"John Knight" <johnknight at usa.com> wrote:
(changing the topic yet again, having been stymied on his 50 zillion
other idiotic topics).
>Asset Ownership of Households: 1993
>>Between 1984 and 1993, a period of nine years, the "median values of
>holdings" for "own homes" in the US decreased by 17%, from $56,430 to
>$46,669. In 1996 the Census Bureau changed the format for reporting this
>asset change so a direct comparison cannot be made to prior years,
That particular number, no. You can get comparable numbers though.
>From the 2001 Statistical Abstract Table 689, owner's equity in
household real estate, Dec 31, 2000 was $6.015 trillion. At the end
of 1993 it was $4.102 trillion. You could divide this by the number
of households in each year to get a per-household figure. Note that
this is equity - the real estate debt (around 5 trillion in 2000) has
already been subtracted. The total real estate assets of households
and non-profit organizations was $12.309 trillion, of which around 10%
is owned by non-profit organizations.
>If this trend continued,
>however, then in 1997 it was down to $42,120 and in 2000 to $37,240.
But of course the trend did not continue. And residential real estate
is not the only form of asset that most people have. Total assets
of households and non-profits was $41 trillion at the end of 2000, so
that $6 trillion stock loss was a lot, but wasn't hardly an economic
collapse.
>The
>increase in the number of female headed households, whose median net worth
>is less than $15,000 each, is one of the primary factors for this loss of
>household assets.
The median net worth of those with incomes between $10K and $25K, was
$24,800 in 1998. This was in fact down 10% from 1992, but the overall
median net worth of ALL families rose from $56,500 to $71,600 in
constant 1998 dollars between 1992 and 1998.
>To make matters worse, in 2000, Personal Saving became NEGATIVE at the same
>time that mortgage debt reached a record high of $5 trillion, a five fold
>increase in just 20 years,
But that ignores the fact that real estate value rose four fold in the
same 20 years, so that all this really means is that the average
American owes 44% of his house value in mortgage instead of 33%.
>The problem is that in 1991, per the US Census Bureau, only 20.7 million
>American households held stocks and mutual fund shares with a median value
>of only $5,490, which is only $114 billion. How then did American
>"investors" manage to lose $7.2 trillion during that time? They mortgaged
>to the hilt the only asset they had,
Nonsense. First of all, stocks went up a long way before they fell
back that $6-7 trillion. Next, most of the investment was not
directly held by those households. At the end of 2000, $6.5 trillion
was held in stocks, $3 trillion in mutual funds, and $9.8 trillion in
pension fund reserves. People don't borrow on their houses for
pension fund reserves, and that's where half of American private
ownership of stocks is held.
In addition to the above table, Tables 1166-1169 give more detailed
breakdown of the financial assets and liabilities (everything BUT real
estate and personal property). Yes the stock market lost $6-7
trillion in the last 2 years. But between 1990 and 1999, households
GAINED $15 trillion from the stock market runup.
>But in 1991, 64.7 million homeowners had equity worth a median of only
>$43,070, which is less than $2.8 trillion, and their total equity was less
>than $4.8 trillion, which means that this stock market loss was $2.4
>trillion more than they had in assets.
>1991 Asset Number of Households Median Asset Value Total Value ($billions)
>Interest-earning Assets 73,200,000 3,709 271.5
>Other Interest-earning Assets 9,000,000 16,058 144.5
>Checking Accounts 46,000,000 529 24.3
>Stocks & Mutual Funds Shares 20,700,000 $5,490 $113.6
>Own homes 64,700,000 43,070 2,786.6
>Rental Property 9,000,000 31,270 281.4
>Other Real Estate 10,700,000 20,140 215.5
>Vehicles 86,400,000 5,555 480.0
>Business or Profession 11,700,000 10,203 119.4
>U.S. Savings Bonds 18,100,000 610 11.0
>IRA or Keogh Accounts 22,900,000 11,886 272.2
>Other Financial Investments 2,800,000 19,031 53.3
>TOTAL $4,773.3
Probably the reason why they abandoned this particular data collection
method is that it doesn't match with the Federal Reserve numbers,
which show that households in 1990 owned $1.8 trillion in corporate
stocks, $2.5 trillion in time and savings accounts, and 126 billion in
savings bonds. The real estate numbers are reasonably close, however.
>x In 1993, median measured net worth varied from $5,786 (± $474) for the
>youngest households to $91,481 (± $3,736) for households in the 55-to-64-year-old category.
Table 688:
In 1998, the range was $9,000 for those under 35 to $146,500 for those
65 to 74.
It
>was $77,654 (± $4,510) for the oldest group (75 years and over). Median measured net
>worth fell significantly from 1991 to 1993 for households in 35-to-44-year-old and 65-to-69-year-old
>categories.
>From 1992 to 1998, it fell around 15% for those aged under 35, 2% for
those aged 55 to 64, and rose 20-30% for the other age categories.
>x In 1993, households with White householders had median measured net worth
>of $45,740 (± $1,307), households with Black householders had median measured net worth
>of $4,418 (± $697), and households with Hispanic-origin householders had a median
>measured net worth of $4,656 (± $681), which was not significantly different from that of Black
>households.
>>x Married-couple households had the largest median measured net worth,
>$61,905 (± $1,614) in 1993. Both male- and female-maintained households had median measured net
>worth approximately one-fifth that of married-couple households in 1993.
>>x Households headed by females experienced a decline in their median
>measured net worth, from
>>$15,518 (± $1,506) (in 1993 dollars) in 1991 to $13,294 (± $1,112) in 1993.
>This decline was concentrated among female householders age 35 to 54.
They don't do those breakouts any more, since they use a different
data source. They give net worth by education level (down for those
without a high school diploma; up for everyone else), income, age,
region, and primary income source of the householder.
lojbab
