Landlords economically better off than savers
By Kathleen Madigan, Wall Street Journal
In this recovery, it’s better to be a landlord or investor than a saver.
That is the message from Friday’s report on personal income. Since the recession ended in the second quarter of 2009 to the average so far in the third quarter, the gains in income have been paced by rents collected by landlords and dividends paid to shareholders.
Since mid-2009, nominal personal income has increased 17%. Rental income has soared 85 percent, and dividends are up 44 percent. Retail income and dividends compromise less than 10 percent of all income, but have accounted for 25 percent of the increase in all earnings so far in the recovery. Following close behind is proprietors’ income, up about 42 percent.
Wages and salaries, about half of all household earnings, have grown about 14 percent, accounting for 40 percent of the entire income increase.
Some of the divergent growth rates reflect changes in the economy coming out of the Great Recession–trends that won’t last over time.
As usual, the Feds are benefitting the very wealthy at the expense of the middle class. The working class savings accounts are being held to record low interest growth. The same low interest rates that are allowing the corporates to invest and rake in record profits from the stock market.
If we actually had a free market, if the Federal Government would quit jerking around with our money, regular people would see some benefit to saving, instead of making a meager .2% while stocks are paying 8% to those wealthy enough to buy.
Will the Fed be shut down today? Will Obama’s chef get his pink slip? Not likely.
I was going to say the same thing. This government has screwed the saver’s. It used to be that a person could choose to invest their savings, or build their savings. The “build” option being more secure of the two choices. But the government meddled into the free market and screwed everything up. Now, after the government has dropped interest rates to near zero, we cannot earn a decent interest rate in our savings accounts. This means that savers loose money to inflation. I remember when I could park my money in a c d and earn over 5% annually. That was a good option for the people whom didn’t follow the markets. It was also a good option for those faint of heart who lost sleep whenever the stock market plunged. Now that option is gone. The government has forced us to gamble in the financial markets.
You’re right, Pizza. In the early days of this century I had a cd with El Dorado Savings that paid 6%. My mortgage was at 6 1/2%. The Fed has destroyed the people’s savings values.
The absolute reality and fact that LESS gov’t regulation of the banks and wall st. and LESS gov’t control of the global corps brought to you by reaganomics, stupid trade policies and the conservatives invisible hand of the market schemes have brought us here doesn’t seem to get through to some people who ignore the obvious-blaming Pres.Obama, hating gubmint and obstructing any progress away from these policies is teabagger inspired lunacy.
You cannot raise the prime interest rate even 1% when an 18 TRILLION debt is tied to that interest rate.
I would just like to see the fed stop loaning big banks big cash for almost nothing, then they might have to actually care about how they treat depositor’s.
I’m not sure you folks understand my earlier comments. I in no way blame this low interest economy on our current Prez. This problem has been building for decades. Teatotal, I disagree with you. The national debt started rising before Regan became president. Even if you attempt to blame a president, the president doesn’t legislate spending. The problem has been congressional spending for the self serving purpose of re-election. The problem is so serious that no one can think of a way to stop the congressional spending. This is now a government of the politicians, for politicians, for the purpose of re-electing politicians.