How America’s 1% Came to Dominate Equity Ownership

hank

“The wealthiest US households are strengthening their grip over corporate America. The richest 1 per cent of Americans now account for more than half the value of equities owned by US households, according to Goldman Sachs.”

Financial Times 2/11/2020 FT can be hard to access after a few hits. Clearing last few from device cache may help.
-

Related article sheds a little more light on issue :

“Despite the fact that almost half of all households owned stock shares either directly or indirectly through mutual funds, trusts, or various pension accounts, the richest 10% of households controlled 84% of the total value of these stocks in 2016” - http://money.com/stock-ownership-10-percent-richest/


(Possibly fodder for an expository essay on “The American Dream ... “ )

Gary1952

People make choices. New cars, new iPhones, cigarettes, vaping, huge cable bills, drinking etc. over saving.

Mark

Rent, daycare and/or senior care, medication, transportation.... you make it sound so simple Gary. If only huh? Having been at the bottom of the ladder with not enough after paying the basics to even think of purchasing items from your list above I'll just say that not everyone fits your convenient mold. However, they do make choices.

hank

(Thanks for the sanity @Mark.)

Admission - I am not and never have been one of the 1% wealthiest Americans.

Trying to figure out where I went wrong ...

- New cars - Yep.

- New iPhones - Nope. Buy good used ones from sellers on Amazon. Generally 3-5 years old by the time I get them.

- Cigarettes - Never. (Smoked an occasional cheap cigar when younger)

- Vaping - Nope.

- Huge cable bills - Nope. No cable / broadband in this area (But pay $100 a month for DirectTV)

- Drinking - Yep. Plenty during college and younger years. Just couple a day now.

- Savings - Yep. More than average I suspect.


Must have been the new cars, cheap cigars and booze that kept me from being one of those frugal 1% ers. (Doesn’t sounds like much fun however.)

Gary1952

How funny this type of article quotes % but not dollars. Currently about $1.2m net in wealth is top 10%. If one starts saving at first real job then it should be attainable with some discipline. Yep, choices.

LewisBraham

For Republicans, the mantra is always “personal responsibility.” Where was the personal responsibility for the executives of the banks during the 2008 and 2009 financial crisis? They point to the consumers of alcohol, opioids and cigarettes but not to the merchants of alcohol, opioids and cigarettes. What they really mean is personal responsibility for you but not for me.

jerry

If I read the article correctly since 1990 the bottom 99% sold about 1 trillion in stock to the 1%.That is surely significant but I would guess that if you are in the 1% you probably never had to sell stock because you need the money(perhaps to repair the roof)

Actually a famous financial writer(no, I don't remember who)
noted that the roof was a terrible market timer
BY the way I would be interested in the assets and or the income it takes to be top !% , Top 5%,Top 10% . top 25%. Does anyone have a link or the numbers?

Old_Joe

@jerry- Try this link.

catch22

Thanks, @Old_Joe

@jerry

A link from within the link OJ posted that may be of interest, too.

American Retirement Savings by Age

rono

Howdy folks,

You can quibble about the precise figures but the nut is that the distribution of wealth is the worst it's ever been in this country and getting worse. The middle class has been largely exterminated and the two historical pathways to that status - manufacturing jobs and education - have been either outsourced/automated or made impossible to afford. Good grief, people, the U.S. government is charging interest on student loans to the people least able to afford an education AND they continue to accrue interest and penalties. This is such utter bullshit.

This isn't capitalism any more people. It used to be but no longer. For capitalism to work you must have competition and how is it competitive when you handicap a percentage of your population with inadequate health care or education. You must have both universal health care and education. Otherwise, it's a rigged game. Hell, it's not capitalism but a form of neo feudal economic slavery.

And this sort of thing has always led to bad outcomes.

and so it goes,

peace,

rono

catch22

Hi @rono

Excellent summary of the state of affairs.

Take care of you and yours,
Catch

Old_Joe

@rono- Well said, sir.

Thank you and take care-
OJ

Starchild

rono said:

Howdy folks,

You can quibble about the precise figures but the nut is that the distribution of wealth is the worst it's ever been in this country and getting worse. The middle class has been largely exterminated and the two historical pathways to that status - manufacturing jobs and education - have been either outsourced/automated or made impossible to afford. Good grief, people, the U.S. government is charging interest on student loans to the people least able to afford an education AND they continue to accrue interest and penalties. This is such utter bullshit.

This isn't capitalism any more people. It used to be but no longer. For capitalism to work you must have competition and how is it competitive when you handicap a percentage of your population with inadequate health care or education. You must have both universal health care and education. Otherwise, it's a rigged game. Hell, it's not capitalism but a form of neo feudal economic slavery.

