2013
DEBTS UP
07/10/13 14:48
Quoted today in finance.yahoo.com from Washington, DC: Reuters reports that in August, 2013, “total consumer credit advanced by $13.63 billion to $3.04 trillion, Federal Reserve data showed on Monday.”
In 2010 there were 116,716,292 households in the United States. By now perhaps there are 120,000,000. If consumer debt was distributed equally across all households today, each household would have approximately $25,333 of outstanding consumer debt. However, it is likely that the top ten percent of households with the highest income and the bottom ten percent of households with very low income probably have little or no consumer debt.
For the eighty percent of households in the middle the average amount of consumer debt is probably about $31,687. This is the amount that a middle-class household would owe for items such as car loans, student loans, credit card balances and similar loans if the debt was equally distributed among them.
Of course the debt is actually distributed unequally.
When two married adults have borrowed to pay for their undergraduate and graduate educations their household may owe as much as one or two hundred thousand dollars in student debt. Others may owe tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills if they have suffered from serious health problems. Still others may owe large sums because they have chosen to live far beyond their income by “maxing out” their credit cards. And those with smaller incomes may have much smaller balances on whatever consumer debts they hold since they likely only borrow when it is absolutely essential in order to meet their day-to-day cost of living.
One may only wonder how such large amounts of consumer debt will impact everyone as the years unfold before us.
In 2010 there were 116,716,292 households in the United States. By now perhaps there are 120,000,000. If consumer debt was distributed equally across all households today, each household would have approximately $25,333 of outstanding consumer debt. However, it is likely that the top ten percent of households with the highest income and the bottom ten percent of households with very low income probably have little or no consumer debt.
For the eighty percent of households in the middle the average amount of consumer debt is probably about $31,687. This is the amount that a middle-class household would owe for items such as car loans, student loans, credit card balances and similar loans if the debt was equally distributed among them.
Of course the debt is actually distributed unequally.
When two married adults have borrowed to pay for their undergraduate and graduate educations their household may owe as much as one or two hundred thousand dollars in student debt. Others may owe tens of thousands of dollars in medical bills if they have suffered from serious health problems. Still others may owe large sums because they have chosen to live far beyond their income by “maxing out” their credit cards. And those with smaller incomes may have much smaller balances on whatever consumer debts they hold since they likely only borrow when it is absolutely essential in order to meet their day-to-day cost of living.
One may only wonder how such large amounts of consumer debt will impact everyone as the years unfold before us.
NOT ENOUGH BUYERS
24/09/13 13:52
Commenting for CNBC on September 23, 2013, John W. Schoen makes this point concerning supplies and shortages now and in the future:
“The numbers are stark. While the current world population of about 7 billion is projected to top 8 billion by 2030, almost all of that growth is expected to come in the developing world. That means the current population of consumers- people with more than $10 a day to spend- is expected to more than double from 1.8 billion to 4.8 billion.”
Consider for a moment what this means:
Out of an expected 8 billion or more people living on earth in 2030 some 3.2 billion or more of them will have less than $10 a day to spend. That will be the situation in a short seventeen years from now - the time it will take for a 1 year old child to be graduating from high school.
What should our priority be?
How to get more stuff into the hands of those who will have more than $10 a day to spend in 2030?
Or how to feed, clothe and shelter the 3.2 billion who will have less than $10 a day to spend in 2030?
It is important to address both questions adequately if we want keep our world from descending into chaos.
Question is: Where do we start?
And what part should you and I play in the solution?
“The numbers are stark. While the current world population of about 7 billion is projected to top 8 billion by 2030, almost all of that growth is expected to come in the developing world. That means the current population of consumers- people with more than $10 a day to spend- is expected to more than double from 1.8 billion to 4.8 billion.”
Consider for a moment what this means:
Out of an expected 8 billion or more people living on earth in 2030 some 3.2 billion or more of them will have less than $10 a day to spend. That will be the situation in a short seventeen years from now - the time it will take for a 1 year old child to be graduating from high school.
What should our priority be?
How to get more stuff into the hands of those who will have more than $10 a day to spend in 2030?
Or how to feed, clothe and shelter the 3.2 billion who will have less than $10 a day to spend in 2030?
It is important to address both questions adequately if we want keep our world from descending into chaos.
Question is: Where do we start?
And what part should you and I play in the solution?
UP HIGH
17/09/13 15:54
Associated Press reporter Paul Wiseman recently summarized how those at the top are doing according to the latest available national statistics:
“The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share since 1928. And the share held by the top 10 percent of earners last year reached a record 48.2 percent. . .
