HarperCollins
6:05
Top Democrats are signaling not-so-subtly that they are nervous as a forthcoming book from Peter Schweizer that will expose widespread corruption in the Democrat Party drops in just ten days.
The cover features photos of 2020 Democrat presidential frontrunners former Vice President Joe Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), as well as fellow 2020 candidates Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), and former 2020 candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA).
Schweizer is a Breitbart News contributing editor and the president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). He has written multiple bestselling books exposing corruption in Washington.
While little is known publicly about the book thus far, Allen quotes Schweizer as saying he spent a year and a half investigating for it, and that it is “a sweeping, detailed look at how the leading figures of progressivism have leveraged the power of their positions.” Allen reported that the book features chapters on each of them, as well as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH).
It has also been revealed that the book will expose the “Biden Five,” a group of Biden’s family members beyond son Hunter Biden who have siphoned tens of millions of dollars from taxpayers and from guaranteed loans. As Breitbart News reported , the Burisma Ukrainian natural gas company scandal surrounding Hunter Biden that was at the center of the House Democrats’ partisan impeachment push in Congress is just “the tip of the iceberg” when it comes to Biden corruption, and much more will be exposed in this book.
Schweizer’s last two books were filled with explosive revelations about career politicians. Clinton Cash , his 2015 book, uncovered significant corruption swirling around the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative and how the Clintons orchestrated a massive international pay-for-play political scheme. Secret Empires , his most recent book, uncovered much about Joe and Hunter Biden as well as other career politicians. Much of the revelations about Hunter Biden’s role with Burisma originated in Secret Empires .
So it’s no surprise that since these initial revelations about the explosive Profiles in Corruption book out on Jan. 21, the book has rocketed near the top of Amazon’s bestseller list, and interest in it has spiked considerably.
What’s new is that a spokesman for another top Democrat–former U.S. president Bill Clinton–is now formally denouncing the book. Angel Urena, the press secretary for former President Clinton, tweeted in response to Allen’s story announcing the book a claim that various investigations spawned in part by Clinton Cash have not been fruitful. In so doing, Urena urges the media and political class to not “aid” Schweizer in exposing the corruption of Biden, Harris, Warren, Sanders, Booker, Klobuchar, Garcetti, and other Democrats, but instead to just ignore it all:
Urena earlier retweeted this from the Washington Post :
The Washington Post story that Urena has been pushing announced that U.S. Attorney John Huber’s investigation into the Clinton Foundation has informally concluded. But the same Washington Post story says that Huber never interviewed many people he should have, and was more of a “nebulous” “reviewer” than an “investigator.”
The Post wrote:
Huber’s tasking was nebulous from the start. Some people involved in the matters he was said to be reviewing expressed surprise that they were not contacted by the U.S. attorney, and wondered privately what he was doing. Some in the Justice Department considered him more reviewer than investigator. He would get involved, people familiar with the matter said, only if other cases were not being handled properly.
Urena’s insinuation that because Huber’s lackluster-at-best review of the matter that really was not much of an investigation after all per the same Washington Post story he’s pushing to try to claim his bosses the Clintons are in the clear means that Clinton Cash did not somehow live up to its hype is just not true.
In fact, Clinton Foundation donations plummeted after Hillary Rodham Clinton–Bill’s wife and the 2016 Democrat presidential nominee–lost the election to President Donald Trump four years ago. What’s more, many independent investigations like
stories in the New York Times by Jo Becker have upheld the key findings in the book surrounding the Clinton Foundation and the Uranium One scandal.
Even the George Soros-funded Center for Responsive Politics admits in a news story that the Clinton Foundation’s backers seem to have lost interest in the organization in the wake of Clinton’s 2016 election loss. In November 2019, OpenSecrets News–the Center for Responsive Politics’ publication arm–
published a piece detailing the sharp drop in donations to the Clinton Foundation under the headline: “Clinton Foundation cash flow continues to drop years after 2016 election loss.”
The organization wrote:
The Clinton Foundation’s $30.7 million revenue last year is less than half the $62.9 million it raised in 2016 as Clinton was at the height of her presidential campaign. Each of the two years since Clinton’s loss in the 2016 election has seen the organization’s revenue drop to record lows, raising less than any fiscal year in more than a decade — a sharp contrast to the $249 million raised during Clinton’s first year as secretary of state.
What Urena’s tweets casting doubt on Schweizer’s forthcoming book more accurately demonstrate, however, is that the official channels of the highest levels of the Democrat Party–Urena is former President Bill Clinton’s press secretary–are worried about this Profiles in Corruption book and what it may reveal about top Democrats. And they’re so worried they’re already, ten days before its public release, publicly rebutting the book before they even see what’s in it.
TEN YEARS OF OBAMA-BIDENomics AND
TRUMPERNOMICS HAVE SEEN THE GREATEST TRANSFER OF WEALTH TO THE RICH AND ASSAULT
TO THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS.
As in previous budget
crises under the Obama administration, the events are being stage-managed by
the two corporate-controlled parties to give the illusion of partisan gridlock
and confrontation over principles—in this case, whether to go forward with the
implementation of the Obama health care program—while behind the scenes all
factions within the ruling elite agree that massive cuts must be carried
through in basic federal social programs.
“At this point, Clinton is the choice of
most multimillionaires to be the next occupant of the White House. A recent
CNBC poll of 750 millionaires found 53 percent support for Clinton in a contest
with Republican Jeb Bush, 14 points better than Obama’s showing in the 2012
election with the same group.”
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic
Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New
Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an
ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO
E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994
Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has
helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
Richest one
percent controls nearly half of global wealth
The richest one percent of the
world’s population now controls 48.2 percent of global wealth, up from 46
percent last year.
The report found that the growth of global inequality has
accelerated sharply since the 2008 financial crisis, as the values of financial
assets have soared while wages have stagnated and declined.
