The World Economic Forum (2016) warned that “the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which includes developments in previously disjointed fields such as artificial intelligence and machine-learning, robotics, nanotechnology, 3-D printing, and genetics and biotechnology, will cause widespread disruption not only to business models but also to labor markets over the next five years, with enormous change predicted in the skill sets needed to thrive in the new landscape”.
July 15, 2017
Many aquifers are being rapidly depleted throughout the world, and this does not factor in climate change. Case in point, the southern portion of the Ogallala Aquifer, a prime agricultural region in the U.S., is estimated to have no more that 20 years left. Simultaneously, according to the United Nations, the world’s population is expected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100. All of these additional mouths will need to be fed, yet food production will necessarily decline for lack of water with which to irrigate the fields.
It is the responsibility of those in power everywhere to address this impending catastrophe; not doing so, by extension, borders on willful negligence to protect their people from preventable genocide. This begs the question, how many governments, large or small, have it in their agenda to address this issue, solely or collectively? How many are considering, even if only as a pipe dream, the possibility of diverting funds from the merchants of death to the peasants and farmers that feed us all?
July 14, 2017
The comings and goings of the Trumps and Clintons are but skillful distractions from the grave issues afflicting our country and the world: climate change, the global water crisis, the flat-out refusal of the world’s nuclear powers to eliminate humanity’s sword of Damocles, the lack of commitment to a concrete timetable to stop using nuclear fission and fossil fuels to generate electricity, the demise of Aristotelian democracy –and above all- the abysmal inequality of wealth and income.
None of them are ever on the agenda of any administration –regardless of party affiliation. Instead, they purport to tackle consequences, not causes. Take for instance, health care. One reason why it’s necessary to tax the rich to subsidize the poor is because the latter can’t afford the stratospheric premiums and deductibles, a function of inequality. The same applies, of course, to all other services for the poor, a phenomenon formerly the exclusive domain of minorities.
Another example is the housing crisis. The government’s exposure –through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA and VA, among others- to the $10 trillion real estate market is roughly $9 trillion. That means the government’s interest in it is congruent to the banks, investors and homeowners. They all want and need ever-higher prices.
That’s absurd. In California for instance, there are no cities of comparable size between Greater Los Angeles and the Bay Area. Furthermore, surprisingly, Eureka (estimated 2017 population: 26,727) is the largest town between San Francisco and Portland, Oregon. Prices are high not because there’s no vacant land to build on but because the supply of housing is kept artificially low to keep prices high. In other words, the economic system itself is cannibalizing our children and grandchildren. Despite nonexistent job security and low wages, they’re expected to simultaneously take out enormous non-dischargeable student loans and pay outrageous housing prices or rents. No wonder household formation is as low as it is and muffled, compressed dissatisfaction permeates the country. For the first time in our history over 50% of women live alone, and with only 5% of the world’s population, the United States consumes 80% of the world’s opioids.
Then there’s the South China Sea. An enormous percentage of the world’s trade passes through it, no argument there. What kind of trade? Surely it’s not that we’re protecting our exports –we hardly make anything anymore. It’s our dual-use, strategic imports that matter. We are now dependent on factories that American industrialists moved from the U.S. to Asia, a self-inflicted wound. Now we are in the position of having to contain and subdue China, a country 10,000 miles away with four times our population, incomparably lower college costs, and a GPA growing at 6% per year. To say the least, a daunting task.
There’s a silver lining. The G-19 countries that purportedly support the Paris Agreement have a golden opportunity to persuade the U.S. to hop back on board; not with ineffective rhetoric but with deeds. All they have to do is commit to a specific timetable to use hydrogen from the ocean instead of fission and fossil fuels to make water and electricity. As described in Plan A, that should do the trick.
June 9, 2017
Yes indeed. This 1912 (the age of coal-fired Dreadnought class battleships, railroads and factories, few horseless carriages and no airplanes) Popular Mechanics article accurately described anthropomorphic climate change and warned us of its consequences. No one listened, no one cared, and here we are, rushing to the precipice of extinction.
