Waren Buffet is tired of all this talk about how awful the US economy is doing by the current Presidential candidates (he doesn’t specify which candidates) who claim it is in bad shape. And he should know, right?
In his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, Buffett didn’t name specific candidates or issues, but noted that the negative drumbeat about the economy, health care reform and income inequality may get voters down about the future.
“It’s an election year, and candidates can’t stop speaking about our country’s problems (which, of course, only they can solve),” he said, adding later, “that view is dead wrong: The babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history.”
Oh those lucky duckies being born today. Imagine the wonderful world into which they are being born! To paraphrase Heath Ledger in his role as the Joker, Buffer wants us to see the sunny side, and to hell with all this damn negativity. I can;t imagine why they feel the need to campaign on the issue of economic injustice, can you? Seems like a loser to me. More happy talk by Presidential contenders is definitely in order.
But seriously, it’s easy to see why Buffett doesn’t want discussions about income inequality that have struck a nerve with the electorate. He is one of the richest men in the world, and the wealth of people like him is doing just fine, thank you very much.
The top 0.01 percent of Americans — fewer than 14,000 households — received 5.6 percent of adjusted gross income in 2012, according to data released Wednesday by the IRS that underscore the increasing concentration of income.
It was the biggest share of income clustered at the very top of the distribution scale since 2007. Those in that group had a minimum income of $12.1 million, up from the $8.8 million it took to reach that club in 2011.
I’d feel great about the economy too, if I were higher up in the economic food chain. Unfortunately, for the vast majority of people income growth has stagnated, if not outright declined. All one needs to do is look at how the median income level in America is trending over the past few years to understand why many, many people in the US might not be so sanguine regarding an economy that works so well for millionaires and billionaires.
The Sentier Research monthly median household income data for November came in at $56,746. The nominal median rose $75 month-over-month and is up $2,812 year-over-year. That’s an increase of 0.1% MoM and 5.2% YoY. Adjusted for inflation, the latest income was up $58 MoM and $2,574 YoY. The real numbers equate to increases of 0.1% MoM and 4.8% YoY.
In real dollar terms, the median annual income is 1.8% lower (-$1,052) than its interim high in January 2008 but well off its low in August 2011. […]
[R]eal median household income … spent most of the first nine years of the 21st century struggling slightly below its purchasing power at the turn of the century. Real incomes … hit an interim peak at a fractional 0.7% in early 2008, far below the nominal illusionary peak (as in money illusion) of 27.2% six months later. The real median household income is now at -1.1%. In contrast, the real recovery from the trough has been depressingly slow.
Shorter version: A good economy for the Warren Buffetts of the world turns out to be not so wonderful for millions of Americans, many of them deeply in debt, with limited if any savings. The rise of Bernie Sanders (and to some extent Trump, as well) is, in my opinion, attributable to the fact that so many of us are struggling to just barely get by, living from paycheck to paycheck, while the wealthy make out like – well, like bandits.
It is also one of the main reasons for Sanders’ appeal among young people, who don’t feel like they are living in great economic times at all. Quite the contrary. Because their economy sucks.
[M]ost Millennials are struggling in the current economy. The Millennial generation leads the way in the amount of student debt it carries. Many are stuck in low wage jobs earning so little, they are living with their parents deep into adulthood. How broke are Millennials? Pretty broke when you look at the data.
[…]
A very high number of Millennials don’t even work or if they are working, are stuck in a low wage job. Close to half of recent college graduates are working in jobs that don’t even relate to their undergraduate degree. Not a problem when you pay little for college but this can be an issue when you are going into tens of thousands of dollars of debt to finance your studies.
No wonder Sanders’ campaign, which has maintained a laser focus on income inequality in America has found an audience, despite the relative lack of media coverage of his campaign compared to Trump and Clinton. It’s a message Warren Buffet and others of his ilk would prefer not be told because it is true. And often the truth is damn depressing.
So forgive me if I side with those candidates, like Sanders, who are speaking out so “negatively” about the US economy. The truth hurts, and at this moment in time, as more and more of us watch our incomes decline or job and career prospects diminish or never get started in the first place, we need the truth, not happy talk, from those seeking higher office.
Sanders’ economic plans are getting some serious attention from economists after the PKrugman misstep. Lot of pushback on just what might be possible if it could be sold.
The comparison doesn’t hold up because Sanders represents a doctrinaire primary challenge, the same as in any era, whereas what’s happening on their side is a much more fundamental, systemic breakdown.
The specific Pandora’s box they opened with Reagan (and then pried further open with George W. Bush) created a perverse, upside-down ethos where the world’s most demanding job can (in fact, should) be given to the wild, unpredictable idiot with no experience, because, hey, it’s America and cowboys solve problems.