Despite a booming economy, many U.S.
households are still just holding on
"One of the premier
institutions of big business, JP Morgan Chase, issued
an internal report on the eve of the 10th anniversary of the 2008
crash, which warned that another “great liquidity crisis”
was possible, and that a government bailout on the scale of that
effected by Bush and Obama will produce social unrest, “in light of
the potential impact of central bank actions in driving
inequality between asset owners and labor."
Seventy percent of US Millennials say they are
likely to vote socialist
The fourth annual report on “US Attitudes Toward Socialism,
Communism, and Collectivism,” commissioned by the anticommunist Victims of
Communism Memorial Foundation and conducted by YouGov, found a sharp growth in
interest in socialism among youth in the US over the past year.
The study has been conducted annually since 2016 and bases
itself on interviews with over 2,000 people.
This years’ results reveal a significant radicalization taking
place among youth, particularly in the Millennial Generation (those aged 23-38)
and Gen Z (aged 16-22). Compared to last year’s report, favorable views of
capitalism dropped 6 percentage points and 8 percentage points for Gen Z and
Millennials, respectively.
Other notable findings include:
* 70 percent of Millennials say they would be “somewhat likely”
or “extremely likely” to vote for a socialist candidate. The percentage of
Millennials who say they would be extremely likely to vote for a socialist
candidate has doubled (from 10 percent in 2018 to 20 percent in 2019).
* Overall, 83 percent say they know at least a little about
socialism, and 39 percent of Americans say they “know a lot”—a nearly 40
percent increase from 2018.
* Nearly half of Millennials think the government should provide
a job to everyone who wants to work but cannot find it.
* Forty percent of Americans (45 percent of Gen Z and
Millennials) think all higher education should be free.
* Around one in five Millennials thinks society would be better
off if all private property were abolished.
* Seventy percent of Americans say the divide between the rich
and the poor is a serious issue.
* Of the more than half (63 percent) of Americans who think the
highest earners are “not paying their fair share,” 54 percent think increased
taxes are part of the answer, and 47 percent say a complete change of the
economic system is needed.
* Thirty-seven percent of Millennials think the US is one of the
most unequal societies in the world.
* Over a quarter of Americans across all generations said Donald
Trump is the biggest threat to world peace.
The source of this radicalization is not hard to find. The chief
characteristic of life for Millennials and Gen Z has been skyrocketing social
inequality. Many are forced to work two, three or even four jobs to make ends
meet. One in five millennials is living below the poverty line.
The growing interest in and support for socialism coincides with
a significant growth of class struggle and social protest internationally. In
Lebanon, massive protests have brought an estimated one quarter of the
country’s six million people onto the streets. In Chile, millions of people
continue to flood the streets protesting social inequality and state violence
in the largest demonstrations in the country’s history.
In the US, the strike by 32,000 Chicago teachers and support
staff is in its second week, following the largest autoworker strike in 30
years by GM workers.
This eruption of the class struggle on a global scale terrifies
the ruling class. They are acutely aware of social tensions and the growing
interest in socialism.
The response of the Trump administration has been an open turn
towards fascistic and authoritarian forms of rule. His hysterical denunciations
of socialism, now a feature of nearly every rally, express the growing fear of
the rich that demands for social reform will set off a mass movement for social
equality.
On the other hand, the Democrats, speaking for another faction
of the ruling elite, are determined to avoid anything that would mobilize
popular anger against Trump. They are systematically keeping out of their impeachment
inquiry any reference to Trump’s brutal crackdown on immigrants and refugees,
unending war and the social catastrophe confronting workers and youth. Instead,
they have focused their impeachment campaign on issues of foreign policy.
It is within this framework that the Democratic Party’s
elevation of figures such as Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez must
be understood. In order to provide a left cover for their right-wing policies,
these self-proclaimed “socialists” have been brought forward to direct growing
social anger back behind the Democratic Party.
In this latest campaign rally in Detroit on Sunday, Sanders once
again directed his remarks against social inequality, listing many of the
social ills confronting workers and youth. Most significant, however, was what
was not said.
Sanders made no reference to the more than month-long strike by
General Motors workers, which was just shut down by the United Auto Workers on
the basis of a contract that facilitates the massive expansion of temporary
workers, which has become the “new normal” for young people. Sanders also made
no reference to the ongoing Chicago teachers strike.
The omissions were not accidental. The Democratic Party, through
figures like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, propose a “socialism” (though they
almost never use the word) that does not involve the class struggle. Ending the
domination of the “billionaire class” is supposedly to be achieved without any
mass social movement or any challenge to the economic domination of the capitalist
class.
And it is supposedly to be done within the framework of the
Democratic Party, which is no less responsible than the Republicans for the
social conditions confronting workers and young people.
The critical question is to build a socialist leadership in the
working class and youth, to explain what genuine socialism is and how it must
be fought for. The fight for socialism means the fight to establish democratic
control of the giant banks and corporations by the working class. It means an
end to social inequality through a radical redistribution of wealth and the
expropriation of the ill-gotten gains of the corporate and financial
aristocracy. It means an end to war and abolition of the military-intelligence
apparatus.
The foundation for a socialist movement is the working class, in
the United States and internationally. The reorganization of economic life on a
world scale, on the basis of social need, not private profit, requires the
independent mobilization of the working class to take power and establish a
workers’ government.
Richest 400 Americans paid lower taxes than everyone else in 2018
According to an analysis by noted economists Emmanuel Saez and
Gabriel Zucman, previewed this week by New
York Times columnist David Leonhardt, the wealthiest American
households paid a lower tax rate last year than every other income group for
the first time in the country’s history.