Will today’s elite be willing to pay the price of walking away from nuclear fission and fossil fuels or will they choose to doom humanity -including their progeny- to extinction?
June 4, 2017
On June 1, 2017, as expected, President Donald Trump announced the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement based on his conclusion that it would “undermine our economy, hamstring our workers, weaken our sovereignty … and put us at a permanent disadvantage to the other countries of the world.” He hopes to negotiate a new agreement “on terms that are fair to the United States.” Almost immediately, in a separate joint statement, French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni and German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the agreement was a “vital instrument for our planet that cannot be renegotiated.”
The President made his decision in the wake of his previous criticism at the G7 meeting of Germany’s failure to spend 2% of its GNP in military expenditures and its chronic trade surplus with the United States. Subsequently, in a campaign speech, Chancellor Merkel pointedly said that the European Union can no longer “fully count on others.”
To be sure, he is not wrong about everything. Germany, an export-dependent economy, does indeed have a surplus with the United States, and it does spend less than 2% of its GNP on NATO and the military. But the U.S. has trade deficits (2016, in billions) with China – $347, Canada – $11, Mexico – $63, Japan – $69, and South Korea – $28. Other countries have large deficits too, and they’re not withdrawing.
The fact is that manufactured goods made in America by American workers –not robots- are in the aggregate a tiny portion of an economy dominated by services. The U.S. imports more than it exports in every international trade goods category tracked by the Census Bureau.
Mr. Trump’s policy of deporting undocumented workers –whose non-white U.S. born children would almost certainly vote for the Democrats-, has already resulted in acute labor shortages in some occupations that U.S.-born citizens simply will not fill at any price. At this rate soon there won’t be anyone to harvest our crops, and they’ll rot in the field. If that happens -assuming other countries have the spare capacity to provide us with what we need, which is by no means certain- we’ll be forced to import our food too, and the trade deficit will expand.
Mr. Trump’s actions and policies are the complete opposite of what the U.S. needs to do, as he puts it, to “make America great again.” If he retrenches behind duties and tariffs to protect American-based industries, he will simply ignite a trade war with key NATO ally Germany (and the European Union) and our two largest creditors, Japan and China. That would be counterproductive to say the least.
Withdrawing from the Paris Agreement is not going to reverse the current account deficit or create well paying jobs, on the contrary. The antipathy and ill will for the U.S. that Mr. Trump’s current policies have already generated among ordinary people worldwide, measured by the declining number of tourists, could well expand to other goods and services –a spontaneous boycott. Instead, he should realize that under present conditions our best bet to reverse the trade deficit is to become the world’s largest producer of the one element that can wean humankind from its addiction to nuclear energy and fossil fuels –hydrogen. The potential demand for it, foreign and domestic, could realistically create an entire new economy based on its numerous uses. If he does see the light, history might well remember him as indeed the greatest President of all time.
January 29, 2019
Western Reserve Currencies and the Quest for Dominance
Historically, shifts in reserve currencies have brought pivotal changes in the global balance of power. Beginning with the 15th Century, which marked Western Europe’s global ascendancy, the currencies of the empires of Portugal (1450-1530), Spain (1530-1640), the Netherlands (1640-1720), France (1720-1815), Britain (1815-1920), the USA (1920-) and China, still in gestation, have served as primary media of exchange in global trade.
Every shift was preceded by devastating wars and economic cataclysms -even famine. As it pertains to the U.S., whose saga continues to affect and afflict virtually everyone on the planet one way or another, its transformation from the world’s preeminent surplus and creditor country at the end of World War II into the largest debtor in history and its dangerous non-ideological rivalries with Russia and China in the age of proliferation of nuclear weapons does not bode well for humanity. And yes, proliferation is exactly right. Since 1945, when these nightmarish weapons were first used, India, Israel, North Korea and Pakistan, which at the time weren’t even independent nations, have all acquired them. If history is a precursor of things to come, two things can be inferred. The first is that although a modern war between major powers has not yet exploded there’s no guarantee it won’t. The other is that, with little or no warning, non-state extremists may acquire and use miniaturized nuclear weapons.
