One of the more dismal facts about the US economy, right up there with the Gargantuan debt figure, is the shrinking average wage being handing out to Joe Citizen, assuming Joe Citizen is lucky enough to have a job in a country where nominal unemployment is above 9% and real unemployment is probably above 15%.
Alan Krueger, a labor economist and the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, has been tracking the growth of inequality in the Land of the Brave and the Home of the Free for the last few decades. On 12 January he gave a scathing speech on this theme to the Center for American Progress.
For most of his working career, Krueger said, he has resisted the term “inequality”, preferring to use the more emotionally neutered phrase “income dispersion” to reflect the way rewards flow from the economy to the pockets of individual citizens. However, as he put it:
This is not just a matter of intrinsic fairness and decency. The US economy is actually ossifying, Krueger argues, and the major motor of US economic growth, consumer spending, is being throttled by too much flowing into the bank accounts of too few. Billionaires do not spend anything like as much as would be the case if the same amount of money was dispersed over a much larger number of consumers. They simply end up fretting about where they can “store” their vast surpluses more efficiently to avoid it being leached away by either inflation or the periodic economic contractions that sweep through advanced economies with depressing regularity.
There is a not so comic parallel here with the traditional land owners of a few centuries past whose granaries were bursting, and who worried about rats getting at the grain, while the peasants starved.
Krueger quotes a telling phrase from a recent speech by President Obama on the theme of rising inequality:
The figures behind this concern do not make pretty reading. The annualized growth rate of real incomes for the period from the end of the Second World War to the late 1970s were roughly the same across the whole spectrum of incomes. Since the 1970s, however, those at the top of the scale have surged forward while those at the bottom of the scale have seen their incomes shrink. Those in the middle have barely trod water. Instead of growing together, the US is growing apart…
Krueger gives former President Clinton, now regarded as at least partially to blame for the 2008 crash since he was responsible for both repealing Glass Steagal and stoking the sub-prime mortgage market, some praise here. The history of incomes shows that during the eight years of Clinton’s tenure in the White House, from 1992 to 2000, all income groups experienced their fastest ever income growth.
Under Presidents Bush, father and son, as reported by the impartial Congressional Budget Office, the top 1% of families saw a 278% increase in their real after tax income, while the middle 60% saw a real increase of less than 40%. Not surprisingly, the distance between the top 1% and the trailing pack is now obscenely large. According to Krueger, the change has been the equivalent of shifting $1.1 trillion of annual income to the top 1% of families. “Put it another way, the increase in the share of income going to the top 1% of families over this period exceeds the total amount of income that the entire bottom 40% of households receives,” he says.
The path the US is on is simply not sustainable, he concludes. “Ohhh say can you see…”
By Anthony Harrington