That, and the crazy wrench-in-the-gears approach to legislating (which is built atop the near-Shakespearian genius of directly associating the first black President with muslim terrorists, so that literally everything he does must be impeded) together creates a massive system failure that’s vastly more problematic an existential threat than anything happening over here.
How does that explain the same in EU?
It doesn’t, but so what? (I’m sorry; but I was just responding to the hints at enforced symmetry in BooMan’s post.)
Ah.
Buffet’s words “The babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history.”
Is possibly the single most chilling tell I’ve ever heard a plutocrat utter.
We’re not humans, but a ‘crop’ to be harvested and sold for a profit.
The faint scchhhhiick!…scchhhhiick!…scchhhhiick! of the sharpening stones on the guillotine blades is getting louder.
Colonizing a developed economy is very lucrative, they have found. And the same old tools work perfectly.
The first interaction many people have with the real world is with student loans. Large numbers of young people are very much similar to indentured students.
Wow – why would a politician who proposes making Public University free be popular.
“In the real world, forecasts are a very weak guide to policy; when attempting to make major changes the right strategy is to proceed and to take up the challenge of obstacles or changing circumstances as they arise. That is, after all, what Roosevelt did in the New Deal and what Lyndon Johnson did in the 1960s. Neither one could have proceeded if today’s economists had been around at that time.”
Economic Forecasting Models and Sanders Program Controversy
By James K. Galbraith
http://ineteconomics.org/ideas-papers/blog/forecasting-models-and-sanders-program-controversy
Also…”Are rivers flowing upstream? Has anyone seen four horsemen? Anyhow, it seems that the Washington Post editorial board is now acknowledging that a financial transactions tax [FTT] could be a serious policy. It ran an editorial which included a few derisive comments directed towards Senator Bernie Sanders, who has advocated a financial transactions tax in his presidential campaign, but favorably cited the Tax Policy Center’s analysis and said:
“They [FTTs] represent a `tempting’ option that might help the United States raise revenue while curbing speculative excess.”
The Washington Post Treats a Financial Transactions Tax Seriously
by Dean Baker
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/the-washington-post-treats-a-financial-transactions-tax-serious
ly
If you paint every wealthy person with that broad a brush, you’re making a mistake. Buffett is with you in many, many ways. Yes, he’s wealthy. But he didn’t inherit it and he speaks often about the unfairness of income tax where his secretary pays more percentage in tax than he does. And he’s supporting Clinton (and many other Dems) because he wishes that to change. Have you heard of the Buffett Rule? So be careful who you attack and limit your attacks to people who really are not on your side.
This is complete nonsense. So you can’t point out that someone “on your side” is talking out of his ass when he is talking out of his ass? Buffett may not be like other billionaires and may have some shreds of decency, but he’s still completely out of touch. Nothing in Steven D’s post was an “attack” on Warren Buffett; it was a rebuttal to the stupid-ass sunny view from a man a the very tippy top of the global economy. There are many things he could have said about the strength of the US economy or of how the ACA has helped a lot of people and is still better than what it replaced without spitting on people who’s lives are shit because the system is shit. Instead he said politicians should shut up about trying to improve the situation and just be happy. Maybe he was trying to make a more subtle point, but if that’s the case, he failed and should let someone outside his bubble read these things before he sends them out.
Being a billionaire necessarily isolates you from vast, unpleasant portions of the standard human experience. It takes an extraordinary person to both achieve billionairehood and remain fully in touch with those in different places of the economy. Buffett doesn’t have his head fully up his ass like lots of others in his class, but all of them should actually be fearful of rising inequality and working to reduce it. Inequality is the type of thing that, once it reaches a tipping point, the system destabilizes and a lot of people are killed – and it often isn’t only the proles dying in those scenarios.
Everything isn’t alright, and it isn’t just because certain politicians are pointing it out…
I’m tired of being told that what I say is nonsense. This is all that was quoted of what Buffett said: “It’s an election year, and candidates can’t stop speaking about our country’s problems (which, of course, only they can solve),” he said, adding later, “that view is dead wrong: The babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history.” The rest is Steven trying to make the point that being optimistic about the economic situation in America makes you somehow connected to all 1 percenters and therefore evil. I just don’t buy it. Sorry. And really, do you disagree with what he said? Maybe babies being born in Denmark are luckier. I don’t know. But by and large, it feels to me, that even with all the problems we have here about income inequality, etc. it’s still better to be born here than anywhere else in the world. Do you disagree?
Buffet’s claim is untrue.
https:/www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/29/child-poverty-in-the-u-s-is-among-the-worst-i
n-the-developed-world
“…the share of U.S. children living in poverty has actually increased by 2 percentage points since 2008. Overall, 24.2 million U.S. children were living in poverty in 2012, reflecting an increase of 1.7 million children since 2008. “Of all newly poor children in the OECD and/or EU, about a third are in the United States,” according to the report. On the other hand, 18 countries were actually able to reduce their childhood poverty rates over the same period.”