Hydrogen as the basis for Special Drawing Rights (SDRs)
The value of the IMF’s (International Monetary Fund) SDR basket is based on fiat currencies of former imperial powers: the euro (mainly Germany, France, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands and Italy), Great Britain’s pound sterling, the United States dollar, Japan’s yen, and China’s renminbi, the newcomer. The IMF’s formula for determining currency weights in the basket assigns equal shares to the currency issuer’s exports and a composite financial indicator. The latter comprises, in equal shares, official reserves denominated in the member’s (or monetary union’s) currency that are held by other monetary authorities that are not issuers of the relevant currency, foreign exchange turnover in the currency, and the sum of outstanding international bank liabilities and international debt securities denominated in the currency. However, but for a few exceptions, notably heavily subsidized Israel, these criteria are also heavily stacked against ordinary people in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and central and southern Asia. They presently lack the means to earn enough SDRs to lift themselves out of poverty and compete on equal terms with their former colonial masters.
Aside from scandalous moral and social issues stemming from the abysmal (and growing) inequality of wealth, extreme poverty, and high morbidity and mortality rates, practically all governments and mainstream media worldwide have chosen to exclude from discourse the obvious drawbacks and dangers these issues pose to everyone, including the elites. One such drawback is that the poor simply do not have enough buying power to contribute to the global economy to help prevent (or at the very least mitigate) recessions or depressions; another is that absolute despair and hopelessness breed hate and extremism, and it has a way of manifesting itself in lethal unexpected ways.
A Crucial Omission and its Solution
The IMF’s current SDR formula has two fatal flaws. Firstly, it does not price the system’s impact on the environment. Secondly, it does not contritely admit that this omission is the turbine propelling anthropomorphic climate change –which is killing the planet. Accordingly, the obvious way to make amends is to gradually, resolutely and swiftly replace the SDR basket of privileged currencies –all of them- with a formula (whose specific details would be negotiated) based on (a) the total production of hydrogen by electrolysis of sea water (or, in the case of landlocked nations other forms of green energy), (b) the ratio of green energy produced to their population, and (c) their gross national product.
This shift would:
• Create an economic incentive to produce and use hydrogen to replace fossil fuels to generate electricity and move vehicles.
• Stop the runaway production of carbon monoxide.
• Stop the mad competition to achieve and perpetuate a nation’s currency as reserve currency of the world, a path more likely than not to eventually escalate into a terminal thermonuclear war.
• Introduce the possibility to actually manufacture, collect and distribute pure water anywhere (simply by burning the hydrogen in power plants) to fight growing water shortages, drought, rapidly depleting aquifers, and desertification around the world.
• Create a non-fiat, common currency with a fixed, non-depreciable value based on the above mentioned formula to introduce egalitarian buying power for all nations, and stop current and future asset inflation (particularly real estate) that continually and relentlessly cannibalizes our own progeny.
May 13, 2017
It’s official: the world is in trouble. A sampling (see the links at the bottom of this website) of scientific, governmental and commercial websites concerned with various pressing issues, including anthropogenic climate change and its progeny –ocean acidification, severe water scarcity, sea level rise, and the current mass extinction on a scale not seen in 65 million years- revealed that many researchers treat their fields of expertise as unrelated domains. Thus the oceanographer –while not unaware of the root cause of the bleaching of coral reefs- does not venture outside his/her field of expertise to opine, much less prescribe, which specific economic and political steps should be taken to wean humanity from its addiction to fossil fuels and fission. Similarly, physicists, chemists and engineers seek more efficient ways to produce hydrogen fuel but ignore its unexplored and unused potential to conquer drought. And elite decision-makers –preoccupied with loss of absolute control over the international financial system as a result of the dollar’s dwindling role as the reserve currency of the world- continue to prescribe perpetual economic growth but fail to acknowledge the limitations of a finite world.