Saez and Zucman, both professors at the University of California
Berkeley, detail the phenomenon of declining taxes for the richest Americans in
their soon-to-be released book, The
Triumph of Injustice .
The pair compiled a historical database composed of the tax
payments of households in various income percentiles spanning all the way back
to 1913, when the federal income tax was first implemented. Their research
uncovered that in the 2018 fiscal year the wealthiest 400 Americans paid a
lower tax rate—accounting for federal, state, and local taxes—than anyone else.
The overall tax rate paid by the richest .01 percent was only 23
percent last year, while the bottom half of the population paid 24.2 percent.
This contrasts starkly with the overall tax rates on the wealthy of 70 percent
in 1950 and 47 percent in 1980.
The taxes on the wealthy have been in precipitous decline since
the latter half of the 20th century as successive presidential administrations
enacted tax cuts for the rich, suggesting that they would result in economic
prosperity for all. Taxes that mostly affect the wealthy, such as the estate
tax and corporate tax, have been drastically cut and lawyers have been hard at
work on the beliefs of their wealthy patrons planning out the best schemes for
tax avoidance, seeking to drive tax rates as close to zero as possible. The
impetus for the historical tipping point was the Trump Administration’s 2017
tax reform, which was a windfall for the super-rich.
Supported by both the Republican and Democratic Parties, the two
parties of Wall Street, Trump’s tax cuts were specifically designed to transfer
massive amounts of wealth from the working class to the ruling elite.
The corporate tax rate was permanently slashed from 35 percent
to 21 percent, potentially increasing corporate revenues by more than $6
trillion in the next decade. The bill also reduced the individual federal
income tax rate for the wealthy and included a number of other provisions to
further ease their tax burden.
The story is different for many middle- and working-class
Americans. According to multiple analyses of the 2017 tax reform, 83 percent of
the tax benefits will go to the top 1 percent by 2027, while 53 percent of the
population, or those making less than $75,000 annually, will pay higher taxes.
At the same time, the reform will sharply increase budget deficits and the
national debt, granting the pretense for the further destruction of domestic
social programs.
Furthermore, a majority of Americans are paying higher payroll
taxes, which cover Medicare and Social Security. The tax increased from 2
percent just after World War II, to 6 percent in 1960, to 15.3 percent in 1990,
where it stands today. It has risen to become the largest tax that 62 percent
of American households pay.
The result of the multitude of changes to the US tax system over
the last three-quarters of a century is one that has become less progressive
over time. The 2017 tax reform effectively set up the foundation for a
regressive tax policy where the wealthy pay lower tax rates than the poor.
The implementation of a regressive tax structure has played a
major role in engineering the redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the
top that has brought social inequality in America to its highest level since
the 1920s.
According to Leonhardt’s preliminary Times review of The Triumph of Injustice ,
Saez and Zucman offer a solution to the current unjust tax system in which the
overall tax rate on the top 1 percent of income earners would rise to 60
percent. The pair claim that the tax increase would bring in approximately $750
billion in taxes. Their tax code also includes a wealth tax and a minimum
global corporate tax of 25 percent, requiring corporations to pay taxes on
profits made in the United States, even if their headquarters are overseas.
In an interview with Leonhardt, Zucman states that history shows
that the US has raised tax rates on the wealthy before so therefore it should
be possible to do so now.
However, the last half century of counterrevolution waged
against the working class makes the parasitic nature of the ruling elite
absolutely clear, and underscores the well-known fact that the US is ruled by
an oligarchy that controls the political system. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans, who both represent
this oligarchy and bear responsibility for the tax system, will make any effort
to implement Saez and Zucman’s modest proposal.
California
became a Democratic stronghold not because Californians became
socialists, but because millions of socialists
moved there. Immigration turned California blue,
and immigration
is ultimately to blame for California's high poverty level.
The wealthiest
Americans are paying a lower tax rate than all other Americans, groundbreaking
analysis from a pair of economists reveals.
For the
first time on record, the wealthiest 400 Americans in 2018 paid a lower tax
rate than all of the income groups in the United States, research highlighted by the New York Times
The
analysis concludes that the country’s top economic elite are paying lower
federal, state, and local tax rates than the nation’s working and middle class.
Overall, these top 400 wealthy Americans paid just a 23 percent tax rate, which
the Times
This 23
percent tax rate for the rich means their rate has been slashed by 47
percentage points since 1950 when their tax rate was 70 percent.
(Screenshot
via the New York Times)
The
analysis finds that the 23 percent tax rate for the wealthiest Americans is
less than every other income group in the U.S. — including those earning
working and middle-class incomes, as a Times
Leonhardt
writes:
For
middle-class and poor families, the picture is different. Federal
income taxes have also declined modestly for these families, but they haven’t
benefited much if at all from the decline in the corporate tax or estate tax . And
they now pay more in payroll taxes (which finance Medicare and Social
Security) than in the past. Over all, their taxes have remained fairly flat.
[Emphasis added]
The
report comes as Americans increasingly see a growing divide between the rich
and working class, as the Pew Research Center has found .
Sen. Josh
Hawley (R-MO), the leading economic nationalist in the Senate, has warned
against the Left-Right coalition’s consensus on open trade, open markets, and
open borders, a plan that he has called an economy that works solely for the
elite.
“The same
consensus says that we need to pursue and embrace economic globalization and
economic integration at all costs — open markets, open borders, open trade,
open everything no matter whether it’s actually good for American national
security or for American workers or for American families or for American
principles … this is the elite consensus that has governed our politics
for too long and what it has produced is a politics of elite ambition,”
Hawley said in an August speech in the
Senate.
That
increasing worry of rapid income inequality is only further justified by
economic research showing a rise in servant-class jobs,
strong economic recovery for elite zip codes but not for working-class
regions, and skyrocketing wage growth for the billionaire class at 15 times
the rate of other Americans.