One other point. Buffett has always been an optimist. I think he’s trying to point out that the pessimism is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people talk down our economy, it will decline.
The economy is fine if you are warren buffet. And even if you are his secretary!
Whose economy in the entire world would you trade ours for right now?
And what time in history?
This weasely rhetorical question is about on the same level as ‘love your country or leave it’. Trump will defeat Clinton. Now the question is: who would you trade for Clinton?
Not fair. There is empirical evidence to suggest that our economy is doing better right now than others. And I think Buffett’s point is that the negative assertions from the Republicans do not paint an accurate picture of the state of our economy. Since he is a Democrat, it’s unlikely that he is so much addressing income inequality, but I think he is supportive to changes in income distribution in our country. He’s also a successful capitalist. But, as you may know, he’s giving away his money; he and Gates are heading up a movement among the very wealth to give away 1/2 or more of their wealth. Yes, there are inequities. But, as I said earlier, Steve has used too broad a brush in his critique.
The hard evidence very emphatically suggests that the average and below average wage earner in the US has lost ground in the past decade, going back further, including above average. None of Buffet or Gate’s fortune will ever trickle down to anyone in need. Their fortunes are too small to accomplish that even if that is their intention, which I doubt very much. If Buffet ‘is supportive of changes in income distribution’ why would he not be ‘so much addressing income inequality’. What is addressing then? It is no consolation to anyone.
The only claim Buffett makes in the pull-quote that Steve provided is that babies born in the US today have it great. This isn’t inconsistent with anything he’s said before, for years, in his very upbeat way. He’s a believer in America. He thinks progress on many fronts offers Americans a terrific opportunity that didn’t exist before. He’s not talking just about income. At least all the times I have seen him speak, I hear a general optimism about the USA and its future. I think he’s saying that the Republican approach of doom and gloom or that America’s best days are behind it, just don’t coincide with his view of America and it’s future. He is a Democrat and supports them. I think Steve is shaping Buffett’s annual report to suit his own agenda re: income inequality. A rich man said this, so he’s the bad guy. It ain’t necessarily so. The whole thread seems to rest on Steve’s going on about income inequality, which is fine for him to be focused on. I only object to using the quote to support his thesis. For me it’s a stretch. But enough.
A very large contingent of US babies do not have it great. At all. Neither do a very large contingent of US school kids.
Don’t know what Buffet is looking at to make that statement. Maybe, just his “feelings” about things.
one of my emails sigs:
that comes from henry ford, the president of ford motor company, speaking in 1932.
As a 51 year old professional engineer, I AM doing just fine. The economy doesn’t suck. I have recruiters taking a run at me all the time. I will make $120K plus this year doing not much work.
But here is the thing… for the last 6 months I have mentored a 20 something PhD engineer from India who, while smart, really wasn’t all that smart. Yet this guy is on a fast track to management in a well known multinational corporation and will no doubt pass me up one day soon in salary and rank. I work with several H1B visa people who, frankly, just aren’t that special. They are OK, but for whatever reason we have collectively decided that they should come here and take the jobs of americans. I don’t get it. I understand where the young and unemployed are coming from. They ARE being screwed over, but it is mostly their own lazy ass fault!
I don’t know why more americans aren’t willing / able to get through engineering school. It is, I suppose, expensive but no more so than those silly business degrees. There are plenty of perfectly dumb ass engineers making 6 figures. (I’m probably one of them!) So I just don’t get it. The jobs are there for the taking. People from half way around the world are stealing your fucking lunch and dumb ass americans can’t get up off their lazy ass to do anything about it. Shame on us.
Thanks for your information from the ground. But have you considered the changes in US higher education and H1B visas since thirty years ago when you became a “dumb ass engineer?”
How many of your college classmates back then were foreign students? Go back fifty years when public colleges/universities were well funded by taxpayers. Out-of-state and foreign students are profit centers for public colleges today. So, instead of admitting a mediocre, lazy-ass student, they go with the mediocre, lazy-ass foreign student. In general H1B visa workers start off cheaper than Americans and translated through a lifetime, they remain cheaper. Particularly when they can be used to replace experienced American workers.
Good for you. Now Booman is evolving into Facebook.
And here I thought that Warren was a pinko!
A long standing problem for that can’t discriminate between social/religious affiliations and government and economic policies.
In America “in god we trust” = capitalism = freedom. Throw in race and gender and the equations get more complicated.
Just a moment again Warren Buffet was interviewed on CNBC to speak about Wall Street, Berkshire Hathaway and US politics … he still has admiration for Bernie Sanders. Sanders is one politician standing today and not changing his views. He provides clarity and answers all questions.
Posted in my diary – Robert Reich Endorses Bernie Sanders .. and More.