Meanwhile the inequality gap –already abysmal- continues to expand unabated everywhere, round the clock. The middle and working classes –bereft of job security, burdened with unaffordable medical care premiums and deductibles, unprecedented student debt, and median incomes that are not keeping pace with real estate prices- are increasingly unable to buy single family homes or save for retirement. Worse, the unrelenting frenzy to reduce labor costs and increase profits combined with new technologies means that robots, computers and online commerce will inevitably erode the demand for domestic low-skilled workers. That will only exacerbate the decline in household formation among young adults, of white non-Hispanics –who by 2060 are projected to transition from an absolute majority to the second-largest ethnic group– and an unprecedented increase in the morbidity and mortality rates among non-Hispanic whites only, a demographic time bomb.
It’s no surprise that people voted against the establishment in 2016. They need, demanded and expected real permanent relief, but it’s not coming. No government that we know of has announced a feasible plan designed specifically to simultaneously halt –much less reverse- the growth of inequality, the fast-approaching water crisis that will culminate when the great aquifers of the world are finally depleted and the food supply collapses, the ongoing sea level rise that will eventually flood Florida’s mansions, Manhattan’s skyscrapers and vast swaths of low-lying nations, or the cutthroat competition for supremacy among the world’s elites before it erupts into a terminal war. Instead, despite President Eisenhower’s heartfelt warning and the obvious need to decisively address the aforementioned problems, our leaders have opted to do the exact opposite of what he advised –and to pay for it by recklessly charging it ad infinitum to the national credit card.
With the exception of the Espejo de Tarapacá (Mirror of Tarapacá) project in Chile’s Atacama Desert, none of the other reviewed websites –shown below this article- consider the possibility of using ocean water and gravity to generate a net surplus of electricity. Yet like all the rest, even Tarapacá is not designed to simultaneously produce a surplus of energy and potable water. Clearly it is a step in the right direction, but it does not apply in inland deserts hundreds or thousands of kilometers from the nearest ocean.
On the surface Plan A and its front door, California Template, border on being delusions of a deranged mind. The response to that thought is simple. Had our forefathers been aware of the catastrophic environmental consequences that would follow the introduction of the steam engine –and proceeded anyway- they might have been charged with something akin to crimes against the Earth, taboo doctrine even today. No, Plan A is not lunacy. It is immense in scope and magnitude simply because the problems it attempts to address are overwhelmingly vast. In fact, it is the only one that posits using solar energy, sea water, hydrogen and gravity solely to simultaneously ameliorate the aforementioned problems on a global scale. For that reason, decision makers who truly care more about the planet than the interests of their big campaign donors –a tall order- should appoint a task force of luminaries in all the related disciplines to (a) analyze it thoroughly and (b) make its findings public.
May 7, 2017
China’s University of Science and Technology reports that using solar energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen from water is a sustainable technology. A research group led by Professor Xiong Yujie has developed a class of noble-metal-free Z-scheme photocatalysts which exhibit an enhanced performance in photocatalytic hydrogen production based on a facile cation-exchange approach.
April 22, 2017
Oil reserves by country, their value at $50 per barrel, and loss each would incur if 80% is left in the ground to cope with climate change. Since most of the financial wealth in the world is owned by a minuscule percent of the population (10% in the U.S.) they, not the mass of the people, would lose the most. This begs the question, what would have to happen for them to agree to suffer such losses?