. . . since the recession officially ended in June 2009, the top 1 percent have enjoyed the benefits of rising corporate profits and stock prices: 95 percent of the income gains reported since 2009 have gone to the top 1 percent.
That compares with a 45 percent share for the top 1 percent in the economic expansion of the 1990s and a 65 percent share from the expansion that followed the 2001 recession.
The top 10 percent haven't done badly, either. Last year, they captured 48.2 percent of income, up from the previous record, 46.6 percent, in 2011.
The top 1 percent of American households had income above $394,000 last year. The top 10 percent had income exceeding $114,000.”
For any who may be concerned about such matters one may now determine the position one has in the economic hierarchy of the USA.
If you had income in the last year that was greater than $114,000, you belong at the top.
If not, you are in the remaining 90% of Americans who get to share the 51.8% of national income that those at the top are not currently getting.
Wait a while longer. The trend is that the share for the top is going up while the share for the rest is going down.
Perhaps you have noticed.
“The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share since 1928. And the share held by the top 10 percent of earners last year reached a record 48.2 percent. . .
. . . since the recession officially ended in June 2009, the top 1 percent have enjoyed the benefits of rising corporate profits and stock prices: 95 percent of the income gains reported since 2009 have gone to the top 1 percent.
That compares with a 45 percent share for the top 1 percent in the economic expansion of the 1990s and a 65 percent share from the expansion that followed the 2001 recession.
The top 10 percent haven't done badly, either. Last year, they captured 48.2 percent of income, up from the previous record, 46.6 percent, in 2011.
The top 1 percent of American households had income above $394,000 last year. The top 10 percent had income exceeding $114,000.”
For any who may be concerned about such matters one may now determine the position one has in the economic hierarchy of the USA.
If you had income in the last year that was greater than $114,000, you belong at the top.
If not, you are in the remaining 90% of Americans who get to share the 51.8% of national income that those at the top are not currently getting.
Wait a while longer. The trend is that the share for the top is going up while the share for the rest is going down.
Perhaps you have noticed.
YOU SHOULD GO FIRST
13/04/13 13:26
Most of us view this world from where we live it, in our work, in our home, in our family, in our personal life. Is any one of us surprised anymore when we discover that some or many disagree with us about conclusions which to ourselves seem obviously true? Probably not. Yet we each must go through this life with one another no matter what. I may not know you and it is highly likely I never will. In a lifetime the number of people we actually meet is numbered in tens or hundreds - not thousands. For most of us the number who we ever talk with alone and who we ever speak with for more than an hour may well be fewer than a hundred.
We seldom think of the isolation of our individual lives that separates us into countless numbers of different groups. We have been convinced that being on different sides and competing with one another is in our best interest. To compete of course is to win or to lose. Since every competition must have a loser, having losers must be in our best interest.
Since losing is in our best interest, I have only one suggestion:
You should go first.
We seldom think of the isolation of our individual lives that separates us into countless numbers of different groups. We have been convinced that being on different sides and competing with one another is in our best interest. To compete of course is to win or to lose. Since every competition must have a loser, having losers must be in our best interest.
Since losing is in our best interest, I have only one suggestion:
You should go first.
CHAINED CPI
10/04/13 12:54
“Tote that load.“, said Tennessee Ernie Ford in in a song from the 1950s.
And in 2013 we are getting ready to put that weight right on the backs of the old, of the sick, and of the disabled.
According to the businessinsider.com in an article by Walter Hickey on April 9, 2013, quoting a study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research:
“Switching to the Chained CPI immediately would have a more significant impact on the retirement of seniors than the ending of the Bush-era tax cuts would have on the after-tax income of the wealthiest 2 percent of households. For the average worker retiring at age 65, this would mean a cut of about $650 each year by age 75 and a cut of roughly $1,130 each year at age 85.”
Get ready for the new America. No need to cut them off when they become too expensive. . . Just slice the level of their benefits and let them slowly fade away. . . a little more quickly. . .
And in 2013 we are getting ready to put that weight right on the backs of the old, of the sick, and of the disabled.
According to the businessinsider.com in an article by Walter Hickey on April 9, 2013, quoting a study by the Center for Economic and Policy Research:
“Switching to the Chained CPI immediately would have a more significant impact on the retirement of seniors than the ending of the Bush-era tax cuts would have on the after-tax income of the wealthiest 2 percent of households. For the average worker retiring at age 65, this would mean a cut of about $650 each year by age 75 and a cut of roughly $1,130 each year at age 85.”
Get ready for the new America. No need to cut them off when they become too expensive. . . Just slice the level of their benefits and let them slowly fade away. . . a little more quickly. . .