Income Inequality and Rising Personal Debt; Coincidence?


For economic commentary and analysis go to the Bonddad Blog

The below documented mutual rise of increased household debt and income inequality leads to the general question, does one cause the other? Are people who aren't participating in the same degree with good economic fortunes using debt to finance their lifestyle? While the data does not provide a definitive answer either way, it is a very interesting question from an economic and policy perspective.

The information on household debt comes from the Federal Reserve's Flow of Funds Report.

Information on GDP and Disposable Income is from the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Numbers are in trillions.

Total Household Debt as a Percentage of GDP

1975: $.734/$1.638 = 44%
1980. $1.396/$2.789 = 50%
1985. $2.270/$4.220 = 51%
1990. $3.589/$5.803 = 61%
1995. $4.855/$7.397 = 65%
2000. $6.999/$9.817 = 71%
2005. $11.803/$12.455= 94%
2006. $12.815/$13.246 = 96%

Total Household Debt as a Percentage of Disposable Income:

1975: $.734/$1.187 = 61%
1980. $1.396/$2.009 = 69%
1985. $2.270/$3.109 = 73%
1990. $3.589/$4.285 = 83%
1995. $4.855/$5.408 = 89%
2000. $6.999/$7.194 = 97%
2005. $11.803/$9.036= 130%
2006. $12.815/$9.522 = 134%

The pattern is clear. Americans are using more and more debt to finance their lifestyle.

Let's coordinate this information with the growth in income inequality from 1979.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Correlation or Causation?


Bonddad April 3, 2007 - 7:51am
( categories: Economics: USA )

My pet theory (which is, of course, completely untested) is that the primary source of household debt is the 'housing boom' - people carrying debt in the form of mortages to buy overpriced homes, or pulling equity out of houses in the form of HELOCs. I really wonder how much of the 'growth' that we've seen is in the form of increased housing prices or for that matter from other forms of household debt.

NateTG April 3, 2007 - 9:51am

Let's say a family has 50Ks of disposable income per year, after taxes. Let's say this family buys a 400K house and puts down 100K as a down payment (this is money they had in the bank, so no debt here) and pays a fixed 30-year mortgage, let's say 20Ks per year. If this family had only this debt, what would the percentages be? I'm just a little unclear as to how they are calculated. Would it be 40% (100* 20/50) ? Also, obviously, this debt is not the same as having bought some gadgets that lose value quickly and cannot be sold.

creativelcro April 3, 2007 - 3:45pm

make a case that much of the growth came from housing. Your pet theory has been tested just by looking at residential construction as a percentage of GDP. Back out the unusual housing growth and GDP is anemic.

http://mauberly.blogspot.com/

mauberly April 3, 2007 - 7:36pm

sense and so I think you are right. They make half as much as I do but live at twice the expense while I barely manage to break even. I have no debt. I think they run credit cards up 12 at a time; refinance the debt into their mortgage and then proceed to run the credit cards up again. Now, the their homes equity, which had been increasing, is shrinking so the current cycle of credit card debt will not be refinanced and will eat them alive.

Joaquin April 3, 2007 - 7:58pm

Managing money well is a gift Joaquin that not everyone has. I believe that wise money management should be taught in school and instilled at a young age.

adrena April 4, 2007 - 8:45am

You are of course right but the failure of so many will affect all of us. Its so easy to say that people are being irresponsible but what would we say if financial institutions start to fail? There is something wrong when institutions drive themselves to failure because they are maximizing profit even though it drives them into a wall.

Joaquin April 4, 2007 - 7:16pm

housing

The average household carries a balance of approximately $10,000 to $12,000 in revolving debt.

-----

At credit card interest rates, that’s a deplorable number. If a family has a credit card debt of $10,000, and the interest rate is a modest 12.4 percent, it would take more than ten and a half years to pay off the balance while making minimum monthly payments of four percent.

canuck April 3, 2007 - 11:09am

aaaaa

Bonddad April 3, 2007 - 11:27am

included, I was just astounded that the figure was so high for an average family.

canuck April 3, 2007 - 11:29am

service, as opposed to the outstanding balance owed, conditions are pretty tame.As a percentage of household net worth, credit matters were much worse in the late 70s and early 80s.

You could just as easily make the case that the debt is high today because the debt service is low.

http://mauberly.blogspot.com/

mauberly April 3, 2007 - 7:43pm

Book values versus selling price...value on books $100, but sells for $75. That translates into a 25% reduction in net worth.

Houses often don't get what sellers would like for them and as there are more houses on the market, housing prices decrease. There is nothing more subject to supply and demand than housing. What I 'think' something is worth may have no relationship to what a buyer is willing to pay. If someone has pinned their hopes at getting x number of dollars, they may wake up to not having nearly enough funds from the sale of the principal residence for retirement. Another factor to take into consideration when calculating one's net worth is the timing of purchases and sales.

canuck April 4, 2007 - 3:29am

and it is on the same funds flow statement as this article mentioned. Just figure they rounded some edges off.

http://mauberly.blogspot.com/

mauberly April 4, 2007 - 9:21pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.