| Rank | Country | BBL (2016) | Value (U.S.$50/Bl) | 80% in Ground (Loss) |
| 1 | Venezuela | 300,000,000,000 | $15,000,000,000,000 | 12,000,000,000,000 |
| 2 | Saudi Arabia | 269,000,000,000 | $13,450,000,000,000 | 10,760,000,000,000 |
| 3 | Canada | 171,000,000,000 | $8,550,000,000,000 | 6,840,000,000,000 |
| 4 | Iran | 157,800,000,000 | $7,890,000,000,000 | 6,312,000,000,000 |
| 5 | Iraq | 143,000,000,000 | $7,150,000,000,000 | 5,720,000,000,000 |
| 6 | Kuwait | 104,000,000,000 | $5,200,000,000,000 | 4,160,000,000,000 |
| 7 | United Arab Emirates | 98,000,000,000 | $4,900,000,000,000 | 3,920,000,000,000 |
| 8 | Russia | 80,000,000,000 | $4,000,000,000,000 | 3,200,000,000,000 |
| 9 | Libya | 48,360,000,000 | $2,418,000,000,000 | 1,934,400,000,000 |
| 10 | Nigeria | 37,000,000,000 | $1,850,000,000,000 | 1,480,000,000,000 |
| 11 | United States | 36,520,000,000 | $1,826,000,000,000 | 1,460,800,000,000 |
| 12 | Kazakhstan | 30,000,000,000 | $1,500,000,000,000 | 1,200,000,000,000 |
| 13 | Qatar | 25,000,000,000 | $1,250,000,000,000 | 1,000,000,000,000 |
| 14 | China | 25,000,000,000 | $1,250,000,000,000 | 1,000,000,000,000 |
| 15 | Brazil | 16,000,000,000 | $800,000,000,000 | 640,000,000,000 |
| 16 | Algeria | 12,000,000,000 | $600,000,000,000 | 480,000,000,000 |
| 17 | Mexico | 9,700,000,000 | $485,000,000,000 | 388,000,000,000 |
| 18 | Ecuador | 8,832,000,000 | $441,600,000,000 | 353,280,000,000 |
| 19 | Angola | 8,400,000,000 | $420,000,000,000 | 336,000,000,000 |
| 20 | Azerbaijan | 7,000,000,000 | $350,000,000,000 | 280,000,000,000 |
| 21 | India | 5,675,000,000 | $283,750,000,000 | 227,000,000,000 |
| 22 | Oman | 5,300,000,000 | $265,000,000,000 | 212,000,000,000 |
| 23 | Norway | 5,100,000,000 | $255,000,000,000 | 204,000,000,000 |
| 24 | Sudan | 5,000,000,000 | $250,000,000,000 | 200,000,000,000 |
| 25 | Vietnam | 4,400,000,000 | $220,000,000,000 | 176,000,000,000 |
| 26 | Egypt | 4,400,000,000 | $220,000,000,000 | 176,000,000,000 |
| 27 | South Sudan | 3,750,000,000 | $187,500,000,000 | 150,000,000,000 |
| 28 | Indonesia | 3,693,000,000 | $184,650,000,000 | 147,720,000,000 |
| 29 | Malaysia | 3,600,000,000 | $180,000,000,000 | 144,000,000,000 |
| 30 | Yemen | 3,000,000,000 | $150,000,000,000 | 120,000,000,000 |
| 31 | United Kingdom | 2,800,000,000 | $140,000,000,000 | 112,000,000,000 |
| 32 | Uganda | 2,500,000,000 | $125,000,000,000 | 100,000,000,000 |
| 33 | Syria | 2,500,000,000 | $125,000,000,000 | 100,000,000,000 |
| 34 | Argentina | 2,400,000,000 | $120,000,000,000 | 96,000,000,000 |
| 35 | Colombia | 2,300,000,000 | $115,000,000,000 | 92,000,000,000 |
| 36 | Gabon | 2,000,000,000 | $100,000,000,000 | 80,000,000,000 |
| 37 | Congo | 1,600,000,000 | $80,000,000,000 | 64,000,000,000 |
| 38 | Chad | 1,500,000,000 | $75,000,000,000 | 60,000,000,000 |
| 39 | Australia | 1,200,000,000 | $60,000,000,000 | 48,000,000,000 |
| 40 | Brunei | 1,100,000,000 | $55,000,000,000 | 44,000,000,000 |
| 41 | Equatorial Guinea | 1,100,000,000 | $55,000,000,000 | 44,000,000,000 |
| 42 | Peru | 700,000,000 | $35,000,000,000 | 28,000,000,000 |
| 43 | Trinidad and Tobago | 700,000,000 | $35,000,000,000 | 28,000,000,000 |
| 44 | Ghana | 660,000,000 | $33,000,000,000 | 26,400,000,000 |
| 45 | Denmark | 611,000,000 | $30,550,000,000 | 24,440,000,000 |
| 46 | Turkmenistan | 600,000,000 | $30,000,000,000 | 24,000,000,000 |
| 47 | Romania | 600,000,000 | $30,000,000,000 | 24,000,000,000 |
| 48 | Uzbekistan | 600,000,000 | $30,000,000,000 | 24,000,000,000 |
| 49 | Italy | 544,500,000 | $27,225,000,000 | 21,780,000,000 |
| 50 | Japan | 541,600,000 | $27,080,000,000 | 21,664,000,000 |
| 51 | Tunisia | 400,000,000 | $20,000,000,000 | 16,000,000,000 |
