Greetings to Mariposa County Board of Supervisors, January 23, 2026
I am sending some facts about the U.S. economy to elected officials and to candidates for office. This is a background description of inequality of income and wealth. Social cohesion is decaying and hollowing out.
I have written a blog for over 15 years, "Economics Without Greed, Part Two" (http://benL88.blogspot.com). Severe inequality has a poisonous effect on social unity and cohesion. As a result over 40% of U.S. citizens live with incomes insufficient to meet normal living expenses -- see the end of this essay for details and links.
Income Growth -- RealTime Inequality
Since 1976, 50 years ago, the pre-tax market incomes of the lower earning half of U.S. households rose by $2,100 (from $16,900 to $19,000), while the income of the top 1% rose by $2,005,000 (from $795,000 to $2,800,000) -- that in a nutshell is the problem with the U.S. economy. Those figures come from the web page RealTime Inequality, a data source created by University of California Berkeley economists. I'll also document the Congressional Budget Offices two recent reports on Income Distribution, 2022 and 2026. The CBO has very similar findings, not as drastic but also shocking. Over 40% of U.S. adults live with insufficient incomes to pay for normal expenses. I cover this assertion in other essays at my blog.
Half of the U.S. citizens have income growth of $2,100 and while 1% have growth of $2,000,000 -- extremely unequal.
The graph:
Top 0.01% -- 570% $61 million 5.1% Top 0.1% -- 378% $13 million 10.6% Top 1% -- 224% $2.7 million 22.4% 90% to 99% -- 79% $390 K 28.9% -- 51.3% for top 10% 50% to 90% -- 30% $117 K 38.5% lower 50% -- 19% $25 K 10.3% -- 48.8% for lower 90% If 100 households share a total income of $100, then today's top 10 get $5.13 each. And the lower 90 households receive ($48.80 divided by 90) $0.54 each This is pre-tax and pre-social-benefit-transfer income. This ratio can also be expressed as: every $1 received by the lower 90, the top 10 receive $9.50. -- $1 for ninety, $9.50 to ten -- 1 to 9.5 This is pre-tax and pre-transfer. The post-tax distribution by share of total income is 0.01% receive 3.2% 0.1% receive 6.9% 1% receive 15.8% 90% to 99% receive 25.2% top 10% receive 41.0% 50 to 90% receive 42.5% lower 50% receive 16.5% lower 90% receive 59% If again 100 households' combined income is $100, then the top 10 get $4.10 each. And the lower 90 households receive ($59 divided by 90) $0.66 each. The ratio is $1 for all 90 households and $6 for the top 10 percent households. -- 1 to 6.
We live in a $1 to $6 economy, after distributing all social benefits and collecting all taxes , all households below 90% earn $1, while all above 90% earn $6.
I sought confirmation in the CBO reports on income distribution.
Income Growth -- Congressional Budget Office
The Congressional Budget Office's report (CBO), covering a 39 year period (1989 to 2018), also concurs in its report "The Distribution of Household Income in 2018". (The newest report just published in January 2026 covers years 2019 to 2022.) We can uncover data from 1979 to 2022, showing growth of all types of income for all income groups by opening the Supplemental Data section, Table 5. The full table is enormous and complicated; it has just over 10,000 spreadsheet cells. There are 23 horizontal sources of income groups matched vertically with 439 income-group-by-year vertical cells, 1979 to 2022. It shows incomes of all quintiles (20%s) of earners, and the smaller breakdown of the top 20% -- the 81 to 90%tiles, the 91 to 95%tiles, the 95 to 99th percentiles, and the top 1 percentile from 1979 to 2022, 43 years. It's an enormous file showing all possible sources of income. Its findings somewhat match the RealTime Inequality report. I spent more than an hour digging through it, the simple conclusion perhaps is this: in 43 years the middle quintile income grew by 40% and the top One percent group grew its income by 306%. Get the idea? Does it match RealTime Inequality? RTEq shows the top 1% grew its income from $843,700 to $2,700,000 (1979 to 2022). Almost the same as CBO, which shows $664,700 to $2,700,900.
Here's the CBO graph showing the general trend, but the exact numbers are missing, therefore we have to open the Supplemental Data, and find Table 5, which corresponds to the graph below on page 13.
The 2018 report has related files, "Data Underlying Figures", showing tables with exact numbers. The first report shows between 1989 and 2018 the top 1% increased their income from $584,900 in 1989 to $1,999,200 in 2018, nearly tripling its income, an income gain of $1,414,300. The lower 80% of households saw wage income increases ranging from $2,000 to $10,000. Again: $1,414,300 for the top 1% -- $2,000 to $10,000 in wage increases for the lower 80%. On the following link you'll find (Supplemental Data, Chart 5, Income Before Taxes and Transfers) and Data Underlying Figures" and there one finds Table 18 explaining precisely the changes in the graph on page 13.
You can go there and see for yourself, but it is huge and complicated.
