The Shocking Redistribution of Wealth in the Past Five Years

[hfojvt]

29. that's kinda hard to believe

my own wealth has been steadily growing.

Especially since I started working full time in October 2011. Since then, I have put $18,000 in my IRA.

In 1983, my net worth was probably only about $5,000. I was a junior in college.

The OP says "From 1998 to 2009, fully 80% of American families LOST wealth. They had to borrow to stay afloat."

Again, hard to believe. That would put me in an elite 20%. 1998 happens to be the year I sold my bookstore. I worked about three years, most of the time as a factory temp. Then got a job at a major corporation in August 2001 from which I was fired in March 2002 and was unemployed until August 2002 when I got a part-time janitor job.

This, after I bought a house in November 2001.

And the laundromat/apartments I bought in 1998 for $35,000 I sold in 2003 for about $9,000.

Ouch. Ouch. Ouch.

And still, I gained wealth over the period from 1998 to 2009. Got a full time job, finally, in May 2004, paid off my house by October 2005.

Still, in spite of a $27,000 loss in real estate, I still gained wealth over the period. The house I put $8,000 down on in 2001 was paid for by 2006. That's the $27,000 back.

It just does NOT make sense that a part-time janitor can gain wealth while 80% of the country loses it.

I think that statistic is mis-leading. That 80% who lost wealth is probably some sort of net. Meaning that within that group, 30% of households lost wealth while 50% of them gained wealth. But if you combine the two, the losses of the losing group cancel out the losses of the gaining group.

I bet the same thing is true of this

"This first fact is nearly ungraspable: In 2009 the average wealth for almost half of American families was ZERO (their debt exceeded their assets)."

Because the 2011 census of wealth showed only 18.1% of households with less than zero net worth.

However, the negative net worth of that 18.1% is more than enough to cancel out the net worth of the next two groups. The 9.1% which had positive net worth less than $5,000 and those with less than $10,000 and more than $5,000, which were 4.8%. So, it is possible that the lowest 38% of households in 2011 had a combined net worth of zero.

BUT

within that group, there is
A - 2.4% - $5,000 to $7,113
B - 2.4% - $7,113 to $9,999

and with 118.7 million households, that means
the net worth of Group A is AT LEAST $14 billion
the net worth of Group B is AT LEAST $20.3 billion

there's even group (A-) - 4.55% - $1,679 to $4,999
which has AT LEAST $9 billion in net worth

Granted $50 billion in net worth is a long way from a trillion, but it is also a long way from zero.