| 52 | Thailand | 400,000,000 | $20,000,000,000 | 16,000,000,000 |
| 53 | Pakistan | 400,000,000 | $20,000,000,000 | 16,000,000,000 |
| 54 | Ukraine | 400,000,000 | $20,000,000,000 | 16,000,000,000 |
| 55 | Turkey | 300,000,000 | $15,000,000,000 | 12,000,000,000 |
| 56 | Bolivia | 209,800,000 | $10,490,000,000 | 8,392,000,000 |
| 57 | Cameroon | 200,000,000 | $10,000,000,000 | 8,000,000,000 |
| 58 | Papua New Guinea | 200,000,000 | $10,000,000,000 | 8,000,000,000 |
| 59 | Belarus | 200,000,000 | $10,000,000,000 | 8,000,000,000 |
| 60 | Albania | 200,000,000 | $10,000,000,000 | 8,000,000,000 |
| 61 | Congo | 180,000,000 | $9,000,000,000 | 7,200,000,000 |
| 62 | Niger | 150,000,000 | $7,500,000,000 | 6,000,000,000 |
| 63 | Spain | 150,000,000 | $7,500,000,000 | 6,000,000,000 |
| 64 | Chile | 150,000,000 | $7,500,000,000 | 6,000,000,000 |
| 65 | Netherlands | 144,700,000 | $7,235,000,000 | 5,788,000,000 |
| 66 | Cuba | 124,000,000 | $6,200,000,000 | 4,960,000,000 |
| 67 | Cote d’Ivoire | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 68 | Poland | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 69 | Germany | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 70 | Serbia | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 71 | Philippines | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 72 | Bahrain | 100,000,000 | $5,000,000,000 | 4,000,000,000 |
| 73 | Suriname | 88,970,000 | $4,448,500,000 | 3,558,800,000 |
| 74 | France | 84,080,000 | $4,204,000,000 | 3,363,200,000 |
| 75 | Guatemala | 83,070,000 | $4,153,500,000 | 3,322,800,000 |
| 76 | Croatia | 71,000,000 | $3,550,000,000 | 2,840,000,000 |
| 77 | New Zealand | 67,200,000 | $3,360,000,000 | 2,688,000,000 |
| 78 | Burma | 50,000,000 | $2,500,000,000 | 2,000,000,000 |
| 79 | Austria | 47,500,000 | $2,375,000,000 | 1,900,000,000 |
| 80 | Kyrgyzstan | 40,000,000 | $2,000,000,000 | 1,600,000,000 |
| 81 | Georgia | 35,000,000 | $1,750,000,000 | 1,400,000,000 |
| 82 | Bangladesh | 28,000,000 | $1,400,000,000 | 1,120,000,000 |
| 83 | Hungary | 27,190,000 | $1,359,500,000 | 1,087,600,000 |
| 84 | Mauritania | 20,000,000 | $1,000,000,000 | 800,000,000 |
| 85 | South Africa | 15,000,000 | $750,000,000 | 600,000,000 |
| 86 | Czechia | 15,000,000 | $750,000,000 | 600,000,000 |
| 87 | Bulgaria | 15,000,000 | $750,000,000 | 600,000,000 |
| 88 | Israel | 13,950,000 | $697,500,000 | 558,000,000 |
| 89 | Lithuania | 12,000,000 | $600,000,000 | 480,000,000 |
| 90 | Tajikistan | 12,000,000 | $600,000,000 | 480,000,000 |
| 91 | Taiwan | 10,060,000 | $503,000,000 | 402,400,000 |
| 92 | Greece | 10,000,000 | $500,000,000 | 400,000,000 |
| 93 | Slovakia | 9,000,000 | $450,000,000 | 360,000,000 |
| 94 | Benin | 8,000,000 | $400,000,000 | 320,000,000 |
| 95 | Belize | 6,700,000 | $335,000,000 | 268,000,000 |
| 96 | Barbados | 2,530,000 | $126,500,000 | 101,200,000 |
| 97 | Jordan | 1,000,000 | $50,000,000 | 40,000,000 |
| 98 | Morocco | 680,000 | $34,000,000 | 27,200,000 |
| 99 | Ethiopia | 430,000 | $21,500,000 | 17,200,000 |
| Total | 1,662,268,960,000 | $83,113,426,500,000 | 66,490,741,200,000 |
Source: CIA World Factbook
April 22, 2017
The Wealth Distribution
In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in relatively few hands. As of 2013, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 36.7% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 52.2%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 89%, leaving only 11% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one’s home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.8%. Table 2 and Figure 1 present further details, drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2017).
