Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Incomes for 2009 and 2010 reported today. Richest one percent way up. Lower 99 percent down. BIG SURPRISE!

Posted 8 years ago on Oct. 21, 2011, 8:46 p.m. EST by Mcc (542)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

MIAMI (CBSMiami.com) – Florida is touting the new jobs it created Friday after a positive unemployment report. But based on numbers from all W-2’s filed in the country, the wages simply aren’t keeping up.

According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 99 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively.

The sobering numbers were a far cry from what was going on for the richest one percent of Americans.

The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion.

In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009.

Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.

11 Comments

11 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

Another word about the first Great Depression. It really was a perfect storm. Caused almost entirely by greed. First, there was unprecedented economic growth. There was a massive building spree. There was a growing sense of optimism and materialism. There was a growing obsession for celebrities. The American people became spoiled, foolish, naive, brainwashed, and love-sick. They were bombarded with ads for one product or service after another. Encouraged to spend all of their money as if it were going out of style. Obscene profits were hoarded at the top. All of this represented a MASSIVE transfer of wealth from poor to rich. Executives, entrepreneurs, developers, celebrities, and share holders. By 1929, America's wealthiest 1 percent had accumulated around 40% of all United States wealth. The upper class held around 30%. The middle and lower classes were left to share the rest. When the majority finally ran low on money to spend, profits declined and the stock market crashed. Of course, the rich threw a fit and started cutting jobs. They would stop at nothing to maintain their disgusting profit margins and ill-gotten obscene levels of wealth as long as possible. The small business owners did what they felt necessary to survive. They cut more jobs. The losses were felt primarily by the little guy. This created a domino effect. The middle class shrunk drastically and the lower class expanded. With less wealth in reserve and active circulation, banks failed by the hundreds. More jobs were cut. Unemployment reached 25% in 1933. The worst year of the Great Depression. Those who were employed had to settle for much lower wages. Millions went cold and hungry. The recovery involved a massive infusion of new currency, a World War, and higher taxes on the rich. With so many men in the service, so many women on the production line, and those higher taxes to help pay for it, the lions share of United States wealth was gradually transfered back to the middle class. This redistribution of wealth continued until the mid seventies. This was the recovery. A massive redistribution of wealth. 

Then it began to concentrate all over again. Here we are 35 years later. The richest one percent now own well over 40 percent of all US wealth. The lower 90 percent own less than 10 percent of all US wealth. This is true even after taxes, welfare, financial aid, and charity. It is the underlying cause.   No redistribution. No recovery.

The government won't step in and do what's necessary. Not this time. It's up to us. Support small business more and big business less. Support the little guy more and the big guy less. It's tricky but not impossible.

No redistribution. No recovery.

[-] 2 points by anamericancitizen (19) 8 years ago

Nice history lesson and sound logic.