John
Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Census Says U.S.
Income Inequality Grew ‘Significantly’ in 2018
(Bloomberg) -- Income
inequality in America widened “significantly” last year, according to a U.S.
Census Bureau report published Thursday.
A measure of inequality
known as the Gini index rose to 0.485 from 0.482 in 2017, according to the
bureau’s survey of household finances. The measure compares incomes at the top
and bottom of the distribution, and a score of 0 is perfect equality.
The 2018 reading is the
first to incorporate
But the distribution of
income and wealth in the U.S. has been worsening for decades, making America
the most unequal country in the developed world. The trend, which has persisted
through recessions and recoveries, and under administrations of both parties,
has put inequality at the center of U.S. politics.
Leading candidates for
the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, including senators Elizabeth
Warren and Bernie Sanders, are promising to rectify the tilt toward the rich
with measures such as taxes on wealth or financial transactions.
Just five states --
California, Connecticut, Florida, Louisiana and New York, plus the District of
Columbia and Puerto Rico -- had Gini indexes higher than the national level,
while the reading was lower in 36 states.
OBAMAnomics:
Billionaire Class Enjoys 15X the Wage Growth of American Working
Class
The billionaire class — the country’s top
0.01 percent of earners — have enjoyed more than 15 times as much wage growth
as America’s working and middle class since 1979, new wage data reveals.
Between 1979 and 2017, the wages of
the bottom 90 percent — the country’s working and lower middle class — have
grown by only about 22 percent, Economic Policy Institute (EPI) researchers find.
Compare that small wage increase over nearly four decades to the
booming wage growth of America’s top one percent, who have seen their wages
grow more than 155 percent during the same period.
The top 0.01 percent — the country’s billionaire class — saw
their wages grow by more than 343 percent in the last four decades, more
than 15 times the wage growth of the bottom 90 percent of Americans.
In 1979, America’s working class was earning on average about
$29,600 a year. Fast forward to 2017, and the same bottom 90 percent of
Americans are earning only about $6,600 more annually.
The almost four decades of wage stagnation among the country’s
working and middle class comes as the national immigration policy has allowed
for the admission of more than 1.5 million mostly low-skilled immigrants every
year.
(Public Citizen)
In the last decade, alone, the
U.S. admitted ten million
legal immigrants, forcing American workers to compete against a growing
population of low-wage workers. Meanwhile, employers are able to reduce wages
and drive up their profit margins thanks to the annual low-skilled immigration
scheme.
The Washington, DC- imposed mass immigration policy
is a boon to corporate executives, Wall Street, big business, and multinational
conglomerates as every one percent increase in the immigrant composition of an
occupation’s labor force reduces Americans’ hourly wages
by 0.4 percent. Every one percent increase in the immigrant workforce reduces
Americans’ overall wages by 0.8 percent.
Mass immigration has come at the expense of America’s working
and middle class, which has suffered from poor job growth, stagnant wages, and
increased public costs to offset the importation of millions of low-skilled
foreign nationals.
Four million young Americans enter
the workforce every year, but their job opportunities are further diminished as
the U.S. imports roughly two new foreign workers for every four American
workers who enter the workforce. Even though researchers say 30
percent of the workforce could lose their jobs due to
automation by 2030, the U.S. has not stopped importing more than a million
foreign nationals every year.
For blue-collar American workers,
mass immigration has not only kept wages down but in many cases decreased
wages, as Breitbart News reported . Meanwhile, the
U.S. continues importing more foreign nationals with whom working-class
Americans are forced to compete. In 2016, the U.S. brought in about 1.8 million
mostly low-skilled immigrants.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
Study: Elite Zip Codes Thrived in Obama Recovery, Rural America
Left Behind
4:49
Wealthy cities and elite zip codes thrived
under the slow-moving economic recovery of President Obama while rural American
communities were left behind, a study reveals.
The Economic Innovation Group
research, highlighted by Axios
Between 2007 and 2016, the number of residents living in elite
zip codes grew by more than ten million, with an overwhelming faction of that
population growth being driven by mass immigration where the U.S. imports more
than 1.5 million illegal and legal immigrants annually.
The booming 44.5 million immigrant
populations are concentrated mostly in the
country’s major cities like Los Angeles, California, Miami Florida, and New
York City, New York. The rapidly growing U.S. population — driven by immigration
— is set to hit 404 million by 2060, a boon for
real estate developers, wealthy investors, and corporations, all of which
benefit greatly from dense populations and a flooded labor market.
The economic study found that while the population grew in
wealthy cities, America’s rural population fell by nearly 3.5 million
residents.
Likewise, by 2016, elite zip codes had a surplus of 3.6 million
jobs, which is more than the combined bottom 80 percent of American zip codes.
While it only took about five years for wealthy cities to replace the jobs lost
by the recession, it took “at risk” regions of the country a decade to recover,
and “distressed” U.S. communities are “unlikely ever to recover on current
trendlines,” the report predicts.
A map included in the research shows how rich,
coastal metropolises have boomed economically while entire portions of
middle America have been left behind as job and business gains remain
concentrated at the top of the income ladder.
(Economic Innovation Group)
(Economic Innovation Group)
Economic growth among the country’s middle-class counties and
middle-class zip codes has considerably trailed national economic growth, the
study found.
For example, between 2012 and 2016, there were 4.4 percent more
business establishments in the country as a whole. That growth was less than
two percent in the median zip code and there was close to no growth in the
median county.
The same can be said of employment growth, where U.S. employment
grew by about 9.3 percent from 2012 to 2016. In the median zip code, though,
employment grew by only 5.5 percent and in the median county, employment grew
by less than four percent.
“Nearly three in every five large counties added businesses on
net over the period, compared to only one in every five small one,” the report
concluded.
