iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

U.S. Household Wealth Third Quarter 2011: Americans Take Biggest Hit Since 2009

Us Household Wealth Third Quarter 2011

DEREK KRAVITZ and DAVE CARPENTER   12/ 8/11 05:26 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — Americans' wealth last summer suffered its biggest quarterly loss in more than two years as stocks, pension funds and home values lost value.

At the same time, corporations raised their cash stockpiles to record levels.

Household net worth fell 4 percent to $57.4 trillion in the July-September quarter, according to a Federal Reserve report released Thursday. It was the sharpest drop since the tumultuous period after the September 2008 bankruptcy of investment bank Lehman Brothers. And it was the second straight quarterly fall.

Household wealth, or net worth, is the value of assets like homes, bank accounts and stocks, minus debts like mortgages and credit cards.

Lower net worth can hurt the economy. When people feel poorer, they spend less. That slows growth. Businesses typically then cut back on hiring and expansion.

Stock market declines, in particular, have held back Americans' quest to recover losses from the 2008 financial meltdown. The Standard & Poor's 500 stock index tumbled about 14 percent in the July-September period, ending a streak of four quarterly increases. The decline was driven by worries about Europe's debt crisis and the U.S. economy.

Stocks have rebounded about 9 percent since last quarter ended. But the S&P index is still about 21 percent below its peak of four years ago.

"Going forward, you're going to see these ups and downs; the era of volatility is back," said Gregory Daco, principal U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. "There's greater uncertainty among consumers."

The value of Americans' stock portfolios fell 5.2 percent last quarter. T. Rowe Price Associates estimates that two-thirds of that decline has been recouped in the October-December period. Much of that comes from continuing contributions to retirement accounts.

Home prices remain under pressure, diminishing home equity. Home equity is the biggest source of wealth for most Americans. Last quarter, home values slipped 0.6 percent. Total values fell to $16.1 trillion, down from nearly $21 trillion in 2007, before the recession began.

At the same time, corporations are amassing record cash stockpiles – $2.1 trillion at the end of September. Their reluctance to spend more of that money helps explain why job growth remains modest. The unemployment rate fell to 8.6 percent in November. But it's hovered near 9 percent for more than two years.

Roughly half of U.S. households own stocks or stock mutual funds. Stock portfolios make up about 15 percent of Americans' wealth. That's less than housing but ahead of bank deposits, according to the Fed's report.

Most stock wealth is owned by the richest Americans, who also account for a disproportionate share of consumer spending. Eighty percent of stocks belong to the richest 10 percent of Americans. And the richest 20 percent represent about 40 percent of consumer spending.

The average balance in 401(k) plans managed by Fidelity Investments, the largest workplace savings plan provider, dropped nearly 12 percent in the July-September period.

Thanks largely to workers' added contributions and company matches, about 92 percent of people with 401(k) retirement savings plans now have more money than at the market top in October 2007, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute in Washington.

As measured by the Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index, stocks lost $2.6 trillion in the July-September quarter. About $15 trillion remains invested in U.S. stocks.

Most economists expect home prices to fall further, as banks resume foreclosing on millions of homes with past-due mortgages. Many foreclosures have been delayed because of a government investigation into mortgage lending practices.

When their declining wealth is combined with stagnant pay, many Americans are less likely to spend. Average household income, adjusted for inflation, fell 6.4 percent last year from 2007, the year before the recession, according to the Census Bureau. That's a drag on the economy, since consumer spending accounts for 70 percent of economic activity.

The report found that household debt declined at an annual rate of 1.25 percent from the previous quarter. The main reason was a decline in mortgage debt, which has fallen for 14 straight quarters.

But the drop is deceiving. Mortgage debt is declining mainly because so many Americans are defaulting on payments and losing their homes to foreclosure – not just because people are paying off loans.

The Fed report says the average household owes about $121,000 on mortgages, credit cards, auto loans and other debt.

Their debt equals 119 percent of the money Americans have left after taxes. In late 2007, when the country was binging on debt, it was 135 percent. In the healthier 1990s, it was roughly 90 percent.

The Fed's quarterly report documents wealth, debt and savings for corporations, governments and households. It covers most of the financial transactions that take place in the United States.