And this sort of thing has always led to bad outcomes.

and so it goes,

peace,

rono

I doubt the wealthy became wealthy through manufacturing jobs. Maybe 100 years ago, but times have changed. This sounds like a political rant. Let's leave politics in a different place and focus on investing, please?

Mark

@Starchild - you do see that this is an Off-Topic posting right? Fair game. I would also argue that ever since Citizens United politics has become the biggest game in town.

Gary1952

Starchild said:

rono said:

Howdy folks,

You can quibble about the precise figures but the nut is that the distribution of wealth is the worst it's ever been in this country and getting worse. The middle class has been largely exterminated and the two historical pathways to that status - manufacturing jobs and education - have been either outsourced/automated or made impossible to afford. Good grief, people, the U.S. government is charging interest on student loans to the people least able to afford an education AND they continue to accrue interest and penalties. This is such utter bullshit.

This isn't capitalism any more people. It used to be but no longer. For capitalism to work you must have competition and how is it competitive when you handicap a percentage of your population with inadequate health care or education. You must have both universal health care and education. Otherwise, it's a rigged game. Hell, it's not capitalism but a form of neo feudal economic slavery.

And this sort of thing has always led to bad outcomes.

and so it goes,

peace,

rono

I doubt the wealthy became wealthy through manufacturing jobs. Maybe 100 years ago, but times have changed. This sounds like a political rant. Let's leave politics in a different place and focus on investing, please?

+1. Exactly. Capitalism is not competition at the worker level.

Mona

Gary1952 said:

Starchild said:

rono said:

Howdy folks,

You can quibble about the precise figures but the nut is that the distribution of wealth is the worst it's ever been in this country and getting worse. The middle class has been largely exterminated and the two historical pathways to that status - manufacturing jobs and education - have been either outsourced/automated or made impossible to afford. Good grief, people, the U.S. government is charging interest on student loans to the people least able to afford an education AND they continue to accrue interest and penalties. This is such utter bullshit.

This isn't capitalism any more people. It used to be but no longer. For capitalism to work you must have competition and how is it competitive when you handicap a percentage of your population with inadequate health care or education. You must have both universal health care and education. Otherwise, it's a rigged game. Hell, it's not capitalism but a form of neo feudal economic slavery.

And this sort of thing has always led to bad outcomes.

and so it goes,

peace,

rono

I doubt the wealthy became wealthy through manufacturing jobs. Maybe 100 years ago, but times have changed. This sounds like a political rant. Let's leave politics in a different place and focus on investing, please?

+1. Exactly. Capitalism is not competition at the worker level.

Gary1952, I knew you missed the good 'ol days of the M* Off-Topic forum.

Old_Joe

Since when is commentary regarding the evisceration of the middle class, or a country's social and living conditions "politics"?

@rono's post is an unsettling but factual observation on the change in historical living, financial, and social conditions in the United States.

LewisBraham

This "don't talk about politics" refrain which usually comes from people who don't like the persuasion of the politics being discussed reminds me of an old joke in which two prudish ladies buttonhole Noah Webster and say, "Mr. Webster, why did you put so many dirty words in your dictionary?" To wit, Webster replies: "How did you know those words were in there if you weren't looking for them yourselves?" In other words, if you don't like political discussions, why do you click on posts that clearly have political overtones? No one is forcing you to read these off-topic discussions. That's why they're labeled "off topic." And the idea that money and investing have nothing to do with politics is patently absurd. They have everything to do with politics. A whole category of socially-responsible investing now is tied to that political sphere with many trillions invested in it. Meanwhile, the remaining non-ESG investment sphere is tied to politics by tacitly endorsing the status quo--the wholesale abuse of labor and our environment.

Starchild

LewisBraham said:

This "don't talk about politics" refrain which usually comes from people who don't like the persuasion of the politics being discussed reminds me of an old joke in which two prudish ladies buttonhole Noah Webster and say, "Mr. Webster, why did you put so many dirty words in your dictionary?" To wit, Webster replies: "How did you know those words were in there if you weren't looking for them yourselves?" In other words, if you don't like political discussions, why do you click on posts that clearly have political overtones? No one is forcing you to read these off-topic discussions. That's why they're labeled "off topic." And the idea that money and investing have nothing to do with politics is patently absurd. They have everything to do with politics. A whole category of socially-responsible investing now is tied to that political sphere with many trillions invested in it. Meanwhile, the remaining non-ESG investment sphere is tied to politics by tacitly endorsing the status quo--the wholesale abuse of labor and our environment.

Not really. I come to this site to read about mutual funds. I thought something about "equity ownership" in the title had something to with related interest. But yes, it's an off-topic post, so if you all are interested in carrying on, I'll stay out of the way. No need to be fussy.