Elite zip codes added more business establishments during
Obama’s economic recovery, between 2012 and 2016, than the entire bottom 80
percent of zip codes combined. For instance, while more than 180,000 businesses
have been added to rich zip codes, the country’s bottom tier has lost more than
13,000 businesses even after the economic recovery.
(Economic Innovation Group)
The gutting of the American
manufacturing base, through free trade, has been a driving catalyst for the
collapse of the white working class and black Americans. Simultaneously, the
outsourcing of the economy has brought major wealth to corporations, tech
conglomerates, and Wall Street.
The dramatic decline of U.S.
manufacturing at the hands of free trade—where more than 3.4 million American jobs
have been lost solely due to free trade with China, not including the American
jobs lost due to agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) and the United States-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS)—has coincided
with growing wage inequality for white and black Americans, a growing number of
single mother households, a drop in U.S. marriage rates, a general
stagnation of working and middle class wages, and specifically, increased black
American unemployment.
“So, the loss of manufacturing work since 1960 represents a
steady decline in relatively high-paying jobs for less-educated workers,”
recent research from economist Eric D. Gould has noted.
Fast-forward to the modern economy
and the wage trend has been the opposite of what it was during the peak of
manufacturing in the U.S. An Economic Policy Institute study
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on
Twitter at @JxhnBinder .
Record high income in 2017 for top
one percent of wage earners in US
In 2017, the top one
percent of US wage earners received their highest paychecks ever, according to
a report by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).
Based on newly released
data from the Social Security Administration, the EPI shows that the top one
percent of the population saw their paychecks increase by 3.7 percent in 2017—a
rate nearly quadruple the bottom 90 percent of the population. The growth was
driven by the top 0.1 percent, which includes many CEOs and corporate
executives, whose pay increased eight percent and averaged $2,757,000 last
year.
The EPI report is only
the latest exposure of the gaping inequality between the vast majority of the
population and the modern-day aristocracy that rules over them.
The EPI shows that the
bottom 90 percent of wage earners have increased their pay by 22.2 percent
between 1979 and 2017. Today, this bottom 90 percent makes an average of just
$36,182 a year, which is eaten up by the cost of housing and the growing burden
of education, health care, and retirement.
Meanwhile, the top one
percent has increased its wages by 157 percent during this same period, a rate
seven times faster than the other group. This top segment makes an average of
$718,766 a year. Those in-between, the 90th to 99th percentile, have increased
their wages by 57.4 percent. They now make an average of $152,476 a year—more
than four times the bottom 90 percent.
Graph
from the Economic Policy Institute
Decades of decaying
capitalism have led to this accelerating divide. While the rich accumulate
wealth with no restriction, workers’ wages and benefits have been under
increasing attack. In 1979, 90 percent of the population took in 70 percent of
the nation’s income. But, by 2017, that fell to only 61 percent.
Even more, while the
bottom 90 percent of the population may take in 61 percent of the wages, large
sections of the workforce today barely pull in any income at all. For
example, Social Security Administration data found that the bottom 54
percent of wage earners in the United States, 89.5 million people, make an average
of just $15,100 a year. This 54 percent of the population earns only 17 percent
of all wages paid in America.
However unequal, these
wage inequalities still do not fully present the divide between rich and poor.
The ultra-wealthy derive their wealth not primarily from wages, but from assets
and equities—principally from the stock market. While the bottom 90 percent of
the population made 61 percent of the wages in 2017, they owned even less, just
27 percent of the wealth (according to the World
Inequality Report 2018
The massive increase in
the value of the stock market, which only a small segment of the population
participates in, means that the top 10 percent of the population controls 73
percent of all wealth in the United States. Just three men—Jeff Bezos, Warren
Buffet and Bill Gates—had more wealth than the bottom half of America combined
last year.
Wages are so low in the
United States that roughly half of the population falls deeper into debt every
year. A Reuters report from July found that the pretax net income (that is,
income minus expense) of the bottom 40 percent of the population was an average
of negative
As the Social Security
Administration numbers show, 67.4 percent of the population made less than the
average wage, $48,250 a year in 2017, a sum that is inadequate to support a
family in many cities—especially, with high housing costs, health care,
education, and retirement factored in.
For the ruling class,
though, workers’ wages are already too much. The volatility of the stock market
and the deep fear that the current bull market will collapse has made politicians
and businessmen anxious of any sign of wage increases.
In August, wages in the
US rose just 0.2 percent above the inflation rate, the highest in nine years.
Though the increase was tiny, it was enough to encourage the Federal Reserve to
increase the interest rate past two percent for the first time since 2008.
Raising interest rates helps to depress workers’ wages by lowering borrowing
and spending. As the Financial Times
Further analysis of the
Social Security Administration data shows that in 2017, 147,754 people reported
wages of 1 million dollars or more—roughly, the top 0.05 percent. Their
combined total income of $372 billion could pay for the US federal education
budget five times over.
These wages, however
large, still pale in comparison to the money the ultra-rich acquire from the
stock market. For example, share buybacks and dividend payments, a way of
funneling money to shareholders, will eclipse $1 trillion this year.
Whatever the immediate
source, the wealth of the rich derives from the great mass of people who do the
actual work. Across the United States and around the world, workers, young
people, and students have entered into struggle this year over pay, education,
health care, immigration, war and democratic rights. This growing movement of
the working class must set as its aim confiscating the wealth and power of this
tiny parasitic oligarchy. Society’s wealth must be democratically controlled by
those who produce it.
THE
STAGGERING ECONOMIC INEQUALITY UNDER OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION SERVING THE
BILLIONAIRE CLASS.
THE
ENTIRE REASON BEHIND AMNESTY IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED AND PASS ALONG THE REAL
COST OF "CHEAP" MEXICAN LABOR TO THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS.