Here's the first graphic from the first CBO report:
Again, the income of each household in the upper 20% and lower 80% -----
If 100 households earn $100, and the pre-tax ratio is 56.1% for 20 and 43.9% for 80, then $2.80 is the average income for each in the top 20 (56/2=28), and $0.55 is the income for each in the lower 80%. That's also a ratio of $1 for all the lower 80s, and $5.09 for all in the top 20. ------ 1 to 5 economy -- pre-tax. -- according to CBO, not RealTime Ineq.
With post-tax the ratio is 49.3% for the lower 80% and 50.7% to upper 20%. Each in the lower 80% receives $0.62 and each in the upper 20% receive $2.53. Or each in the lower 80% receive $1 and the upper 20 each receive (2.53 divided by 0.62) $4.08. Post-tax and post-transfer, year 2022. ---- 1 to 4 economy -- post-tax.
The new 2026 report with data to 2022 shows, (Data Underlying Figures, Figure 5) income increases of just 3 quintiles, the lower 20%, the middle 20%, the topmost 20%.
The lower 20% see a wage and salary increase of $8,000 (from $16,200 to $26,200),
the middle 20% an increase of $31,300 (from $67,000 to $98,300) and
the top 20% an increase of $239,600 (from $173,000 to $412,600).
Up $8,000 -- up $31,300 -- up $239,600 -- very unequal.
The new report also shows the increase of income 1979 to 2022: the lower 20% increased their income by 44%, the middle income 20% increased 47%, the top 0.01% by 537%, from just under $7 million in 1989 to $44.5 million in 2022 (see Figures 5 and 6).
RealTime Inequality mirrors this enormous one-sided growth dilemma.
Since 1979 the share of total national income going to the top 10% of households increased by 9.2% of national income; this implies a loss of $21,300 to ALL 107 million households in the lower-income 80%. A huge loss for 80% of households. (see Figure 8) Go to the graph above, add $21,300 to each post-tax income in the lower 80% --
Change the Q 1 from $26,200 to $47,500
Q2 from $58,100 to $80,400
Q3 from $94,000 to $115,300
Q4 from $143,100 to $164,400.
and reduce Q5 from $412,500 to $330,400.
The ratio between Q1 and Q5 shifts from 1 to 15.7 to 1 to 7.0. A better world.
Imagine, an income increase up to $44.5 million per year! That's about 500 times the income of the middle earning family. Funny how most people contribute so much and are rewarded with so little. Looking at average wealth between the middle and the to 0.01% is astronomical -- $956,500,000 average wealth for 0.01% of tax payer units (18,000), and $890 for 50% of taxpayer units (92 million). To say inequality is severe is to mollify the reality. Horrendous is a better description. (Data from RealTime Inequality)
The $79 Trillion Heist
FYI -- total household net worth (private savings) is $184 trillion (Flow of Funds, Z1 -- Federal Reserve, March 2026) This $184 tr. is over 7.94 times the total disposable income, while the average for 50 years, 1947 to 1997, was 5.2 times. About 33% (or $60 trillion) of wealth is excessive, and maybe the excess should be 50%. We could create a wealth tax and use the surplus hoarded resources for social needs: permanently affordable housing, Medicare for All, childcare, food assistance, tuition free higher education, solar conversion, housing insulation, recreation departments in all towns and cities, etc., etc..
An article at the American Prospect magazine confirms this analysis, “The $79 Trillion Heist” by Harold Meyerson. An excerpt: "A 2021 EPI study shows that between 1979 and 2019, real yearly wages for the bottom 90 percent of workers increased by 26 percent, while the wages of those in the 95th to 99th percentile increased by 75 percent, for those in the top 1 percent by 160 percent, and for those in the top 0.1 percent by 345 percent. Worker pay ratios over the past decade have shown that CEOs usually make about 300 times what their median-paid employee makes, a far cry from the 1960s, when the ratio was roughly 20-to-1. . . . As the size of the bottom 90 percent of the U.S. workforce is roughly 140 million people, that means that the average earner would have made about $28,000 more in 2023 than they actually did."
The RAND Corporation report
The RAND Corporation’s report “Trends in Income 1975 to 2018” shows that median worker’s income grew from $42,000 in 1975 to $50,000 in 2018, a gain of $8,000. The counterfactual income, had wages grown at the rate of total economic growth, shows median income would have reached $92,000, a $50,000 gain (not an $8,000 gain).
The Economic Policy Institute report
Lastly, a look at the Economic Policy Institute's report on income inequality may cement the issue. They show that today's income for production/nonsupervisory workers would be 62% more had total compensation tracked the growth of productivity. Today's average annual income for nonsupervisory workers is $56,020 (see here, Nov. 2025 report). A gain of 62% more would bring average incomes to over $90,920.
Between 1951 and 2023 (72 years) the
lower 90% of workers income grew from $18,871 to $43,035, up 128% or $24,164.
The top 10% saw growth from $63,595 to $250,792, up 294% or $187,197.