[-] 3 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

We have been mislead by Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, and nearly every other public figure. Economic growth, job creation, and actual prosperity are not necessarily a package deal. In fact, the first two are horribly misunderstood. Economic growth/loss (GDP) is little more than a measure of wealth changing hands. A transfer of currency from one party to another. The rate at which it is traded. This was up until mid ’07′ however, has never been a measure of actual prosperity. Neither has job creation. The phrase itself has been thrown around so often, and in such a generic politicali manner, that it has come to mean nothing. Of course, we need to have certain things done for the benefit of society as a whole. We need farmers, builders, manufacturers, transporters, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, mechanics, sanitationi workers, doctors, managers, and visionaries. Their work is vital. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that we need politicians, attorneys, bankers, investors, and entertainers. In order to keep them productive, we must provide reasonable incentives. We need to compensate each by a fair measure for their actual contributions to society. We need to provide a reasonable scale of income opportunity for every independent adult, every provider, and share responsibility for those who have a legitimate need for aid. In order to achieve and sustain this, we must also address the cost of living and the distribution of wealth. Here, we have failed miserably. The majority have already lost their home equity, their financial security, and their relative buying power. The middle class have actually lost much of their ability to make ends meet, re-pay loans, pay taxes, and support their own economy. The lower class have gone nearly bankrupt. In all, its a multi-trillion dollar loss taken over about 30 years. Millions are under the impression that we need to create more jobs simply to provide more opportunity. as if that would solve the problem. It won’t. Not by a longshot. Jobs don’t necessarily create wealth. In fact, they almost never do. For the mostpart, they only transfer wealth from one party to another. A gain here. A loss there. Appreciation in one community. Depreciation in another. In order to create net wealth, you must harvest a new resource or make more efficient use of one. Either way you must have a reliable and ethical system in place to distribute that newly created wealth in order to benefit society as a whole and prevent a lagging downside. The ‘free market’ just doesn’t cut it. Its a farce. Many of the jobs created are nothing but filler. The promises empty. Sure, unemployment reached an all-time low under Bush. GDP reached an all-time high. But those are both shallow and misleading indicators. In order to gauge actual prosperity, you must consider the economy in human terms. As of ’08′ the average American was working more hours than the previous generation with far less equity to show for it. Consumer debt, forclosure, and bankruptcy were also at all-time highs. As of ’08′, every major American city was riddled with depressed communities, neglected neighborhoods, failing infrastructures, lost revenue, and gang activity. All of this has coincided with massive economic growth and job creation. Meanwhile, the rich have been getting richer and richer and richer even after taxes. Our nation’s wealth has been concentrated. Again, this represents a multi-trillion dollar loss taken by the majority. Its an absolute deal breaker. Bottom line: With or without economic growth or job creation, you must have a system in place to prevent too much wealth from being concentrated at the top. Unfortunately, we don’t. Our economy has become nothing but a giant game of Monopoly. The richest one percent already own nearly 1/2 of all United States wealth. More than double their share before Reagan took office. Still, they want more. They absolutely will not stop. Now, our society as a whole is in serious jeapordy. Greed kills.

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

The most profitable industries in the world (energy, healthcare, finance) have been given billions in government handouts and tax breaks. Meanwhile, they keep raising charges causing hardship for millions. With all those massive handouts, tax breaks, and obscene charges, profits rise to record high levels. Millions in bonuses are paid to the executives. With record high profits, record high dividends are paid. 1/2 of all dividends in the United States are paid to the richest one percent. The bottom 95 percent of Americans share about 3 percent (that's three percent) of all dividends. The rest are paid to the top 5 percent and foreign investors. All of this causes a gradual concentration of wealth and income. This results in a net loss for the lower majority who find it more and more difficult to cover the record high cost of living, which again, is directly proportional to record high profits for the rich. As more and more people struggle to make ends meet, more and more financial aid becomes necessary. Most of which goes right back to the health care industry through Medicare, Medicaid, and a very expensive prescription drug plan. This increases government spending. This has been happening for 30 years now. During the same time, tax rates have been lowered drastically for the richest one percent. Especially those who profit from investments. These people pay only 15 percent on capital gains income. As even more wealth concentrates, the lower majority find it more difficult to sustain there share of the consumer driven economy. Demand drops as more and more people go broke. Layoffs results. Unemployment rises. This results in less revenue and more government debt.

Massive subsidies and tax breaks for Wall Street, massive tax breaks for the super rich, heavy concentration of wealth, record high charges along with record high profits and record high cost of living, more hardship for the lower majority, more government spending in the form of financial aid to compensate, more concentration of wealth, less demand, layoffs and unemployment. All of this results in slower economy and less tax revenue. At the same time more and more financial aid becomes necessary. It's a horrible downward cycle which gradually pushes the national debt higher and higher. The other big factors are the wars in the Middle East.

This post is not intended to excuse those who sit on the couch collecting welfare, make no attempt to find work, or squease out kids they can't provide for.

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

Don't believe what you may have heard on talk radio about the CRA, subprime, or the collapse of the housing market. 

This is what really happened:

The first subprime loans were issued in 1994. It was a gimmick to sell more homes, artificially inflate the market, sell more homes at higher profits, foreclose on those who could not pay when the ARM rates readjusted, take their homes leaving them with nothing to show for their payments, resell the homes at a higher profit and so on. It was a cruel and calculated plan to sell more homes and artificially inflate the market. Those loans were incredibly profitable for well over a decade before the house of cards finally collapsed. In the meantime, bankers got richer along with the richest one percent who made off with higher dividends. It was a sham.

The biggest player in the game was Countrywide. Endorsed by Oprah Winfrey, Ellen Degeneres, and Dr Phil. If you have their shows from '04' to '06' on tape, watch them again. All three were paid millions specifically to endorse Countrywide by name. The biggest subprime player in the game. They issued more ARM loans than anyone else. Foreclosing on those who could not make their monthy payments when the rates suddenly went through the roof. It was a cruel and calculated plan to sell more homes, artificially inflate the market, foreclose, and resell for a higher profit. The sham worked like a charm for 12 years before the house of cards finally fell in.