AND IT'S WORKING!
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS
“Calling income and wealth inequality the "great
moral issue of our time," Sanders laid out a sweeping, almost unimaginably
expensive program to transfer wealth from the richest Americans to the poor and
middle class. A $1 trillion public works program to create "13 million
good-paying jobs." A $15-an-hour federal minimum wage. "Pay
equity" for women. Paid sick leave and vacation for everyone. Higher taxes
on the wealthy. Free tuition at all public colleges and universities. A
Medicare-for-all single-payer health care system. Expanded Social Security
benefits. Universal pre-K.” WASHINGTON EXAMINER
YOU THOUGHT OBAMA INVITED
OBAMANOMICS and started the assault on the American middle-class?
NOPE!
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic
Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New
Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an
ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO
E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994
Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has
helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
OBAMA: SERVANT
OF THE 1%
Richest one
percent controls nearly half of global wealth
The richest one percent of the
world’s population now controls 48.2 percent of global wealth, up from 46
percent last year.
The report found that the growth
of global inequality has accelerated sharply since the 2008 financial crisis,
as the values of financial assets have soared while wages have stagnated and
declined.
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
Households with more than a million
(US) dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global
private wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting Group
This large percentage, however, only
includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held through
managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves out
businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial portion
of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014,
millionaire households owned about 41 percent of global private wealth,
according to BCG. This means that collectively these 17 million households
owned roughly $67.24 trillion in liquid assets, or about $4 million per
household.
In total, the world added $17.5
trillion of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that
nearly three quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth.
In other words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing
assets increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the
massive infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks.
The policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the
stock market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the
rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within
the super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million
in private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone.
Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the
world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected
to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.”
They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next
five years.
Those families with wealth between
$20 and $100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent
increase in their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In
five years they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net
worth” population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private
wealth. These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent
each year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several
percentage points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the
ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the experience of billions of people
around the globe. While wealth accumulation has sharply sped up for the
ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not even begun to recover from
the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example,
shows that the bottom 99 percent of the world’s population went from having
about 56 percent of the world’s wealth in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in
2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of
the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation
found that between 2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in
the United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the
rich also saw their wealth drop during the recession, they are more than making
that money back. Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in
the US went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted post-recession
income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between
2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times
more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The
2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all
from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank
The report also draws attention to
the disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the
growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated
global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its
forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
“At
this point, Clinton is the choice of most multimillionaires to be the next
occupant of the White House. A recent CNBC poll of 750 millionaires found 53
percent support for Clinton in a contest with Republican Jeb Bush, 14 points
better than Obama’s showing in the 2012 election with the same group.”
THE CRONY
CLASS:
OBAMACLINTONOMICS
was created by BILLARY CLINTON!
Income inequality grows
FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.
“By the time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic
Party had completely repudiated its association with the reforms of the New
Deal and Great Society periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an
ample supply of cheap labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO
E-VERIFY!), including a growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994
Federal Crime Bill, with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has
helped create the largest prison population in the world.”
OBAMA’S WALL STREET and the
LOOTING of AMERICA – SECOND TERM
The
corporate cash hoard has likewise reached a new record, hitting an estimated
$1.79 trillion in the fourth quarter of last year, up from $1.77 trillion in
the previous quarter. Instead of investing the money, however, companies are
using it to buy back their own stock and pay out record dividends.
Megan McArdle Discusses How America's Elites Are
Rigging the Rules - Newsweek/The Daily Beast special correspondent Megan
McArdle joins Scott Rasmussen for a discussion on America's new Mandarin class.
WHO
REALLY PAYS FOR THE CRIMES OF OBAMA’S CRONY DONORS???
LAST WEEK BARACK OBAMA
CELEBRATED FIVE YEARS OF THE LOOTING BY HIS WALL STREET BANKSTERS… now it’s
back to cutting social programs to pay for all that rape by the 1% he
represents. The following week it will be back to the AMNESTY HOAX to legalize
Mexico’s looting of America and make it legal that Mexicans get our jobs first…
they already do!
As in previous budget
crises under the Obama administration, the events are being stage-managed by
the two corporate-controlled parties to give the illusion of partisan gridlock
and confrontation over principles—in this case, whether to go forward with the
implementation of the Obama health care program—while behind the scenes all
factions within the ruling elite agree that massive cuts must be carried
through in basic federal social programs.
OBAMA’S
CRONY CAPITALISM – A NATION RULED BY CRIMINAL WALL STREET BANKSTERS AND OBAMA
DONORS
GET THIS BOOK
Culture of
Corruption: Obama and His Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks, and Cronies
by Michelle Malkin
In her shocking new
book, Malkin digs deep into the records of President Obama's staff,
revealing corrupt dealings, questionable pasts, and abuses of power throughout
his administration.
PATRICK
BUCHANAN
After Obama
has completely destroyed the American economy, handed millions of jobs to
illegals and billions of dollars in welfare to illegals…. BUT WHAT COMES NEXT?
OBAMANOMICS: IS IT WORKING???
Millionaires
projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth by 2019
By
Gabriel Black
Households with more than a million (US)
dollars in private wealth are projected to own 46 percent of global private
wealth in 2019 according to a new report by the Boston Consulting Group
This large percentage, however, only
includes cash, savings, money market funds and listed securities held through
managed investments—collectively known as “private wealth.” It leaves out
businesses, residences and luxury goods, which comprise a substantial portion
of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households
owned about 41 percent of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means
that collectively these 17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in
liquid assets, or about $4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5 trillion
of new private wealth between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that nearly three
quarters of all these gains came from previously existing wealth. In other
words, the vast majority of money gained has been due to pre-existing assets
increasing in value—not the creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the massive
infusions of cheap credit into the financial markets by central banks. The
policy of “quantitative easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the stock
market even while global economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at
a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy,
skewed towards the very top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in
private wealth saw their wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone.
Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the
world’s private wealth. According to the report, “This top segment is expected
to be the fastest growing, in both the number of households and total wealth.”
They are expected to see 12 percent compound growth on their wealth in the next
five years.
Those families with wealth between $20 and
$100 million also rose substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent increase in
their wealth in twelve short months. They now own $9 trillion. In five years
they will surpass $14 trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net worth”
population are those with between $1 million and $20 million in private wealth.
These households are expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent each
year, going from $49 trillion to $70.1 trillion dollars, several percentage
points below the highest bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the
ultra-rich stand in sharp contrast to the experience of billions of people
around the globe. While wealth accumulation has sharply sped up for the
ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of people have not even begun to recover from
the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent
of the world’s population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s
wealth in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent
saw its wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found
that between 2003 and 2013, the median household net worth of those in the
United States fell from $87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich
also saw their wealth drop during the recession, they are more than making that
money back. Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US
went to the top 1 percent. This is the most distorted post-recession income
gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) has noted, in the United States “between
2007 and 2013, net wealth fell on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times
more (26 percent) for those at the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The
2015 report concludes that “low-income households have not benefited at all
from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank
The report also draws attention to the
disconnection between the rich and the actual economy. It states that the
growth of this ultra-wealthy population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated
global economic growth. During 2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its
forecast increase for world output from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
THE CRONY CLASS:
OBAMACLINTONOMICS
was created by BILLARY CLINTON!
Income inequality grows
FOUR TIMES FASTER under Obama than Bush.
“By the
time of Bill Clinton’s election in 1992, the Democratic Party had completely
repudiated its association with the reforms of the New Deal and Great Society
periods. Clinton gutted welfare programs to provide an ample supply of cheap
labor for the rich (WHICH NOW MEANS OPEN BORDERS AND NO E-VERIFY!), including a
growing layer of black capitalists, and passed the 1994 Federal Crime Bill,
with its notorious “three strikes” provision that has helped create the largest
prison population in the world.”
POLL: MOST INCOMPETENT AND
DISHONEST PRESIDENT SINCE…. Well, isn’t Obama merely Bush’s THIRD and FOURTH
TERMS??
OBAMA’S CRONY CAPITALISM
A NATION RULED BY CRIMINAL WALL
STREET BANKSTERS AND OBAMA DONORS
PATRICK BUCHANAN
After Obama has completely destroyed
the American economy, handed millions of jobs to illegals and billions of
dollars in welfare to illegals…. BUT WHAT COMES NEXT?
OBAMANOMICS: IS IT WORKING???
Millionaires projected to own 46 percent of
global private wealth by 2019
Households with more than a million (US) dollars in private wealth
are projected to own 46 percent of global private wealth in 2019 according to a
new report by the Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
This large percentage, however, only includes cash, savings, money
market funds and listed securities held through managed investments—collectively
known as “private wealth.” It leaves out businesses, residences and luxury
goods, which comprise a substantial portion of the rich’s net worth.
At the end of 2014, millionaire households owned about 41 percent
of global private wealth, according to BCG. This means that collectively these
17 million households owned roughly $67.24 trillion in liquid assets, or about
$4 million per household.
In total, the world added $17.5 trillion of new private wealth
between 2013 and 2014. The report notes that nearly three quarters of all these
gains came from previously existing wealth. In other words, the vast majority
of money gained has been due to pre-existing assets increasing in value—not the
creation of new material things.
This trend is the result of the massive infusions of cheap credit
into the financial markets by central banks. The policy of “quantitative
easing” has led to a dramatic expansion of the stock market even while global
economic growth has slumped.
While the wealth of the rich is growing at a breakneck pace, there
is a stratification of growth within the super wealthy, skewed towards the very
top.
In 2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their
wealth increase 11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households
owned $10 trillion in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According
to the report, “This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both
the number of households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent
compound growth on their wealth in the next five years.
Those families with wealth between $20 and $100 million also rose
substantially in 2014—seeing a 34 percent increase in their wealth in twelve
short months. They now own $9 trillion. In five years they will surpass $14
trillion according to the report.
Coming in last in the “high net worth” population are those with
between $1 million and $20 million in private wealth. These households are
expected to see their wealth grow by 7.2 percent each year, going from $49 trillion
to $70.1 trillion dollars, several percentage points below the highest
bracket’s 12 percent growth rate.
The gains in private wealth of the ultra-rich stand in sharp
contrast to the experience of billions of people around the globe. While wealth
accumulation has sharply sped up for the ultra-wealthy, the vast majority of
people have not even begun to recover from the past recession.
An Oxfam report from January, for example, shows that the bottom 99 percent
of the world’s population went from having about 56 percent of the world’s wealth
in 2010 to having 52 percent of it in 2014. Meanwhile the top 1 percent saw its
wealth rise from 44 to 48 percent of the world’s wealth.
In 2014 the Russell Sage Foundation found that between 2003 and
2013, the median household net worth of those in the United States fell from
$87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36 percent. While the rich also saw their wealth
drop during the recession, they are more than making that money back. Between
2009 and 2012, 95 percent of all the income gains in the US went to the top 1
percent. This is the most distorted post-recession income gain on record.
As the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) has noted, in the United States “between 2007 and 2013, net wealth fell
on average 2.3 percent, but it fell ten-times more (26 percent) for those at
the bottom 20 percent of the distribution.” The 2015 report concludes that
“low-income households have not benefited at all from income growth.”
Another report by Knight Frank , looks at those with
wealth exceeding $30 million. The report notes that in 2014 these 172,850
ultra-high-net-worth individuals increased their collective wealth by $700
billion. Their total wealth now rests at $20.8 trillion.
