Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Solving the Mystery of the Richest Americans' Missing Wealth

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-20-09 08:20 PM
Original message
Solving the Mystery of the Richest Americans' Missing Wealth


http://www.alternet.org/workplace/137540/solving_the_mystery_of_the_richest_americans%27_missing_wealth/

By Sam Pizzigati, Too Much: A Commentary on Excess and Inequality. Posted April 20, 2009.

Families in the top 1 percent are grabbing a rising share of the nation’s income -- why does the data show no jump in their share of the wealth?

The United States has been regularly counting people, via the Census, since 1790. But the federal government didn’t start counting the dollars in people’s pockets, with any regularity, until 1983 when the Federal Reserve began conducting a “Survey of Consumer Finances.”

This Fed survey, now conducted every three years, tallies just how much family wealth sits in the United States and who holds it. The Fed delivers all this info in a neat little summary report that makes comparing the wealth of America’s poor, average, and affluent families a relatively easy undertaking.But this Fed report doesn’t tell us much about America’s truly rich. These rich remain fairly invisible, lost in a broad “top 10 percent” category that includes plenty of families few Americans would consider exceptionally wealthy. In the Fed’s most recent Survey of Consumer Finances wrap-up, released in February, this top 10 percent extends down to families that make $140,000 a year.To the rescue comes Arthur Kennickell, the chief of the Fed’s survey unit. Over recent years, Kennickell has been producing an analysis of the Survey of Consumer Finances data that isolates out the wealth of the top 1 percent, a group most all Americans would define as rich. His latest analysis has just become available online.In 2007, the year the new Survey of Consumer Finances data cover, a family needed to sport a net worth of at least $8.3 million to enter the nation’s richest 1 percent. Together, these top 1 percent families held a collective net worth of $21.9 trillion, $3.5 trillion more than the net worth of all the families in the nation’s bottom 90 percent combined.These numbers actually understate the wealth of America’s top 1 percenters. Each Fed Survey of Consumer Finances, as Kennickell notes, “specifically excludes” from the survey sample any of the people wealthy enough to make the most recent Forbes 400 list of America’s richest. In 2007, the Forbes 400 held a collective net worth of $1.5 trillion.But in 2007, even without the fortunes of the Forbes 400, the top 1 percent still held a whopping 33.8 percent of America's total family wealth. Families in the bottom 90, all together, only held 28.5 percent.Robert Frank, the Wall Street Journal reporter who covers the paper’s wealth beat, finds these numbers deeply troubling — and not just for the obvious reason that they reveal a staggeringly unequal America. For Frank, the Fed numbers on the top 1 percent’s wealth just don’t make sense statistically.Here’s why. According to the Fed, the nation’s top 1 percent in 2007 held roughly the same share of the nation’s family wealth as the top 1 percent held in 1995. Indeed, the 2007 share for top 1 percent — 33.8 percent — runs a bit under the 34.6 percent top 1 percent share in 1995.The Fed’s numbers on income, curiously, show a quite different dynamic. Since the mid 1990s, the share of the nation’s family income going to America’s top 1 percent of wealth-holders has risen substantially, from 11.5 percent of total family income in 1994 to 16.4 percent in 2006.How can this be? How can the nation’s wealthiest be grabbing an ever greater share of America’s income and not show an ever greater share of America’s wealth? The answer could be a statistical quirk. Maybe the Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances just isn’t uncovering all the wealth the wealthy hold.That's possible. The IRS, after all, can send people to jail if they don’t honestly report all the income they’re making. Fed researchers, to collect wealth data, have no such power. These Fed researchers have to rely on the families they survey to respond to questionnaires, and, as Kennickell points out, “nonresponse in surveys often appears to be higher among wealthy families.”

FULL 2 page story at link.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
droidamus2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-20-09 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
1. How about
Does this report include money in offshore accounts? Property or other assets in other countries. Does it include stock options, deferred payments and any other accounting trick the wealthy use to hide their actual income. If you have a husband, wife and lets say 2 kids and they divide the family 'fortune' among the four of them does the study do a accumulated family score or does each member get their own 'score'?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-20-09 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It's just a survey. No teeth.
Time to send in the IRS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. For what...its not illegal to have assets outside of the county
It is illegal not to pay taxes on income from outside of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
droidamus2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Huh?
Edited on Tue Apr-21-09 08:36 AM by droidamus2
Edit : reread and realized you weren't addressing my post, but the following is true anyway.

Wasn't talking about legal/illegal the study was showing how much of the wealth of the country is in so few hands and why the numbers didn't seem to show what they should have. If they don't include wealth 'outside the USA' or the allow wealth to be diluted by subdividing it between family members. or include the other tricks the wealthy use then we aren't getting a true picture of the true 'wealth' being held by this relatively small group of people. That could explain why the rise in income doesn't show up as a rise in percentage of wealth among this group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. My reply was to PCKit who said it was time to send in the IRS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Some percentage of audits are supposed to be done as a matter of course.
For as long as I've been paying taxes, audits of businesses and wealthy individuals have been in decline while audits of the middle class have become routine. I'm simply saying it time to turn that ship around - just like every other alphabet agency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. IIRC the IRS for a while was using some sort of highest payback algorithm
Which almost makes sense at some level
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. No doubt. It's unlikely that anyone making less then $500K/year can afford the kind of legal talent.
to get away with paying no taxes. Those rules were written to provide employment to high-priced lawyers and accounting firms.

If you've got enough money, you can interpret the tax laws any damn way you please.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
9. Must be all those taxes they claim they're paying.
One set of books for the tax accountant, another for the census, I guess?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-21-09 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
10. Marking for later read
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 Thu Apr 25th 2024, 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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