Richest 1 Percent Account For Nearly All Of U.S. Recovery's Gains: Report

Technically, the economy has been in recovery for two years. But it turns out the rich have been doing most of the recovering.

In 2010 -- the first full year since the end of the Great Recession -- virtually all of the income growth in America took place among the country's very wealthiest people, says an economist at the University of California, Berkeley. The top 1 percent of earners took in a full 93 percent of all the income gains that year, leaving the other 7 percent of gains to be sprinkled among the vast majority of society.

Those numbers come courtesy of Emmanuel Saez, the Berkeley economist who co-created a resource known as the World Top Incomes Database. Saez and his colleagues crunched the data on income growth from 2010, the most recent year available, and found that it was shockingly lopsided.

While much of the country is simply treading water, with a growing number of people either edging toward poverty or already there, the richest of the rich seem to be coping nicely.

Saez's findings suggest that even though the recession dealt a blow to the 1 percent, it did little to push the U.S. off the path it's been on for decades -- that of a vast and growing disparity between the richest and poorest citizens.

Income for most workers has barely risen in the last 30 years, but the top 1 percent of earners have seen their income almost triple in the same amount of time. Economists and other experts say that could be the result of any number of factors, including the decline of labor unions, the explosion in capital gains during the middle part of the aughts, and tax policies put in place in recent years that favor the wealthy.

In his State of the Union address this past January, President Obama called economic fairness "the defining issue of our time," perhaps mindful of the growing number of voters who say they can't even afford basic necessities like food.

The wealth gap has been cited as a major concern for the nationwide Occupy movement, and research has suggested that income inequality might be associated with the kind of underwhelming economic growth the country has experienced for the past two years.

 

 

Comments

[Ogg-the-bear]

11:49 AM on 04/10/2012

The President wants "economic fairness" but then gives bailouts to those who don't need them, tolerates right wing conservatives as if they're good-faith dealers (they're anything but), and supports legislation that allows the 1% to keep on keepin' on.

Actions beat words. Period.

[ColoradoPete]

10:10 PM on 03/25/2012

I think the headline for this story ought to be:

"Obama Administration Doing Nothing for the 99%"

[tonylaz]

08:47 AM on 04/27/2012

But he is doing it TO the 99%

[tonylaz]

05:59 AM on 03/25/2012

The surest way to keep the rich from getting richer is to not buy their products. Of course, if you want to join them, find out what they're doing and just do it better.

[kf40]

01:26 AM on 04/26/2012

What world are you living in?! These platitudes are ridiculously hollow. The richest aren't selling products. They're finding ways to make their money without consumers. Consumers are on the road to obsolescence. The only snag is the old world order US economy is still based 70% on consumerism, according to Reich. That consumer economy's only a snag that the wealthiest will deal with soon enough and dismantle to their advantage.

As for your second assertion, well it is just absurd.

[tonylaz]

08:57 AM on 04/27/2012

"Reich"? Is that the Kilroy kinda guy who was in the Clinton administration? I don't believe he's ever run a successful enterprise of any kind. Hardly an expert. Otherwise, re-read your post and think about it instead of parroting the Democrat cac.

[tonylaz]

09:01 AM on 04/27/2012

BTW, when was the last time you sought a street beggar to seek a job?

[D W Smith]

10:27 PM on 03/12/2012

huh...
"Trickle-Up"

... didn't see THAT comin...

[ntmessage]

02:45 PM on 03/11/2012

The real reason that income inequality is less in the Euroland countries? The rich have all left! The brightest and the best leave because the government wants to take too much of what they have. Look at the Forbes richest in the world and it is littered with people taking up citizenship elsewhere. You want better employment that will truly fix the gap in the US? Stop punishing people for building or expanding their businesses here.

[Tommygun264]

05:39 PM on 03/11/2012

Businesses don't hire because they make more money or recieve bigger tax cuts, they hire and expand when there is greater demand for their products and a population with enough money to afford those products. As for your unfounded assertion that there is less income disparity in Europe because the wealthy have fled, PROVE IT. It will come as quite a shock to Getmany and other countries whose economies are outpacing our own. And BTW, if all the rich people fled to the US and they are the job creators, WHERE ARE THE JOBS? You've got nothing but long ago refuted talking points in support of the FAILURE of trickle-down.

