The Poor Aren’t Getting Poorer. They’re Getting Stupider.

The daughter was a pool hustler. The three boys on our left formed 75% of a barbershop quartet.

 

Every week we host the Carnival of Wealth which, although it features content written by other people, requires us to work harder than we do to write one of our own posts.

This week we received a submission from Flexo, the guy who runs Consumerism Commentary. When we started CYC, Flexo was one of the first established personal finance bloggers to accept a guest post from us. He later made the unfortunate choice to let us guest host his own carnival. We gave it the CYC treatment, thus ruining our chances of him ever letting us host it again.

We didn’t run his Carnival of Wealth submission this week, but it did provoke enough thought that we’re devoting a blog post to it. His post, like several others we received, summarized a recent Pew Research Center study that made a shocking claim (all numbers quoted in 2010 dollars):

In 1984, the median net worth of households with someone under 36 in charge was $11,521.
In 2009, the comparable figure was $3,662.

Let’s temporarily leave aside the question of whether this superlative means what it says. The Pew Research Center adds irrelevant data to the study, so it can showcase its findings with respect to an agenda. Read the headline and subhead:

The Rising Age Gap in Economic Well-Being: The Old Prosper Relative to the Young

The median net worth of households with someone over 64 in charge rose from $120,457 to $170,494 during that same span, which is hardly remarkable. If you could travel back to 1984 and tell people about the $170,494 figure, it wouldn’t raise an eyebrow. The $3,662 one would raise plenty.

What old people have spent their lives socking away (and confiscating from younger people via the Ponzi scheme that is Social Security) isn’t germane. The median net worth of the young isn’t decreasing because of the old, and even Pew Research doesn’t dare make such a claim.

Still, a 68% reduction in median net worth is horrifying. Or is it?

  1. A lot of people currently under 36 are upside-down on their residences, a circumstance of the temporary phenomenon that is the depressed housing market. Those people’s 1984 counterparts had either bought houses and watched them amass value, or rented and lost nothing beyond what they were paying in rent.

2. In Pew Research’s own words,

…these long-term changes include delayed entry into the labor market and delays in marriage—two markers of adulthood traditionally linked to income growth and wealth accumulation

In other words, people under 35 are poorer than their Reagan-era counterparts because so many of the former are in suspended adolescence. They live at home longer, they play more enjoyable video games, they start college later and then they stay there longer.

The very next sentence, in which Pew reinforces its (and our) point:

Today’s young adults also start out in life more burdened by college loans than their same-aged peers were in past decades.

Well, yeah. Colleges discovered a while ago that they could almost name their own prices. It’s become received wisdom that you need a degree to flourish. (You don’t.) With a government bent on “making college affordable for all Americans”, a liberal student loan policy means that people without collateral can borrow amounts they can barely conceive of, let alone conceive of paying back. And why should they? It’s not their money, and it’s not their problem. It’s ours.

It gets better, and by better we mean worse. The data the Pew Group delivers antiseptically and devoid of judgment are the very reasons people are losing net worth. Here’s one reason Pew gives for the $3,662 figure:

…today’s young adults are more likely to be…single parents.

How about this: if you’re 25 and you want to raise a kid by yourself, or put yourself in a position where you might end up raising a kid by yourself, it’s going to hurt your financial situation.  Your writer has a college degree and would be far too dumb to figure that out had he only graduated high school.

We don’t expect you to read the entire Pew article: frankly, we’re impressed you’ve stuck with this article as long as you have. But later in the narrative, Pew offers the following chart:

 

The same people whose net worths are decreasing are watching their incomes rise. How is that possible?

For one thing, Pew moved the start of the measurements back 17 years. Second, as we’ve expressed time and again,

Net worth is not income. Especially when Pew Research conveniently leaves this at the bottom of the page:

Following convention, this report’s wealth figures are measured at the household level and do not reflect any adjustments for the size of the household.

Hey now! 25 years ago, a household headed by an under-36-year-old likely meant one that included a married couple. Today, that “household” is more likely to mean one person. Hell, Pew said as much earlier in this jeremiad posing as a report.

More relevant details:

1984 was a recovery year following the 1981-82 recession, while 2009 could be construed as a recession year.

“Could be”? 1943 could be construed as a war year, too. Pew acknowledges that 1984 was in the middle of a boom, 2009 in a bust. Whether the economic cycle ought to have peaks as high and valleys as low as it does, the fact remains that it does and that Pew cherry-picked a bountiful year in the past and contrasted it with the worst recent year they could find.

Pew makes no mention of modern day young people’s materialism, which isn’t wrong in itself but is when it’s out of proportion to earning power. In other words, there were no iPads to finance with credit cards 25 years ago.

In summary:

How well old people live is not young people’s problem, nor vice versa.
Your house might not make you poor, but don’t count on it to make you rich, either.
Deferring adulthood, and productivity, will make you poor.
Spreading your legs/jettisoning your sperm costs money.
All things being equal, a household with x people is going to have a greater net worth than one with x-y people.
Everyone
has an agenda.

This article is featured in the following carnivals:

**Top Personal Finance Posts of the Week – November 18, 2011**

**The Baby Boomers Blog Carnival One Hundred-nineteenth Edition**

**Yakezie Carnival-San Diego Edition**

Carnival of Wealth, Chief Executive Edition

It’s another edition of the Carnival of Wealth, a weekly roundup of personal finance blog posts both insightful and less-than-so. We go live every Monday. If you want to submit a post (please don’t, but if you insist), go here first.