___

Carpenter reported from Chicago.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
WASHINGTON — Americans' wealth last summer suffered its biggest quarterly loss in more than two years as stocks, pension funds and home values lost value. At the same time, corporations raised ...
WASHINGTON — Americans' wealth last summer suffered its biggest quarterly loss in more than two years as stocks, pension funds and home values lost value. At the same time, corporations raised ...
Filed by Jillian Berman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 225
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Terri Skau
Se... sotto una splendida luna piena...
02:47 PM on 12/09/2011
Reagan administration economic policies did not result in a 1960s-style prosperity, when workers' real wages went up in tandem with the value of stock holdings—just the opposite. Since 1980, the gains from U.S. economic growth have gone overwhelmingly to the well-to-do, and economic inequality has steadily worsened. By 2000, the ratio of the family income of the top 5% to that of the bottom 20% stood at 19.1, a dramatic rise over the 1979 ratio of 11.4. Reagan's economic policies ushered in the return of levels of inequality unseen since the eve of the Great Depression
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Ppossom
His life is full
11:14 AM on 12/09/2011
GOP threatens national bankruptcy and American net worth falls.
Could there be a connection?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:16 AM on 12/09/2011
"When people feel poorer, they spend less. That slows growth."

Poverty is not a feeling. It is a debilitating state of being.

That poorly written sentence quoted above reflects a blind spot in our thinking. We cannot make ourselves 'feel better' to overcome our problems, we must treat them aggressively. Telling a cancer patient to fight his/her disease and think positively does not cure cancer. Aggressive medical treatment has the best chance.

Telling poor people to 'feel better" about themselves, to recognize how blessed they are, does not cure the cancer of inequitable growth. We must elect representatives who have the knowledge and fortitude to change our laws to reflect the peoples needs first.
photo
Nancy Daniel
God is Love
07:16 AM on 12/09/2011
Things ain't getting better any time soon, no matter who is in office, in congress, etc.
Either get used to it, or like me, leave the country for a better life somewhere else.
www.thegeekwork.com
12:23 AM on 12/09/2011
Great Hollidays for the Koch Brothers and the Waltons again this year
07:39 AM on 12/09/2011
Don't forget Soros.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
stuart100s
I started with nothing, & still have most of it.
09:30 AM on 12/09/2011
Don't forget our elected officials, none of them have had to cut back. All of their benefits are intact, none of their paychecks have been cut.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
GerryS
I WANT to pay $1 million per year in taxes, or mor
12:20 AM on 12/09/2011
Get ready America,

When the US Dollar is no longer the Reserve Currency for the world,

Everything changes------------
photo
Kai-HK
Don't Share My Wealth! Share My Work Ethic!
11:52 PM on 12/08/2011
Excellent news! Good to see that artificial wealth predicated on unsustainable borrowing is no means to prosperity.

The Austrians called it correctly and the Keynesians continue to be wrong/

Wealth is acquired through real autonomous private sector growth, itself predicated on real private sector savings and investing…not borrowing and printing money…both leading to wealth attrition.

Good to see Americans learning that lesson, a lesson that will hopefully provide them with the same motivation to save and invest that drove the Greatest Generation after the Depression.

Kai
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
GerryS
I WANT to pay $1 million per year in taxes, or mor
12:22 AM on 12/09/2011
To late Kai,