[ntmessage]

07:58 PM on 03/11/2012

Where to start? Ask Obama about the jobs, he got everything he wanted the first two years and is a failure on jobs. 10 Million are off the roles and unemployment barley budges. How about Germany, they have a AAA Bond Rating, Constitutional caps on Debt and made the unions take huge pay cuts a few years ago. Obama did the opposite on all of these. He would not listen to his own commission and tried blaming the GOP , as you blame them for jobs. He is the POTUS. Everyone knows it. It is his economy as Orzag said three years ago. Business? They want to grow larger and make profits. That is why in fact they want to hire. They cannot grow without hiring people. When they hire it creates demand, an economic principle. Your notion 100% wrong, also neglects in the strongest sense the Obama disincentives to demand and growth across the country. That is why they do not hire. Lastly did you also neglect on purpose that the reference in my post was the Forbes list? Or did you just assume there was no proof. Again wrong and without credibility. I will help you get a start. Look up Soros and Fredriksen, just two that would rather do business elsewhere because their own countries either tax too much or are basket cases. Who is staring business today in Spain, Portugal and Italy? No one. Why? Unlike Germany and America under Obama they have too much debt.

[tonylaz]

06:07 AM on 03/25/2012

"Businesses don't hire because they make more money or recieve bigger tax cuts, they hire and expand when there is greater demand for their products and a population with enough money to afford those products"

Haven't you totally contradicted yourself in just one sentence ?

[D W Smith]

10:32 PM on 03/12/2012

lowest taxes in FIFTY YEARS
THEY PAY LITTLE TO NOTHING
SOME GET MONEY FOR NOTHING

and you want us to stop "PUNISHING" them??

WHAT KIND OF SICK, TWISTED lDl0T ARE YOU ANYWAY???

[tonylaz]

06:10 AM on 03/25/2012

"lowest taxes in FIFTY YEARS
THEY PAY LITTLE TO NOTHING
SOME GET MONEY FOR NOTHING"

Can you be just a little more specific, here ?

WHAT KIND OF SICK, TWISTED lDl0T ARE YOU ANYWAY???

[maggiemi56]

02:06 PM on 03/26/2012

"like you, he knows EXACTLY what I was talking about, but prevaricates

I'm not playing that dum. bass game "

I knew what you were saying...it was the way you said it..why do Liberals have to be so nasty?

googled..

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jun/29/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-tax-rates-are-lowest-1950s-ceos-/

Between 1960 (when the "1950s" faded into history) and the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan pushed through landmark tax cuts, top tax brackets had much higher rates than those in place today. For instance, the top rate was 91 percent in 1960, and 70 percent on the eve of Reagan’s election in 1980.

Guess it is the lowest in 50/60 years..

[ntmessage]

02:37 PM on 03/11/2012

Really this is so misleading. Many on the bottom are hurting because of Obama polcies, like gas prices doubling, insurance premiums going up even faster than under Bush and the poverty rate going up, etc; while the top 100 people in the world control almost $2 Trillion by themselves. We need more equality, but Obama is just using this as a pretext for re-relection. If he cared about the 99%, he would do somthing about unemployment and the fact that over 10 million have stopped looking for work. That all comes down to his anti business policies.

[Tommygun264]

05:48 PM on 03/11/2012

The US is producing more oil now than in the prevoius three years- unless you are advocating Socialism in the form of nationalizing the oil industry, it's speculators and higher demand in other countries driving up the price of gas. Healthcare insurance premium increases you try to blame on President Obama were instituted BEFORE. the Affordable Care Act went into effect. In fact, as the regulation in the Affordable Care Act tha requires insurers to spend 80% of premiums on patient care and refund any excess to customers, heslth insurance companies have refund MILLIONS in overcharges to customers. Take off your O-hater blinders and look at the FACTS.

[ntmessage]

08:10 PM on 03/11/2012

Firstly we need to produce more oil because we have more people. How about an empirical relationship as opposed to just saying we are producing more and think that means anything at all? We can produce even more and create more jobs, help the debt and exports without harming the environment. Obama is blocking it. Secondly, socialism is your word and projection. Again, just want to say something even if it does not apply?