Oprah, Ellen, and Dr Phil were paid millions for their endorsements. Ch'Ching!

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

Is greed really good? 

Doctor discovers cure and prevention of AIDS. Sells discovery for $5,000,000,000,000. Same doctor discovers cure and prevention of heart disease. Sells discovery for another $5,000,000,000,000. Same doctor discovers cure and prevention of Alzheimer. Sells discovery for another $1,000,000,000,000. Breast cancer. Brain cancer. Skin cancer. Bone cancer. Colon cancer. Pancreatic cancer. Cervical cancer. Ovarian cancer. Testicular cancer. Banks cover all related investments by the health care industry. Nobody stops to consider that the lower 99 percent combined could never afford such expensive cures. The richest one percent agree to purchase the bulk of material assets along with millions of unsold homes for ten percent of market value. After a two year spike in revenue, the health care industry tanks. The vast majority have gone bankrupt in a desperate attempt to cover those incredibly expensive cures. The profits made in the first two years were nowhere near enough to covering the $20,000,000,000,000 doctor payoff. The largest debts in world history go unpaid. All major banks fail miserably. Followed by every major industry. Unemployment spikes to 90 percent in all of the G20. The global economy tanks. Chaos breaks out worldwide. Meanwhile, the richest man in the world by far, buys an island and hires a small army to protect his $20,000,000,000,000 fortune. 5000 jobs are created. More as the richest one percent worldwide hire additional security. Unemployment drops to 80 percent across the developed world. Widespread chaos remains. Entire cities burn to the ground. The masses finally converge on the richest one percent in every corner of the world. As the bodies pile up, disease breaks out worldwide. When the dust settles, and the bodies rot away, only a few hundred million remain worldwide. Those few hundred million survivors must find a way to get along and rebuild. Hopefully, with a more reliable and ethical system of economics.       

The answer is hell no. Greed kills..

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

God damn it. You die hard winner take all bloodthirsty capitalists and filthy rich pigs absolutely refuse to understand the following: First, that record high charges in health care, energy, and finance also mean record high profits and record high dividends. 1/2 of which are paid to the richest one percent. This causes more hardship and more concentration of wealth. At the same time, more financial aid in the form of welfare, Medicare, and Medicaid becomes necessary. Especially with those record high charges and profits. As even more wealth is concentrated, the lower majority go into debt and lose their relative buying power. This results in less demand, layoffs, and higher unemployment. This results in even more legitimate need for financial aid, a slower economy, less revenue, and higher national debt. It's a downward cycle tied directly to the relentless concentration of wealth.

I'm not making excuses for those who sit on the couch, make no attempt to find work, and sponge off the government. I'm not calling for a welfare state. But God damn it. You die hard conservatives and filthy rich pigs need to stop being such cowards, open your god damn eyes, and finally admit that there is a downside as more and more wealth becomes concentrated.

The richest one percent now own well over 40 percent of all United States wealth. The lower 90 percent now own less than 10 percent of all United States wealth. This is true even after you account for all taxes, charity, and financial aid. This equation becomes more obscene when you account for nearly two trillion in consumer debt which is owed primarily by the lower 90 percent. Mark my words: this equation will get worse.

THERE IS A DOWNSIDE AS YOU GET RICHER AND RICHER!

A word for my critics:  I'm no expert but I'm no fool. I predicted this socio-economic crisis in writing 6 years ago. I'm aware of all the conservative and liberal talking points. Of course, I hate politicians. But I don't hate liberals or conservatives. I agree with both on some issues. For example: I agree that we need an adequate safety net for those in need. Not for those who sit on the couch and watch TV.I  agree with tax cuts for small business. But not for Wall Street and not for those making $500,000 and up. A heavy concentration of wealth is what got us here. A gradual and partial redistribution of wealth is vital.

 I don't want socialism, communism, or marxism. I want modest capitalism. A reasonable scale of income opportunity for all those willing and able to work. An adequate safety net for those in need. 