Forces are gathering and the US Dollar will be replaced as the Reserve Currency------
photo
Kai-HK
Don't Share My Wealth! Share My Work Ethic!
02:05 AM on 12/09/2011
Alas...that is the negative externality to debasing your own currency.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
stuart100s
I started with nothing, & still have most of it.
09:53 AM on 12/09/2011
Things always find a way to correct themselves. How many times do Keynesians have to be wrong before they are discredited?
photo
Kai-HK
Don't Share My Wealth! Share My Work Ethic!
07:57 PM on 12/10/2011
True that!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1Truthseeker
Explore,Discover,Create
11:31 PM on 12/08/2011
For the majority of working people wages have not kept up with cost of living increases. Social Service agencies all over the country were well aware that before families or individuals turned to them for help they had maxed out every credit card to stay afloat. More than 50 million Americans do not earn a living wage. This is not counting the unemployed. The economic Injustice in our country is sickening!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
stuart100s
I started with nothing, & still have most of it.
09:36 AM on 12/09/2011
Everyone agrees. The disagreement is over who caused this economic melt down. There are more government employees than there are manufacturing employees. What did you think was going to happen? The USA is now making more laws, than we are cars. More bureaucrats than factories. More on food stamps than any time in history. Taking from the productive to give to the unproductive will not fix any of these basic problems.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1Truthseeker
Explore,Discover,Create
11:11 AM on 12/09/2011
Are you aware that Homeland security employes 2 million! What about the Pentagon and the Defense Department. The focus has been on the Social Service Sector. That is not where the bloat is. Where it only true that the majority of the 1% are there because they are productive is a gross misrepresentation when it is fact that their profits come from the productive work of the Labor force. The 1% are the most exploitative and the least productive.
How do you justify a CEO and his executive team earning more than 110 of what their labor earns. Nothing productive there. We are making more laws because the prison system is turning into a new for profit venture,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael D Ballantine
Texas Justice Party - Chairperson
10:52 PM on 12/08/2011
There is a recovery in corporate earnings but not in the economy. We are in a depression masked by government accounting. Bank earnings are pushed up by interest on deposits paid for by printing money. In effect, we are printing GDP. That helps politicians but it does not help ordinary people. Fannie and Freddie are government owned and it is time for them to take a haircut. Blinder, Feldstien, Stiglitz, and Krugman are all calling for a haircut to get the economy moving. This is within the power of the FED to reduce principal on underwater mortgages by 20-30% to recognize the fall in house prices. This more than anything will jump-start our economy. Once we take away the wait of the debt, we can get the economy moving again. People are paying for Washington and Wall St's mistakes while Washington and Wall St get off scotfree. We need to replace the dense ones running our economy with people less blinded by their ideology. It's time for change in Washington, it's time to clean house and get rid of the dead wood.
09:58 PM on 12/08/2011
American families took a big hit to their wealth after the 2000 tech bubble burst. Many 401k's and iras cut in half their wealth. Then they just sat there for a decade. In 2008 they took another big hit. And after a year of recovery took a hit again. Add to this falling house prices, stagnant job wages, dumped pension plans, dumped 401k matchs,(though some companys are doing some version of it again) and now the euro contagion, families have just sucked_wind. If things had continued to do as well as the 90's decade a lot of people would have been millionaires by now and well stocked for retirement. Now the average is what? is it even 200k? So much reallocated wealth away from families.
pinegrove
Corporations are not people......
09:22 PM on 12/08/2011
Hasn't anyone put together that the Bush Tax Cuts and radical deregulation have caused the unemployment crisis (and the foreclosure crisis) we face?

The Bush Tax Cuts have been in place for 10 YEARS!!!!!

Why are we at 16-25% un (and under) employment?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lipps
Snopes is going to be busy editing errors soon
10:22 PM on 12/08/2011
The so called disasterous "Bush tax cuts" actually caused tax revenues to increase by 40% between 2002 and 2007 and the deficit, which peaked at $412 billion in 2004 was down to $161 billion by 2007, all while spending increased by 36%. The all time record high level of tax revenues was in 2007 despite those horrible " Bush tax cuts".

That 2007 deficit of $161 billion that took an entire year to accumulate now is being run up every 6 weeks by the Obama Administration.

Just imagine how much of a surplus there would have been if Bush had vetoed even one spending bill!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:11 PM on 12/08/2011
Thanks for the stats. Interesting.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1Truthseeker
Explore,Discover,Create
11:21 PM on 12/08/2011
Bullpucky spin!! Making up numbers doe not create facts. CBO report would discredit every one of your numbers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Godfearing
Is it Birther NRA or NRA Birther?
10:22 PM on 12/08/2011
F&F ~ The Pro-Life White Christian Republican Tea Party Birther Anti Women movement surely
know this but as long as we have a president with an African father in the White House this group can never admit to your true comments. How sad we have people who will allow their intelligence to be insulted everyday.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dporterdvd
Progressive DemoCats Are Lion Hearted
08:48 PM on 12/08/2011
Wealth for the middle class continues to decline while wealth for the top 1% continues to increase thanks to policies favored by the GOP.

Election 2012 Bumper Sticker: GOP = Greedy One Percent
photo
fried52
"Just the Facts Ma'am Just the Facts"
09:01 PM on 12/08/2011
Excellent. I like it.
photo
fried52
"Just the Facts Ma'am Just the Facts"
09:15 PM on 12/08/2011
Or GOP a.k.a. Greedy One Percent
08:02 PM on 12/08/2011
Anyone can make money during a boom. You just dump you savings in any mutual fund you fancy, and they all roar up.