And here are some more real facts. The growth in Health Care Premiums went from 12% to 3% under Bush. They went from 3% to 9% under Obama. You are also trying to mislead people if you think that the debate that started the moment Obama took office did not cause the increase to start. Saying that HCR passed when to start counting is nonsense. I count the minute Obama took office. No blaming Bush on that one?

I know that the insurance companies overcharge. And HCR puts 50 Million more on the Insurance Companies roles. That is why HCR will cost far more for even less services. Obama failure.

These are the unemotional facts. Are Obama and his supporters so desperate that they are now deceiving and lying on purpose? I like to skewer a good spin, but some of these comments are way over the truth line. No shouting here. Just facts.

[noahmarder]

03:52 AM on 03/12/2012

Bush left Obama a totally gutted economy that couldn't recover for at least several years no matter what Obama did. Obama has continued to make things worse by continuing many of Bush's failed policies. There are no jobs here because it is economically advantageous for American businesses to outsource them. Furthermore, since Americans have so little income, there is less demand for products. Reversing some of the regressive class warfare that has been taking place since 1980 might help the situation, but you want to do exactly the opposite.

Business in America is no longer about producing things and selling them for a profit. Instead, the model is to extract other people's wealth while contributing less than nothing yourself, or to defraud others into buying garbage. We need MORE regulation, and HIGHER taxes, especially on those who have benefited so much from this corrupt system. We need penalties for outsourcing jobs, and a financial transaction tax, which would put a damper on what is, at best, a zero sum game, and in practice, a wholesale pillaging of ordinary Americans' wealth. Most importantly, we need to GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS.

[ChristianEcon.com]

08:10 PM on 03/09/2012

I propose a welfare-to-work program for the 1%. Wean them off the workers slowly, let them learn skills and eventually get jobs. I call it "compassionate liberalism."

[ThomH]

02:45 PM on 03/08/2012

Is extreme income inequality unfair? Yes, our system is unfair in producing extremes of poverty and wealth. But it's worse than unfair: it's doomed.

Society cannot survive further increase in income inequality. The "recovery" is not happening. Wealth disparity is increasing, not decreasing.

Forget "fair". Think "stable". What we need is a system that is capable of achieving stability, and what we have is not.

Something has got to give, and it will.

[Damn Strange]

01:17 AM on 03/08/2012

93% of the recovery never happened. if Obama can hang this on the perps in a spectacular way he'll get another shot.

[Damn Strange]

01:14 AM on 03/08/2012

Occupy yacht clubs, country clubs, golf courses, exotic car dealerships, private schools, 5 star restaurants, marinas, hotels, etc. You can run but we'll already be there.

[goodwillsf]

02:55 AM on 03/12/2012

one of the top expensive restaurants where I live was immediately adjacent to the 99% movement encampment, I was always startled to walk past their plate glass windows to observe the diners completely oblivious to the police cordons, bread lines and commotion going on within inches of their cocktails and dinner plates, it was so incongruous and made me feel like I lived in a 3rd world country, let them eat cake!

[Damn Strange]

09:35 PM on 03/12/2012

Next time phone in some uniforms to interrupt their dinner.

[John Steinsvold]

09:50 PM on 03/07/2012

An Alternative to Capitalism (if the people knew about it, they would demand it)

Several decades ago, Margaret Thatcher claimed: "There is no alternative". She was referring to capitalism. Today, this negative attitude still persists.

I would like to offer an alternative to capitalism for the American people to consider. Please click on the following link. It will take you to an essay titled: "Home of the Brave?" which was published by the Athenaeum Library of Philosophy:

http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/steinsvold.htm

John Steinsvold

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result."
~ Albert Einstein

[White Raven]

03:08 PM on 03/07/2012

So the gist of this article appears to be that what economic growth America has had is not really real growth, and that the very rich have mainly benefited.

Does that not then imply that the Obama Administration is failing at fixing our economy?

I suspect the author would be in an uncomfortable position to have to explain that.

[John D Rachel]

07:39 PM on 03/07/2012

"Does that not then imply that the Obama Administration is failing at fixing our economy?"

