have needed for it to have been invested to begin with. Like those that save and not invest in risky stocks are being punished for not supporting big business and wall street. And people think that is "Honest". Today, the rate of inflation is so high that pretty much only "risky" stocks (12% annually) can almost keep up with it. Pretty piss poor way to screw the people if you ask me.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  5. #4
    I'm not even sure stocks are a great investment anymore. The S&P 500 has remained flat for the past 10 or 15 years now, when inflation is taken into account. With reinvested dividends, there has been moderate gain, but taxes eat into away at that gain also. Of course, some people could do a better job at picking stocks, but that would be above average. Oh, and the real inflation is debatably more than what is cited by the government.

    It seems to me that stocks are way too risky and that a lot of companies don't even need to have shareholders when they can get nearly unlimited funds at low interest rates either from the Fed directly or through a big bank. The debacle with facebook showed clearly how the game is rigged to screw retail investors. Many of the big companies, like Apple, for instance, don't even pay dividends and have no intention of ever doing so. It seems like the CEO's and boards of many of these companies have rigged the game so that they take the lion's share of profits, and MAYBE pass a little bit onto the share holders.
    Turning the GOP into a party of liberty will not be a quick race, it will be a marathon.

  6. #5
    The recent recession wiped out nearly two decades of Americans’ wealth, according to government data released Monday, with *middle-class families bearing the brunt of the decline.
    Where to begin... First of all, it was the fed that wiped out the wealth - not the recession. Recessions don't wipe out wealth, they keep wealth from moving and growing. Wealth gets "wiped out" when the Fed increases the money supply, thereby making your money worth less.

    Second of all, this was Fed data - not government data. Remember, the Fed is a private entity.

    This study could have said "We took a look at what we did, and guess what... we f**ked you!"
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  7. #6
    Sounds like a good South Park episode.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Where to begin... First of all, it was the fed that wiped out the wealth - not the recession. Recessions don't wipe out wealth, they keep wealth from moving and growing. Wealth gets "wiped out" when the Fed increases the money supply, thereby making your money worth less.

    Second of all, this was Fed data - not government data. Remember, the Fed is a private entity.

    This study could have said "We took a look at what we did, and guess what... we f**ked you!"

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by madengr View Post
    That's pretty dismal. Assume you are actually trying to draw on that for retirement.
    If they had planned their retirement properly, they would have had the money they were going to need in 2010 out of the market in 2005. This is why.

  9. #8
    I think that the biggest thing responsible for the decline in net worth is the fall of housing prices. Stocks took a huge hit in 2007 but have regained their value there.
    But it was the implosion of the housing market that inflicted much of the pain. The median value of Americans’ stake in their homes fell by 42 percent between 2007 and 2010, to $55,000, according to the Fed.
    Unless you are selling an asset, gains or losses on those exist only on paper. Losses in income are very real though.

    My own investments in the last few years have been into paying off my mortgage (should be gone by end of this year!) and dividend paying stocks.
    Last edited by Zippyjuan; 06-14-2012 at 03:23 PM.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    If they had planned their retirement properly, they would have had the money they were going to need in 2010 out of the market in 2005. This is why.
    This assumes people knew in 2005 what was going to happen in 2007. You can't predict two years from now what will be happening- especially if it is dramatically different from what you had seen in the past.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    This assumes people knew in 2005 what was going to happen in 2007. You can't predict two years from now what will be happening- especially if it is dramatically different from what you had seen in the past.
    The rule of thumb is that you should not have retirement money in the market when you retire. If you think you will need money in 5 years, it should not be in the market.

  13. #11
    I like Peter Schiff's response to this kind of crap. It wasn't wealth that was wiped out. It was the illusion of nonexistent wealth based on malinvestment, market distortions and overvaluations, all of which were encouraged by bad monetary policy facilitated by Congress and the Federal Reserve.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    If they had planned their retirement properly, they would have had the money they were going to need in 2010 out of the market in 2005. This is why.
    Yeah, but even assuming they lost 50% of their savings, which wouldn't be the case since the stock market has somewhat recovered, that would put the savings at $80k, which is only 2x average income. That's not going to last 20 years of retirement. I'd think at minimum someone earning $40k would need $400k in retirement savings at 67. I suppose the plan is to live off SS or win the lottery. Keep in mind that 401k income is mostly taxable, too?
    Last edited by madengr; 06-14-2012 at 04:46 PM.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    I think that the biggest thing responsible for the decline in net worth is the fall of housing prices. Stocks took a huge hit in 2007 but have regained their value there.


    Quote Originally Posted by Steven Douglas View Post
    I like Peter Schiff's response to this kind of crap. It wasn't wealth that was wiped out. It was the illusion of nonexistent wealth based on malinvestment, market distortions and overvaluations, all of which were encouraged by bad monetary policy facilitated by Congress and the Federal Reserve.
    Yep, no real wealth was wiped out. Only the illusion that our houses and financial assets were worth 10-40% more. After all of these fiat shenanigans are over, it will be the people holding real assets and the ability to create products that will come out on top.
    Liberty is for all; privileges are for none.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by madengr View Post
    Yeah, but even assuming they lost 50% of their savings, which wouldn't be the case since the stock market has somewhat recovered, that would put the savings at $80k, which is only 2x average income. That's not going to last 20 years of retirement. I'd think at minimum someone earning $40k would need $400k in retirement savings at 67. I suppose the plan is to live off SS or win the lottery. Keep in mind that 401k income is mostly taxable, too?
    If they started buying in 1970, and took out in 2005, they made a ton of money. If they started buying stocks in 1970, and pulled it out in 2007, they still made a ton of money. If they started buying in 1989 - I think the Dow was about 3000 then.....well, you do the math.

    Again, by the time people retire, they should be long ago out of the stock market and into fixed income investments. Now, I will admit that there's problem because the banks have destroyed Fixed Income with unrealistically low interest rates, but that's a different conversation.

  17. #15
    The ministry of thieves releasing a comprehensive report on the decline of the wealth of people they target. Too much to bear listening to.

  18. #16
    When you count the how much each household now owns of the national debt, we are all broke.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by cubical View Post
    When you count the how much each household now owns of the national debt, we are all broke.
    Yeah, but look on the bright side - with so many multiple claims, the last to default on their odius debt wins! Hip hip...



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-19-2015, 10:31 PM
  2. Federal Reserve Backers Seek Power More Than Wealth
    By FrankRep in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-24-2013, 10:29 PM
  3. Ron Paul on Freedomwatch 12/21/2010 Re: the federal reserve
    By sailingaway in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-21-2010, 08:56 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-06-2009, 01:15 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-12-2009, 06:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •