Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

How the Fed’s Inflation Policies Benefited the Top 1% In Pictures Part 2

Of the total USA net worth (assets minus liabilities) the net worth of the top 1% rose from $4.90 trillion at the end of 1989 to $38.61 trillion at the end of 2020.

Data for this series was downloaded from the Fed report Distribution of Household Wealth in the U.S. since 1989

The charts all show end-of-year figures with the Fed chair at that time in colors.

Total Net Wealth of the Next 9%

Of the total USA net worth (assets minus liabilities) the net worth of the next 9% rose from $7.75 trillion at the end of 1989 to $46.99 trillion at the end of 2020.

The top 10% was worth $15.18 Trillion in 1989 and $81.80 trillion at the end of 2020.

Total Net Wealth of the Next 40%

Of the total USA net worth (assets minus liabilities) the net worth of the next 9% rose from $7.43 trillion at the end of 1989 to $34.81 trillion at the end of 2020.

Total Net Wealth of the Bottom 50%

The total net wealth of the bottom 50% was $0.74 trillion in 1989 and $2.49 trillion at the end of 2020.

Of special note, the total net wealth of the bottom 50% declined by more than half between 1989 and the end of 2010. 

Equities Wealth of the Top 1% 

The equities net worth of the top 1% rose from $0.89 trillion at the end of 1989 to $17.79 trillion at the end of 2020.

Equities includes ETFs, mutual funds, and bonds.

Equities Wealth of the Next 9% 

The equities net worth of the next 9% rose from $0.84 trillion at the end of 1989 to $11.88 trillion at the end of 2020.

Equities Wealth of the Next 40% 

The equities net worth of the next 40% rose from $0.36 trillion at the end of 1989 to $3.66 trillion at the end of 2020.

Equities Wealth of the Bottom 50% 

Real Estate Minus Mortgage Wealth of the Top 1%

This category includes includes all real estate, not just primary residence. Nonetheless, the top 1% only has $4.07 trillion tied up in real estate, a tiny percentage of their wealth. 

Home mortgages only total $0.54 trillion as of the end of 2020. 

Real Estate Minus Mortgage Wealth of the Next 9%

The next 9% have $7.01 trillion tied up in real estate as of the end of 2020 vs $1.69 trillion in 1989.

Home mortgages in this group total $2.71 trillion as of the end of 2020, up from $0.41 trillion at the end of 1989.

Real Estate Minus Mortgage Wealth of the Next 40%

The next 40% have $8.60 trillion tied up in real estate as of the end of 2020 vs $2.28 trillion in 1989.

Home mortgages in this group total $5.23 trillion as of the end of 2020, up from $1.18 trillion at the end of 1989.

A housing slump would hit this group hard.

Real Estate Minus Mortgage Wealth of the Bottom 50%

The bottom 50% have $1.42 trillion tied up in real estate as of the end of 2020 vs $0.21 trillion in 1989.

Home mortgages in this group total $2.46 trillion as of the end of 2020, up from $0.59 trillion at the end of 1989.

The fate of the bottom 50% is totally related to the fate of housing. 

At the end of 2009, the real estate minus mortgage wealth of the bottom 50% was -$0.53 trillion.

Bernanke’s Finest Achievement

Many consider the mortgage debt series and the negative net real estate wealth of the bottom 50% to be Fed Chair Ben Bernanke’s finest achievement.

Count me in that group.

The Fed’s unstated goal is obvious. It hopes to make the bottom 50% and even bottom 90% debt slaves to the banks while transferring all the assets to the top 10%.

Fed’s Unstated Goal

I sarcastically commented that the Fed’s goal is for the top 10% to own all the assets and everyone else the debt.

That is not their stated goal, of course, but that is the result.

The Fed’s inflation policies make homes unaffordable and make it hard for half the nation to save anything at all or buy assets.

In contrast, the Fed’s inflation policies, bank bailouts, and stock market support has done wonders for the top 10%.

The next 40% is losing dramatically to the top 10%.

Stated Inflation Targeting

These events happen in response to the Fed’s stated inflation policies. 

The Fed specifically targets housing by keeping interest rates too low. 

In response, the price of housing has soared.

Inflation a Tax on Consumers

Inflation is a Fed-sponsored tax on consumers. The bottom 50% are getting killed by it.

Yet the Fed wants more of it. It is thus a direct sponsor or wealth inequality.

Hello Fed, Inflation is Rampant and Obvious, Why Can’t You See It?

Home prices have soared well beyond the means of the bottom 50%.

The Fed does not count this as “consumer inflation”.

What’s important? Inflation or the Fed’s and BLS’s perverted sense of inflation?

I strongly suggest the former.

And if we substitute home prices for Owners’ Equivalent Rent (OER) in the CPI we get a better sense of how far off base the Fed and BLS is regarding inflation.

If you don’t like house prices in the CPI then drop the C and rename the index. However, the result of PI is how the Fed has destroyed the middle class for the primary benefit of the top 10%.

For discussion, please see Hello Fed, Inflation is Rampant and Obvious, Why Can’t You See It?

A Word About the CPI 

Earlier today I noted Year-Over-Year CPI Jumps 5%, That’s the Most Since August 2008

For now, the economy is running very hot. Bubbles abound.

The Fed, a collection of groupthink fools, is pleased. Consumers aren’t. And home prices are not even included in the Fed’s measure of inflation.

In case you missed it, please consider How the Fed’s Inflation Policies Benefitted the Top 1% In Pictures Part 1. It’s a look at the above data in percentage terms rather than dollar terms.

Subscribe!

Like these reports? I hope so, and if you do, please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

14 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
amigator
amigator
4 years ago
Good stuff thanks Mish.
Let’s forget about measuring inflation with a basket of goods or a concocted housing weighted measure based on rents.  Let’s make it simple and just use the increase in money or printed dollars that occurs during a year.  All social security checks will be adjusted based on these numbers zero printing zero increase.  Don’t have to worry about hedonic adjustments would greatly simplify the calculation.
More of the population would be able to participate in the wealth created by printing. 
Casual_Observer
Casual_Observer
4 years ago
Somewhat OT but I expect water prices to rise significantly in the west. Those who moved into Western states and left places like California are in for a rude awakening this year. The drought is actually worst in the fastest growing places in the west.
RonJ
RonJ
4 years ago
Part of California is in extreme drought and under water restriction right now. What surprised me is that the state government didn’t place restrictions on all the state, as of yet.
Doug78
Doug78
4 years ago
Wealth and income are two different things. I think that some graphs measuring income and after-tax cash flow of the different tranches would be a good complement to Mish’s analysis.
Felix_Mish
Felix_Mish
4 years ago
Um. Let’s see a picture of today’s “1%” 30 years ago.
Don’t bother with a now-picture of the “1%” of 30 years ago. They are mostly dead.
That picture of how today’s “1%” did over the last 30 years will tell you that the “1%” did very well over the last 30 years. And, and, and water is wet!
Envy porn serves to mislead.
thimk
thimk
4 years ago
not sure you can blame the feds on this round  of CPI inflation , this appears to be structural AND I am not sure the feds can put a lid on it . But rampant  asset inflation is  the the Feds forte . Interesting that the top 1% real estate wealth lags the 9 % and 40 % categories . The 1% favors equities .  
Mish
Mish
4 years ago
Reply to  thimk
The 1% also own businesses 
The 40% are hugely dependent on pensions (not shown) and the subject of another post
Quite interesting data
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
4 years ago
Reply to  thimk
Yes it lags in total but it’s value appreciated much more (8x) over the 30 year time frame than the next 9%/40% did (~4.5x).
That’s probably indicative of the quality of what they own (ocean/beach front or skyscrapers in Manhattan etc)
RonJ
RonJ
4 years ago
“Home prices have soared well beyond the means of the bottom 50%.”
Some California legislators want to fix that by allowing people to buy half a house, with the state creating an entity to fund the other half.
Since2008
Since2008
4 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
Then the prices of houses will go higher to absorb the money the state puts into the house. Then, after that, the state will put in more money and the price will go even higher. Then, after that, the state will simply own the houses and loan or rent them to ever the state decides, fairly, should have them.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
4 years ago
Mish you wrote “The next 40% is losing dramatically to the top 10%.”
But in the first set of charts (the total net wealth ones) the Top 1% wealth and 10% wealth went from 5-38 and 7-46 while the next 40% went from 7-34. They all rose close to the same (1% or so difference).
Also this is over 30 years (1989-2020). That represents 5% increase per year (1.05^30)=4.32 and 4.32*7.43=32.01 (the next 40% numbers). So the next 9% at about 6% and the top 1% at about 7%. It’s not dramatically different though obviously over time an extra 1% adds up and that’s what you see over 30 years time.
yooj
yooj
4 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65

And there’s mobility. The members of the one percent this year are not the same as last year, let alone ten years ago.

And there’s unmeasured wealth, wealth not captured by ownership of financial assets.  I’m typing this post while listening to streaming music, from my instant-access catalog of … almost every recording ever made. Thusly, I have more wealth in recorded music today than even a one percenter had in 1989, when the series plotted above begins.  
Wealth comparisons over time are different than standard of living comparisons, yet some perspective of the latter should inform the former.

RonJ
RonJ
4 years ago
Hello Fed, Inflation is Rampant and Obvious, Why Can’t You See It?”
Because the FED has an agenda. When the agenda requires not seeing something, such as 2% inflation is not stable prices…

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.