A year from now, we’ll have a new president. Or an old one. Thus some presidential esoterica, spread throughout this week’s carnival.

Last president who was neither a Democrat nor a Republican:

Millard Fillmore

 

“You guys are mean. Why can’t you say anything positive?” We can say plenty of positive things about Paula Pant at Afford-Anything. Craft your submissions half as well as she does, and you’ll have a guaranteed spot in every CoW until the end of time. This week Ms. Pant discusses the neurological reasons for people refusing to follow their dreams (and demonstrates why most of us could never be Navy SEALs.)

Last president who didn’t have a daughter:

Dwight Eisenhower (Note: Mitt Romney doesn’t have a daughter.)

 

Jacob at My Broken Coin buys premium bike and running accessories. Now if we can only get him to self-edit.

This week’s hidden wisdom comes from Corey at 20s Finances:

An average movie ticket ranges from $12-$15 per person. For just two people, this means that you are spending $24-$30 just on the tickets.

Wait a second.

12 times 2 is…well, all my fingers twice, plus 4. That’s, uh, 24.
15 times 2 is…all my fingers 3 times. Which is 30. Hey, he’s right!

Anyhow, Corey got four tickets for $9 on Living Social. Another ending ruined.

Maybe if Rep. Barney Frank’s parents had let him play with toy soldiers instead of dolls as a kid, he wouldn’t have had to validate himself by running for office and we wouldn’t be in the mess he helped create as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Marjorie Rochon at Card Hub illustrates how the Dodd-Frank Act gives merchants the legal authority to insist on minimum amounts for credit card purchases.

Last 3rd-party candidate to win an electoral vote:

George Wallace. He didn’t just win one electoral vote, he carried Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia. In 1968. He’s also the last candidate to stand in a school doorway and block black kids from getting in, unless you count that time Barack Obama bent down to pick up a quarter when Sasha was walking behind him.

 

If it’s Monday, and it’s insightful, it could well be the work of Len Penzo. America’s favorite eponymous personal finance blogger is back with a piece on the psychology of prices incorporating the digit 9. It’s part pseudoscience, part human nature, and 100% fascinating.

Last president who was never a vice president, senator, governor, or general (i.e., was only a congressman):

James Garfield, assassination victim

 

F and YES. We rarely go with bold all-caps or pseudo-cursing on this site, so you know this is a big deal. Darwin’s Money did the research we were too lazy to do, breaking down unemployment rates by college major. He went bold himself, italicizing for good measure:

The majors that are HARD, have a focus on MATH and PROBLEM SOLVING will continue to be the ones in high demand.

The world doesn’t owe you a living, especially in the liberal arts.

Wait, it gets better. Shawanda Greene at You Have More Than You Think might be our favorite non-us financial blogger. (Don’t be jealous, Financial Uproar.) Never mind her humor, or her patriotism, or her ability to spell: it’s her outspokenness that gets us excited. She identifies the one biggest stumbling block to getting the United States back to competitiveness. You might not want to hear it.

Jeff Rose makes a guest appearance at Christian PF. The esteemed financial planner looks at, and derides, people who have expressed their frustrations with the stock market by…quitting investing altogether. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. In summation, keep contributing to your 401(k), don’t withdraw from it, and don’t check your account daily. Amen.

Dough Roller thinks you need perspective, and he’s right. People moaned and complained about Bank of America’s recent attempt to charge $5 a month for you to use its debit card, this on the heels of a national uproar over Netflix forcing its customers to – gasp – log onto two accounts to get their precious discounted entertainment delivered to their doors. Leaving aside DR’s claim of how taxpayers got a 10% return on their forced “investment” in BofA stock over a 14-month period, we salute his idea that you need to think independently instead of joining a herd who switch their bank accounts to credit unions en masse. (Just ignore his line about “meet your financial needs.” Jesus.)

2nd-last president who was only a congressman:

Abe Lincoln, assassination victim

 

Dividend growth stocks have been big news lately, among an investing population that’s finally realizing that you can’t build a portfolio out of nothing but stocks whose prices you hope will rise. Boomer and Echo recommend that you do a little work and commit to something for, as always, the long term.

Did we mention that dividend growth stocks are a big deal these days? Dan at High Yield Edge makes his Carnival of Wealth debut this week (unless we forgot about a previous submission of his), with a comprehensive listing of the highest yielding stocks in the Dow. 22 of the 30 have higher yields than do 10-year Treasurys.

Free Money Finance has been outsourcing his blog as of late, and that includes a book excerpt from noted curmudgeon Ben Stein. You need to save, i.e. invest. A salary is no protection against life’s inevitable curveballs, particularly against the elimination of said salary.

No one ever said that Odysseas Papadimitriou wasn’t outspoken. (See what we did there? A double negative, which had more impact than if we’d written “Lots of people have said that Odysseas Papadimitriou is outspoken.”) The Wallet Blog wag believes it’s time to treat Switzerland less as a banking haven and more as a place that indirectly invites criminals to launder money.

Only other president who was never a vice president, senator, governor, nor general, although he was a cabinet secretary:

Jimmy Madison. In other words, if you’ve served only as a U.S. representative before getting elected, you have a 100% chance of someone murdering you. We hope Michele Bachmann carries a concealed weapon.

 

We hope you found this educational and slightly less offensive than usual. Enjoy the games, everyone.