Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
|
 |
02-11-2008, 23:39 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Military Professional
Moderator
Join Date: 02-23-05
Location: Krblachistan
Country: 
|
You Are What You Spend
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/opinion/10cox.html
Quote:
You Are What You Spend
WITH markets swinging widely, the Federal Reserve slashing interest rates and the word “recession” on everybody’s lips, renewed attention is being given to the gap between the haves and have-nots in America. Most of this debate, however, is focused on the wrong measurement of financial well-being.
It’s true that the share of national income going to the richest 20 percent of households rose from 43.6 percent in 1975 to 49.6 percent in 2006, the most recent year for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has complete data. Meanwhile, families in the lowest fifth saw their piece of the pie fall from 4.3 percent to 3.3 percent.
Income statistics, however, don’t tell the whole story of Americans’ living standards. Looking at a far more direct measure of American families’ economic status — household consumption — indicates that the gap between rich and poor is far less than most assume, and that the abstract, income-based way in which we measure the so-called poverty rate no longer applies to our society.
The top fifth of American households earned an average of $149,963 a year in 2006. As shown in the first accompanying chart, they spent $69,863 on food, clothing, shelter, utilities, transportation, health care and other categories of consumption. The rest of their income went largely to taxes and savings.
The bottom fifth earned just $9,974, but spent nearly twice that — an average of $18,153 a year. How is that possible? A look at the far right-hand column of the consumption chart, labeled “financial flows,” shows why: those lower-income families have access to various sources of spending money that doesn’t fall under taxable income. These sources include portions of sales of property like homes and cars and securities that are not subject to capital gains taxes, insurance policies redeemed, or the drawing down of bank accounts. While some of these families are mired in poverty, many (the exact proportion is unclear) are headed by retirees and those temporarily between jobs, and thus their low income total doesn’t accurately reflect their long-term financial status.
So, bearing this in mind, if we compare the incomes of the top and bottom fifths, we see a ratio of 15 to 1. If we turn to consumption, the gap declines to around 4 to 1. A similar narrowing takes place throughout all levels of income distribution. The middle 20 percent of families had incomes more than four times the bottom fifth. Yet their edge in consumption fell to about 2 to 1.
Let’s take the adjustments one step further. Richer households are larger — an average of 3.1 people in the top fifth, compared with 2.5 people in the middle fifth and 1.7 in the bottom fifth. If we look at consumption per person, the difference between the richest and poorest households falls to just 2.1 to 1. The average person in the middle fifth consumes just 29 percent more than someone living in a bottom-fifth household.
To understand why consumption is a better guideline of economic prosperity than income, it helps to consider how our lives have changed. Nearly all American families now have refrigerators, stoves, color TVs, telephones and radios. Air-conditioners, cars, VCRs or DVD players, microwave ovens, washing machines, clothes dryers and cellphones have reached more than 80 percent of households.
As the second chart, on the spread of consumption, shows, this wasn’t always so. The conveniences we take for granted today usually began as niche products only a few wealthy families could afford. In time, ownership spread through the levels of income distribution as rising wages and falling prices made them affordable in the currency that matters most — the amount of time one had to put in at work to gain the necessary purchasing power.
At the average wage, a VCR fell from 365 hours in 1972 to a mere two hours today. A cellphone dropped from 456 hours in 1984 to four hours. A personal computer, jazzed up with thousands of times the computing power of the 1984 I.B.M., declined from 435 hours to 25 hours. Even cars are taking a smaller toll on our bank accounts: in the past decade, the work-time price of a mid-size Ford sedan declined by 6 percent.
There are several reasons that the costs of goods have dropped so drastically, but perhaps the biggest is increased international trade. Imports lower prices directly. Cheaper inputs cut domestic companies’ costs. International competition forces producers everywhere to become more efficient and hold down prices. Nations do what they do best and trade for the rest.
Thus there is a certain perversity to suggestions that the proper reaction to a potential recession is to enact protectionist measures. While foreign competition may have eroded some American workers’ incomes, looking at consumption broadens our perspective. Simply put, the poor are less poor. Globalization extends and deepens a capitalist system that has for generations been lifting American living standards — for high-income households, of course, but for low-income ones as well.
W. Michael Cox is the senior vice president and chief economist and Richard Alm is the senior economics writer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
|
__________________
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3
Last edited by Shek : 02-11-2008 at 23:42 PM.
|
|
|
|
02-15-2008, 16:34 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Military Professional
Join Date: 09-25-07
Location: Megalopolis, US
Country:
|
The BLS defends my assertion that the US has an unmatchedly outstanding "quality of life"
__________________
"If we will not be governed by God then we will be ruled by tyrants" -William Penn
|
|
|
|
|
02-15-2008, 16:38 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: 08-03-03
Location: Montreal, Canada
Country: 
|
Quote:
|
The BLS defends my assertion that the US has an unmatchedly outstanding "quality of life"
|
It really doesn't defend that assertion at all because it says absolutely nothing about the rest of the world, this article happens to be just about America, which is fine. |
|
|
|
|
02-15-2008, 19:59 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Patron
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZFBoxcar
It really doesn't defend that assertion at all because it says absolutely nothing about the rest of the world, this article happens to be just about America, which is fine.
|
Please describe to me the quality of life in any other country of which you are thinking. |
|
|
|
|
02-15-2008, 20:47 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: 08-03-03
Location: Montreal, Canada
Country:
|
Quote:
|
Please describe to me the quality of life in any other country of which you are thinking.
|
You may have already read the reply I made originally, but I deleted it because I don't want to take this thread off topic...my bad 
Last edited by ZFBoxcar : 02-16-2008 at 09:54 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:52 AM.
|
| 
Similar Threads