Table 2: Distribution of net worth and financial wealth in the United States, 1983-2013
| Total Net Worth | |||
| Top 1 percent | Next 19 percent | Bottom 80 percent | |
| 1983 | 33.8% | 47.5% | 18.7% |
| 1989 | 37.4% | 46.2% | 16.5% |
| 1992 | 37.2% | 46.6% | 16.2% |
| 1995 | 38.5% | 45.4% | 16.1% |
| 1998 | 38.1% | 45.3% | 16.6% |
| 2001 | 33.4% | 51.0% | 15.6% |
| 2004 | 34.3% | 50.3% | 15.3% |
| 2007 | 34.6% | 50.5% | 15.0% |
| 2010 | 35.1% | 53.5% | 11.4% |
| 2013 | 36.7% | 52.2% | 11.1% |
| Financial (Non-Home) Wealth | |||
| Top 1 percent | Next 19 percent | Bottom 80 percent | |
| 1983 | 42.9% | 48.4% | 8.7% |
| 1989 | 46.9% | 46.5% | 6.6% |
| 1992 | 45.6% | 46.7% | 7.7% |
| 1995 | 47.2% | 45.9% | 7.0% |
| 1998 | 47.3% | 43.6% | 9.1% |
| 2001 | 39.7% | 51.5% | 8.7% |
| 2004 | 42.2% | 50.3% | 7.5% |
| 2007 | 42.7% | 50.3% | 7.0% |
| 2010 | 41.3% | 53.5% | 5.2% |
| 2013 | 42.8% | 51.9% | 5.3% |
Total assets are defined as the sum of: (1) the gross value of owner-occupied housing; (2) other real estate owned by the household; (3) cash and demand deposits; (4) time and savings deposits, certificates of deposit, and money market accounts; (5) government bonds, corporate bonds, foreign bonds, and other financial securities; (6) the cash surrender value of life insurance plans; (7) the cash surrender value of pension plans, including IRAs, Keogh, and 401(k) plans; (8) corporate stock and mutual funds; (9) net equity in unincorporated businesses; and (10) equity in trust funds. Total liabilities are the sum of: (1) mortgage debt; (2) consumer debt, including auto loans; and (3) other debt. From Wolff (2017).
Figure 1: Net worth and financial wealth distribution in the U.S. in 2010
From Wolff (2017).
In terms of types of financial wealth, in 2013 the top one percent of households had 49.8% of all privately held stock, 54.7% of financial securities, and 62.8% of business equity. The top ten percent had 84% to 94% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and almost 80% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America; see Table 3 for the details. The only category which is not skewed severely toward the upper class is debt.
Table 3: Wealth distribution by type of asset, 2013
| Investment Assets | |||
| Top 1 percent | Next 9 percent | Bottom 90 percent | |
| Business equity | 62.8% | 31.0% | 6.2% |
| Financial securities | 54.7% | 39.6% | 5.7% |
| Stocks and mutual funds | 49.8% | 41.2% | 9.1% |
| Trusts | 49.5% | 34.0% | 16.5% |
| Non-home real estate | 33.7% | 44.1% | 22.2% |
| TOTAL investment assets | 51.5% | 37.0% | 11.5% |