See the
bottom of this post for BEA’s Table 10 where BEA breaks down Personal Income (PI). I deleted a lot of the quarters from the original table. The table below shows you figures for the final quarter of 2013 and the percentage change since the final quarter of 2012. Table 10 is worrisome with respect to
future US growth. While most GDP figures reported are in real or deflated
terms, most of what you see in Table 10 is nominal, meaning that each item is
measured in current prices. The top line shows that PI in the US was about $14.3 trillion in the fourth quarter (annualized). It increased by
about $230 billion during 2013. That amounted to a nominal increase of 1.6%. By
historical terms that increase was very weak.
But the story is much worse:
·
If
we deflate PI for inflation what remains was a 0.6% real increase in Personal
Income in 2013.
·
During
that same time period real GDP increased by 2.5% and Real Personal Consumption
expenditures increased by 2.1%.
·
Thus
real PI is not a sustaining force when it comes to driving spending in the
economy.
·
At
the bottom of the table under addenda you see something called Personal Disposable
Income in chained dollars (RPDI). RPDI
is a better proxy for the impact of income of spending since it removes
inflation and taxes from nominal Personal Income.
·
RPDI
declined by 0.2% in the past year.
I come to two conclusions. First, spending in 2013 was not being driven by real income
gains. Second, spending has been driven by more debt or depletion of saving.
Near the bottom of the chart you see that the rate of Personal Saving declined
from 6.6% of GDP down to 4.5% in just one year. Or if you prefer dollar terms,
US Personal Savings declined by $259 billion between the end of 2012 and
the end of 2013.
Let’s
understand better the sources of the problem. In 2013 PI rose by $230 billion. It
sounds impressive that Wages and Salaries accounted for $146 billion of the
increase. But also included in the gain in PI was $76 billion in government
transfer payments to households. These transfers include money the government
sends to us in the way of benefits for welfare, pensions, healthcare and so on. It is
remarkable that government transfers were responsible for more than half as
much as the entire private sector’s wage and salary growth.
So while
government was a main contributor in 2013 to the gains in PI, it was
also the main detractor. In 2013 households paid money to the government –
money for personal income taxes and also their contributions to Social Security
system – or what we call payroll taxes. The combined total of income and
payroll taxes in 2013 was about $2.8 trillion – or $280 billion more than in
2012. Say what? PI increased by $230 billion in 2013 while household taxes
increased by $280 billion. Now you can more easily see why RDPI decreased in
2013. Although the government is propping up income through increased transfer
payments of $76 billion, they were taking it away from spending by increasing
taxes by $230 billion.
Bottom line.
Wages and salaries grew by $146 billion in 2013. The government added to those
income gains by increasing transfer payments by $76 billion (as you can see
from the table there are other sources of PI but I am intentionally ignoring
that detail here). So the sum of the
increases of W&S and Government Transfers in 2013 was about $222 billion. The
government wiped out that entire increase with the $230 billion increase in taxes.
And we
wonder why households are not spending more. The result of course is that
people have to buy things. Without sufficient income growth they borrow or run down their precious savings. This
is bad for a lot of reasons. But the main point of this posting is that
household spending is the core of the economy representing 70% of all spending. Our policymakers cannot handle financial planning. Our government deficit
is such a problem that we must tax our households to death. To make up for that
fact, they give some of us transfer payments but that does little to support
spending. Worse yet, because of government debt, there is pressure to reduce
transfer payments and raise taxes. Under current budget and taxation policy it
is hard to see how the engine of the economy will be coming back anytime soon.
Table 10.--Personal Income and Its Disposition
| |||
[Billions of dollars; quarters seasonally adjusted at annual rates]
|
2013Q4r | %Chg | |
Personal income1........................... | 14303.4 | 1.6 |
Compensation of employees................ | 8968.8 | 2.1 |
Wages and salaries..................... | 7232.5 | 2.1 |
Supplements to wages and salaries...... | 1736.3 | 2.1 |
Proprietors' income with inventory | ||
valuation and capital consumption | ||
adjustments............................. | 1356.2 | 8.7 |
Farm................................... | 112.9 | 51.5 |
Nonfarm................................ | 1243.3 | 6.0 |
Rental income of persons with capital | ||
consumption adjustment.................. | 602.7 | 8.5 |
Personal income receipts on assets....... | 2030.6 | -1.6 |
Personal interest income............... | 1240.9 | 1.8 |
Personal dividend income............... | 789.7 | -6.5 |
Personal current transfer receipts....... | 2463.6 | 3.2 |
Less: Contributions for government | ||
social insurance, domestic............. | 1118.5 | 15.6 |
Less: Personal current taxes............... | 1681.9 | 8.3 |
Equals: Disposable personal income......... | 12621.5 | 0.8 |
Less: Personal outlays..................... | 12056.3 | 3.1 |
Equals: Personal saving.................... | 565.2 | -31.4 |
Personal saving as a percentage of | ||
disposable personal income.............. | 4.5 | |
Addenda: | ||
Personal income excluding current | ||
transfer receipts, billions of | ||
chained (2009) dollars2................. | 10997.0 | 0.3 |
Disposable personal income, billions of | ||
chained (2009) dollars2................. | 11723.1 | -0.2 |
Dear LSD. Yer numbers don’t lie and evidence the grand scheme to “break” the USA by burdening it with debt, devaluing the greenback, taxing, taxing, and more taxing those nasty 1%’ers, and making folks more dependent on govomit. I know, I know, I know, I know . . . . yer bud Paul Krugman would not acknowledge the scheme but we in the know know otherwise, don’t we?
ReplyDelete