Is this a trick question? A joke? Or are you just completely unaware that Obama has not only failed to fix the economy, he has rigged it further in favor of the already rich? Don't be fooled by the cosmetics and politicking of this administration. America is a country of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. And now they have a pseudo-populist president to do their bidding.

[White Raven]

07:49 PM on 03/07/2012

I'm not sure what your point is here. You seem to be acting like I'm singing Obama's praises when I'm actually calling him (and the writer of this article) into question.

[Janet Cooke]

08:39 PM on 03/11/2012

What I would call into question is the assumption that the government is responsible for fixing the economy. Government tracks and regulates the people who run the economy. That is what capitalism is. When business takes the government over completely we will have an (how did Beck spell it?) oligarchy! Sorry, just couldn't copy him.
Government does not produce anything. That is why Republicans hate government. They cannot figure out the value of anything that does not make money.
Hmmm, wonder if that includes family, friends...

[White Raven]

10:57 PM on 03/11/2012

I don't know that Republicans actually hate government though, because they use it so damned much. I think they SAY they hate it but their actions speak differently.

And while I would like it if our economic prosperity was more or less divorced from the nuts and bolts of our government, we do live in a mixed command/market economy. For better or worse this is true, and the government does have some degree of influence over our economy and how it operates.

[gregrocker]

12:38 PM on 03/07/2012

How much fairness will they let Obama campaign for with their money? A BILLION dollars for reelection is pretty bought.

[OldTulsan]

11:52 AM on 03/07/2012

http://ampedstatus.org/exclusive-analysis-of-financial-terrorism-in-america-over-1-million-deaths-annually-62-million-people-with-zero-net-worth-as-the-economic-elite-make-off-with-46-trillion/#rules
EXCLUSIVE: Analysis of Financial Terrorism in America: Over 1 Million Deaths Annually, 62 Million People With Zero Net Worth, As the Economic Elite Make Off With $46 Trillion | AmpedStatus

"...The fact of the matter is that the overwhelming majority of US population is unaware of the vast wealth at hand. An entire generation of unprecedented wealth creation has been concealed from 99% of the population for over 35 years. Having never personally experienced or known of this wealth, the average American cannot comprehend what is possible if even a fraction of it was used for the betterment of society as a whole.

In fact, given modern technology and wealth, not a single American citizen should live in poverty. The statistics clearly demonstrate that we now live in a Neo-Feudal society. In comparison to the wealthiest one-tenth of one percent of the population, who are sitting on top of tens of trillions of dollars in wealth, we are modern day serfs, essentially propagandized peasants.

The fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans are struggling to get by, while tens of trillions of dollars are consolidated within a small fraction of the population, is a crime against humanity..."

[OldTulsan]

11:57 AM on 03/07/2012

From the same article...

"...Propaganda Inflation

When reporting on inflation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has twice, since 1980, revised their methodology to mask the severity of inflation, similar to how they mask the severity of unemployment. In their Consumer Price Index (CPI), which measures inflation, they have heavily discounted the measurement weight of energy, food and education – three of the most significant costs for most American households.

To understand the significance in their revised methodology, current “official” CPI is at a 3.6% annual rate. However, if calculated the way it was before former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan altered it in 1980, it would be 11.1%, three times worse than officially stated.

So while the government and the Federal Reserve claim that inflation is low, at 3.6% over the past year, food prices have increased 39% and US gas prices have increased 34% over the same time frame..."

[Rooster Coburn]

11:48 AM on 03/07/2012

Richest 1 Percent Account For Nearly All Of U.S. Recovery's Gains:

In other words, without them the economy would be even deeper in the tank!

[ChristianEcon.com]

08:08 PM on 03/09/2012

Ever heard of arithmetic? Look it up.

[Tommygun264]

05:56 PM on 03/11/2012

If 100% of the millionaires and billionaires disappeared from the face of the earth tomorrow, the US & world economies would keep moving fine and in fact flourish as all their money stagnating in accounts filtered back into circulation. If just 50% or even 25% of workers disappeared from the earth, the US & world economies would collapse and human civilization ad we know it would unravel. We need workers - the prople who actually produce the wealth, not the parsites who grow fat off the labor of others.