If you want to increase your wealth during times like these, however, it requires close attention and a well thought-out strategy. You really have to work hard at research and analysis before you plunk your hard-earned dollars down.

I'll admit, I've done all right, but it hasn't been easy.
07:50 PM on 12/08/2011
Has anyone but me seen the article in that well-known “fellow traveler”, Communist, Pink, Socialist, Anarchist and otherwise leftist, slanted, liberal publication entitled “National Review” which demolishes one of the favorite “conservative” claims---that 47% of the people “pay no taxes” and are getting a free-ride at the expense of the rest of us? The article terms the claim to be “The Freeloader MYTH” and reports that the Tax Policy Center (not known as a leftist hotbed) estimates that at the current time no more than 18%---not 47%--are “non-payers” of federal taxes. It also says that "that worrying too much about this number will lead conservatives down an intellectual and political dead end." (Actually, I thought they had gone down that way a long time ago.) What do you want to bet that the big mouths on the right totally ignore the story and continue using this false and alarmist charge? P.S. Just so there is no confusion, the article is on pages 33-34 of the November 28, 2011, edition, not the April 1st issue.)
09:26 PM on 12/08/2011
Great find, WUSRPH. That's just what we need to squelch that claim, at least on HP, for all time. But of course we won't hear a word about it from either Faux news OR the corporate media.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:18 PM on 12/08/2011
Here is the link to the online article if you would like to read it and if HP will allow it to be published.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/283265/freeloader-myth-ramesh-ponnuru
07:48 PM on 12/08/2011
You invent a new widget and then start up a factory with 10 workers making the widgets which you sell for $10 each making a $1 profit on each sale. Your product is popular; so next year you hire another 10 workers and double the size of your factory; thereby producing and selling twice as many widgets. Your profit is going to double; but both the old and new workers are doing the same production job at the same level. Why would their income change? In reality, the larger factory would gain some economies of scale that would increase per employee productivity and pay slightly. However, in this scenario, the owner sees a big increase in income; while individual employees only have small gains.
09:29 PM on 12/08/2011
That's the difference between now and thirty years ago. Back then, it was part of the unwritten social contract that productivity gains were reflected in workers' paychecks. Furthermore, wages also kept pace with inflation,with or without productivity gains.

Corporations and business tore up that social contract about thirty years ago, resulting in flat wages for the average worker for thirty years.
05:35 PM on 12/11/2011
As Sam Goldwyn said: “A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.” That is why successful countries have written constitutions which can be changed when mores shift the way America’s did on issues like slavery and female suffrage. Those thirty years of flat wages only occurred in developed countries. In places like China, wages have been rising sharply.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
stuart100s
I started with nothing, & still have most of it.
09:49 AM on 12/09/2011
Having built a number of new companies from inception, to sale on public stock exchanges, I can point out facts, rather than theory. What you say is what should happen, however it doesn't.

When a company is small, it is easy to identify what each employees contribution to production consists of. As the company grows, you draw the attention of government subdivisions who each want a piece of you. You have to comply with more mandates and regulations. You get more inspections from the authorities, and you have to hire more human resource persons. You attract more lawsuits, and you have more middle management supervising your work force. With more people comes less production. Your profit doesn't double because now the company is big enough that some employees find a place to hide so that they don't have to work.

The owner gets the small gain in income that the employee's get. This is why the company goes public in the stock market. This is the way the owner gets paid for his sweat equity, and actual financial contribution to the company. Not trying to take sides here regarding pay, as I tended to pay well to attract talent. The larger the company got, the less say the owner has regarding staff and pay as you have to have more rules and can't treat everyone as individuals.
12:45 PM on 12/10/2011
I take your point that there are dis-economies as well as economies of scale. The tradeoff between the two determines the optimum size for a business or anything else (whales would not be any more successful if they were ten times their current size). Frequently increases in scale result in more productive businesses; but not all the employees of the larger business are individually more productive - there are just more of them. If you double the size of a McDonald’s outlet; then you need roughly twice as many cashiers, floor sweepers and so on. You may still need only one manager on duty; so there could be a big boost in the manager’s productivity/pay. However, the new cashiers will be doing basically the same job at the same pay as the current ones.