A word for the rich: I have received quite a bit of negative feedback from you one percent club pigs. I must be doing something right. After all, you took time away from your money bath just for me. You might want to check your ass crack for soggy bills. In the meantime, let me just say this for the record: 

You can't intimidate me. You can't embarrass me. You can't make me feel uneducated, unintelligent, or otherwise insignificant. You can't confuse me. You can't divert my attention. You can't exhaust me and you sure as hell can't break my will. I know I'm getting to you because you're here with another lame psychological trick. You're here in an attempt to shut me up. It won't work. I've had it with all of you.  

I won't break any laws. I would never discredit the cause with a criminal act. But I'm telling you right now that I'm virtually impossible to stop. It's a big world and I have a lot to say. If you want to break my will, you're going to have to break my neck first. 

If you pull a stunt like that, a lot of people will know what happened to me and why. 

Now get out of my face. I have work to do.

[-] 2 points by Mcc (542) 8 years ago

The rich and famous do not want to be seen as 'pigs' or go down in history as 'villains'. They want to be seen as 'heros' and go down in history as 'humanitarians'. The market for their product has become global. The fan base has become global. Therefore, the 'humanitarian' effort and 'good will' PR machine has gone global. These 'huMmanitarian' efforts and 'good deeds' are not chosen to address the greatest need or injustice. They are chosen almost exclusively to appeal to the largest demographic for their respective commercial products. The largest fan base. Efficiency or effect is of little or no concern. Its all about PR, marketing, image, and fame. This is why so many of the rich and famous have taken up 'philanthropy' or 'good will' around the world. This is why so many have 'schools' or 'foundations' in their name. This is why so many play golf or appear on a TV game show for 'charity'. This is why so many sign motorcycles, other merchandise, or auction off their own 'personal effects' for 'charity'. This is why so many have TV shows with a 'charitable' gimmick. This is why so many arrange photo ops with wounded veterans, firefighters, or sick children. This is why so many have adopted children from around the world (Which they always pay others to care for full time. The hired professionals are sworn by legal contract to confidentiality. Not allowed to discuss or appear in public with the children they care for. Those 'photo' and 'interview' opportunities are reserved exclusively for the rich and famous 'adoptive' parents. Often sold for millions.). This is why every 'humanitarian' effort and 'good deed' is plastered all over the media worldwide. Its not about 'humanity' or 'good will'. Its all about marketing, image, fame, and PROFIT. This is why we are so often reminded of their respective 'good deeds' or 'humanitarian' efforts shortly before or after the release of their latest commercial product. IT IS A SHAM. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A MULTI-MILLIONAIRE HUMANITARIAN. GOOD WILL HAS BECOME BIG BUSINESS.

Charitywatch.org is a non-profit charity watchdog. Others include guidestar.com and charity navigator.org. Of all the well rated charities (about 1500) only three are closely affiliated with celebrities. Michael J Fox (he is not the primary donor), Tiger Woods (he is not the primary donor), and Bill Clinton (he is not the primary donor). That's three well rated celebrity foundations out of 1500. THREE OUT OF 1500. That should tell you something. In general, celebrity foundations run like crap because they blow half the money flying around in private jets, securing five star accommodations, and hiring PR crews.

Don't even get me started on Jolie and Pitt.

Oh the hell with it. I'll tell you just a little.

Virtually every penny they have 'donated' has come from the sale of baby photos. The babies had no choice. The money goes to their own foundation first. Then later, a portion is donated to a a legitimate charity. Another portion is blown on private jet rides, accommodations, photo ops, and pr crap. They always schedule their transactions and photo ops to coincide with the promotion of a new movie.

The Make it Right Foundation took in over $12,000,000 the first year alone. Tens of millions overall. To date, the Make it Right foundation has helped 14 former families of the lower ninth ward in New Orleans move back into new homes. These families were not given homes. They were required to pay an average of $150,000 each. UP FRONT. That's tougher financing than any bank. The difference is offered in cheap loans or on occasion, forgiven.

That's 14 families total after 5 years and tens of millions in funding. Brad Pitt has never been the primary donor. He is nothing but a figurehead. Make it Right is the epitome of inefficiency. A God damn disgrace.

Celebrities sick. They are just like politicians. The only difference is that the celebrities have had more plastic surgery. THEY SUCK.

[-] 1 points by Nevada1 (5843) 8 years ago

Hi Mcc, Thank you for this. Everyone needs to see this thread. Best Regards

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 8 years ago

I haven't had a job in Physics since I quit the national defense