The report also draws attention to the disconnection between the
rich and the actual economy. It states that the growth of this ultra-wealthy
population “came despite weaker-than-anticipated global economic growth. During
2014 the IMF was forced to downgrade its forecast increase for world output
from 3.7 percent to 3.3 percent.”
OBAMA-CLINTONomics:
the never ending war on the
American middle-class. But we still get the tax bills for the looting of their
Wall Street cronies and their bailouts and billions for Mexico’s welfare state
in our borders.
While the wealth of the rich
is growing at a breakneck pace, there is a stratification of growth within the
super wealthy, skewed towards the very top.
In
2014, those with over $100 million in private wealth saw their wealth increase
11 percent in one year alone. Collectively, these households owned $10 trillion
in 2014, 6 percent of the world’s private wealth. According to the report,
“This top segment is expected to be the fastest growing, in both the number of
households and total wealth.” They are expected to see 12 percent compound
growth on their wealth in the next five years.
In 2014 the Russell Sage
Foundation found that between
2003 and 2013, the median
household net worth of those in
the United States fell from
$87,992 to $56,335—a drop of 36
percent. While the rich also saw
their wealth drop during the
recession, they are more than
making that money back.
Between 2009 and 2012, 95 percent
of all the income gains in
the US went to the top 1 percent.
This is the most distorted
post-recession income gain on
record.
INCOME PLUMMETS UNDER OBAMA AND
HIS WALL STREET CRONIES
collapse
of household income in the US… STILL BILLIONS IN WELFARE HANDED TO ILLEGALS…
they already get our jobs and are voting for more!
INCOME
PLUMMETS UNDER OBAMA… most jobs go to illegals.
AS HIS CRONY BANKSTERS
CONTINUE TO LOOT, INCOMES PLUMMET FOR AMERICANS (LEGALS).
GOOD TIME FOR AMNESTY FOR
MILLIONS OF LOOTING MEXICANS?
MORE HERE:
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2014/09/and-still-democrat-party-wants-millions.html
“The yearly income of a
typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six
years between 2007 and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013
Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documents
a sharp decline in working class living standards and a further concentration
of wealth in the hands of the rich and the super-rich.”
"During the month,
some 432,000 people in the US gave up looking for a job." EVEN AS JEB BUSH, HILLARY CLINTON and
BERNIE SANDERS PREACH AMNESTY! AMNESTY! AMNESTY! "The American phenomenon
of record stock values fueling an ever greater concentration of wealth at the
very top of society, while the economy is starved of productive investment, the
social infrastructure crumbles, and working class living standards are driven
down by entrenched unemployment, wage-cutting and government austerity
policies, is part of a broader global process." HILLARY
CLINTON'S BIGGEST DONORS ARE OBAMA'S CRIMINAL CRONY BANKSTERS! "A defining expression
of this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the
point where a narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s
resources in order to further enrich itself." Federal Reserve documents stagnant state of US economy
Federal
Reserve documents stagnant state of US economy
The US
Federal Reserve Board last week released its semiannual Monetary Policy Report
to Congress, providing an assessment of the state of the American economy and
outlining the central bank’s monetary policy going forward. The report, along
with Fed Chair Janet Yellen’s testimony before both the House of
Representatives and the Senate, as well as a speech by Yellen the previous week
in Cleveland, present a grim picture of the reality behind the official talk of
economic “recovery.” This was an expected, but nevertheless welcome, signal to the
American financial elite, which has enjoyed a spectacular rise in corporate
profits, stock values and personal wealth since 2009 thanks to the flood of
virtually free money provided by the Fed. In her prepared testimony to the House Financial Services
Committee and the Senate Banking Committee, Yellen noted the following features
of the performance of the US economy over the first six months of 2015: * A sharp decline in the rate of economic growth as compared to
2014, including an actual contraction in the first quarter of the year. * A substantial slackening (19 percent) in average monthly
job-creation, from 260,000 last year to 210,000 thus far in 2015. * Declines in domestic spending and industrial production. In her July 10 speech to the City Club of Cleveland, Yellen
cited an even longer list of negative indices, including: * Growth in real gross domestic product (GDP) since the official
beginning of the recovery in June, 2009 has averaged a mere 2.25 percent per
year, a full one percentage point less than the average rate over the 25 years
preceding what Yellen called the “Great Recession.” * While manufacturing employment nationwide has increased by
about 850,000 since the end of 2009, there are still almost 1.5 million fewer
manufacturing jobs than just before the recession. * Real GDP and industrial production both declined in the first
quarter of this year. Industrial production continued to fall in April and May. * Residential construction (despite extremely low mortgage rates
by historical standards) has remained “quote soft.” * Productivity growth has been “weak,” largely because “Business
owners and managers… have not substantially increased their capital
expenditures,” and “Businesses are holding large amounts of cash on their
balance sheets.” * Reflecting the general stagnation and even slump in the real
economy, core inflation rose by only 1.2 percent over the past 12 months. The Monetary Policy Report issued by the Fed includes facts that
are, if anything, even more alarming, including: * “Labor productivity in the business sector is reported to have
declined in both the fourth quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2015.” * “Exports fell markedly in the first quarter, held back by
lackluster growth abroad.” * “Overall construction activity remains well below its
pre-recession levels.” * “Since the recession began, the gains in… nominal compensation
[workers’ wages and benefits] have fallen well short of their pre-recession
averages, and growth of real compensation has fallen short of productivity
growth over much of this period.” * “Overall business investment has turned down as investment in
the energy sector has plunged. Business investment fell at an annual rate of 2
percent in first quarter… Business outlays for structures outside of the energy
sector also declined in the first quarter…” During the month, some
432,000 people in the US gave up looking for a job.
No comments:
Post a Comment