The top 1% saw growth from $163,064 to $794,129, up 387% or $631,065.
The top 0.1% saw growth from $442,603 to $2,805,105, up 534% or $2,362,497.
Wealth Growth
Wealth also had a similar pattern; the lower half of households grew their average savings by $6,200 (from $2,800 to $9,000), while the top 1% grew its average wealth by $17,400,000 from $2.9 million to $20.3 million as reported by RealTime Inequality. The very topmost wealth holders, the 0.01%, some 25 thousand individuals, grew their average wealth total from around $30 million to over $600 million. The CBO states wealth at the 25th percentile is $36,800 and at the 90th percentile $2,330,000 – a difference of 63 times. (CBO, “Trends in the Distribution of Family Wealth, 1989 to 2019")
A stark comparison of average wealth amounts is shown in the CBO report on wealth. Calculating from Data Underlying Figures, Figure 5, it shows that for every $1 of savings held by the lower 50%, the next 40% holds $13, the next 9% holds $76, and the top 1% holds $634. Half own $1, the next 40 own $13, the next 9 own $76, the last 1 owns $634.
That’s a ratio of 1 to 13 to 76 to 634 – extreme inequality of wealth.
From RealTime Inequality, average wealth growth since 1976 for the top 0.01% , the top 1%, and the middle 40% between 50th and 90th percentiles:
Comparison of growth rates --
Between 1989 and 2022, a 33 year period,
the "average weekly earnings of 80% of U.S. workers increased by 17%;
the "real" median household income increased by 20%;
the "real" per capita income increased by 70%;
and the total national private wealth increased by 282%, or by a multiple of 3.82, meaning wealth almost quadrupled. This is a portrait of uneven distribution of income and wealth.
At my blog I link the data to sources with hyper-links: Eighty percent of workers are "nonsupervisory workers" and their "average weekly earnings" have gone up 17% in the same 33 years, 1989 to 2022. -- https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000031
It’s important to note that the annual income of these 82% of workers was higher in 1973 than in 2025 – higher! For all Men, not just nonsuperivsory working men, annual income especially was 1% higher in 2025 than in 1979 (see the Federal Reserve FRED graph).
The “Real Median Household Income” since 1984 went up by only 24%. (see FRED)
The national "disposable personal income" per capita in chained 2017 dollars shows an increase of 70% between 1989 and 2022, and between 1973 and 2022 it went up by 130%. (BEA.gov, Table 2.1, Line 39)
The Congressional Budget Office report on wealth, "Trends in the Distribution of Family Wealth, 1989 to 2022" states: "Total Wealth. --- Adjusted for inflation, the wealth held by families in the United States almost quadrupled between 1989 and 2022, rising from $52 trillion (in 2022 dollars) to $199 trillion, at an average rate of about 4 percent per year.” That is a "real" gain of 282% or a multiple of 3.82. It “almost quadrupled”.
The Federal Reserve in its Flow of Funds report for January 2026 shows total “household net worth”, or private wealth, is $181.632 trillion. The CBO reports 1% own 33% or $60 trillion, and per household that is $135 million. The lower-saving 50% own 2.5%, or almost $68,000 on average. But that is deceptive.
Hardship and Insecurity -- over 40%
About 40% of U.S. Adults report economic fragility, hardship, insecurity:
The top 0.01%, about 18,000 individuals, receive an average annual income of $44.5 million (CBO report) and have an average wealth of $617 million. The lower 20% have average incomes of $20,000 and wealth around $7,000 if that. 42.5% of adults would not be able to pay normal expenses after 30 days if they lost their main source of income – they obviously have little to no savings. (from “Making Ends Meet”, a survey from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, page 18) This report from the CFPB shows how fragile the circumstances are for a near majority of American adults and their families. I report at my latest blog essay 4 other studies that reiterate the above 40% economic insecurity, a study from the United Way charity, another from the U.S. Census Supplemental Poverty Measure, the Pulse Survey from the U.S. Census, and another from the Brookings Institute. Look for sub-heading "40%, 41%, 42%, 43% Live in Poverty or Hardship" here and here for links.
That's our economy: very low and slow income growth for lower-income working people coupled with persistent worry, anxiety, and unhappiness. The entire economy grows slowly but is unevenly distributed. And growth of wealth accumulation is unnaturally rapid which distorts the housing market and other areas of pricing. When wealth expands with hypertrophy we have a social disaster such as the Great Depression of 1929 to 1937.
There are solutions, many ways to improve this condition. But awareness is the first step to finding solutions.
_______________________________________________________________________
I wrote an essay titled “Solutions”, the December 2024 article at my blog,
Economics Without Greed, Part Two, http://benL88.blogspot.com.
My latest essay is about Precarity, Insecurity, Anxiety – effecting 40% of the U.S.
Hope this helps. Yours, Ben Leet
I live in Mariposa, California.
_________________________________________________________________
I'm working on a Table of Contents for this blog. Maybe by end of January I'll post it.
No comments:
Post a Comment