Weather | Beachcam
Login | Contact Us | Staff | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Electronic Edition | Subscribe to the paper

HomeOpinionOpinion

Middle class's purchasing power dips as incomes decline

Casting blame has been easy during this year's great and ongoing epidemic of home foreclosures.

Greedy bankers sought out suckers and foisted adjustable-rate mortgages on them, with little emphasis on the fact that initial low monthly payments would rise within a few years to levels the borrowers probably could never pay.

Greedy homeowners and buyers sought out new loans because they figured the astronomical real-estate price increases of the boom years early in this decade would continue forever. Even when they understood the terms of those loans, they still figured that if they couldn't make the bumped-up payments, they could at least sell the properties at a profit, or refinance to another adjustable-rate mortgage with low start-up payments, while taking out cash for cars, boats, big-screen TVs and other toys.

These portrayals of the foreclosure crisis have some validity. But there's another economic force at work here, one that's even more pernicious than old-fashioned greed.

For it turns out there's a reason why the wealthy in California almost never become victims of foreclosure, while the vast middle class gets most of the eviction notices.

That reason: The rich are getting richer and can afford bumped-up payments, while the middle class is steadily losing purchasing power. And that's without even figuring in the huge increases in the prices of gasoline and some foodstuffs.

This becomes clear from new information reported by the state's tax-collecting Franchise Tax Board and analyzed by the nonpartisan Sacramento-based California Budget Project.

It turns out that in the typical mid-decade fiscal year of 2005-06 — the latest one for which information is complete — the wealthiest 1 percent of Californians saw their adjusted gross incomes (income after deductions for things like business expenses) rise by 0.3 percent. Meanwhile, the middle 40 percent of California families saw their adjusted gross incomes drop by about 1 percent.

Doesn't sound like much, but it has meaning. For when the middle class represented by that middle 40 percent of taxpaying families loses ground, they begin to be overwhelmed when expenses rise while their incomes drop. Among the things that rose more than 5 percent in the 2005-06 fiscal year were the price of gasoline, the average Catholic school tuition, state university and college tuitions and fees, and the cost of a new car.

Since then, even though later figures are not yet official, the middle class has done even worse, income-wise. Meanwhile, the prices of things like gasoline, milk and even corn-based food products have risen significantly.

What's more, middle-class consumers increasingly found their wealth being transferred to corporations during the middle years of this decade. While the average adjusted gross income of people in the middle fifth of California taxpayers dropped by 2.6 percent during those apparent boom years, after adjusting for inflation, average corporate profits rose by 516 percent. This means the average California company was making six times as much profit in 2006 as five years earlier.

All that money came from somewhere, and the most likely source was the pockets of the great middle class. Companies in the transportation and utilities sectors saw their net income rise by an average of 2,514 percent during those same years. So firms dealing with basic needs for things like heat, cooking fuel and getting to and from work increased their profits five times as much as companies in other businesses, like remodeling or furniture sales.

Any overview of this scene must surely reveal a middle class struggling harder and harder to pay for basics, while looking up to a wealthiest 1 percent with no worries at all.

When that struggle becomes impossible, something has to give. For many in the past year, house payments became the easiest thing to scrap. Especially when many middle-class families found declining real-estate prices evaporated all their equity, with home-loan balances emerging as higher than home values. At the same time, these families often see comparable homes available for rent at prices far lower than their newly bumped-up loan payments. The result has been a mass tendency to say, "to heck with our credit rating, let's get out of here."

— Thomas D. Elias of Santa Monica is a columnist and author. His e-mail address is tdelias@aol.com.

Discussions

Posted by cassandra2 on August 29, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is the stuff the candidates should be talking about. Reining in corporate power is the most important political issue of our time.

Sure, world ecology is more important but we may have to deal with corporate hegemony before we can effectively rescue our trashed environment.

David Korten ( author of classic international bestseller "When Corporations Rule the World" ) will be speaking in Oxnard 9-12 under the auspices of CAUSE. Will the Star cover it?

Posted by cassandra2 on August 29, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As a Green, I often complain that there is not much difference between Dems and Repugs, But I may be wrong. (Shock)

Here is Krugman's take extrapolating from a convention speech and discussing the same vital issues as this columnist

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/29/opi...

Posted by del on August 29, 2008 at 1:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Your research of the difference between Dem & Rep is no doubt more in depth than mine, but I see no real difference. The lack of the spirit of compromise is too deeply ingrain on both sides.

The corporate-military-industrial-complex has us by the short-n-curlies; both ecologically and economically.

C.S. Lewis has it correct;

"The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint ... but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices."

Introduction to The Screwtape Letters

I only these 'quiet men' would read E.B. White;

"I would feel more optimistic about a bright future for man if he spent less time proving that he can outwit Nature and more time tasting her sweetness and respecting her seniority."

Posted by cassandra2 on August 29, 2008 at 3:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I always find Krugman persuasive. Maybe because he doesn't seem to be trying that hard, no over the top rants, blanket condemnations or praise. Just a really smart dude that "got it: recently vis-a-vis peak oil.

Maybe I'm easy.



Discuss this article
(Requires free registration.)

Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.

Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.

We do not allow the following:

  • Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
  • Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
  • Threats, whether obvious or veiled.

We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.

Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Username:

Password:
(Forgotten your password?)

Your Turn:

Loading videos... If you don't see them shortly, you may need to download the Flash Player.