The Answer is for the government to tax them or at least withdraw their tax
breaks and spend the money on developing a vital 21st century economy and
culture that will renew and cleanse an ageing and corrupt private sector.  

I find that wealthy doctors are now speaking about quitting medicine or
pressuring the government for more stable salaries and cost supports i.e.
socialism.    I nearly swallowed my teeth when my surgeon told me that.  The
surgeon opened a private practice and has lost $20,000 a month for the past
two years.  Working in a hospital was a pain of bureaucracy but he had a
stable salary and a retirement.   Now that is gone and the savings are also
almost gone.     

He would have done as well to have worked as a singer.   At least he
wouldn't have had the expenses and was doing something that people loved and
he did as well.  He would not have lost anywhere near what the private
practice has taken from him.   Before he went into it, the estimate by the
experts considering his skills and background was six months of loss and
then a stable practice.   Not in the old U.S. of A.   

He's not the first to encounter this.   A medical school professor told me
that he was recommending that graduating MDs enter the military for a stable
life and salary while they are young.   They could get first rate training
and lots of experience and retire early to a hospital or private practice
somewhere that they liked.   But not to start now!   He told me this in
2001.   Before it had gotten as bad as it is now. 

Of course my opinion is just experience and networking.   The folks with the
theories and the numbers say otherwise.   My Doctor/singer paid a lot for
that opinion from them and has paid a lot more since they were full of horse
feathers.   Those "experts"  should get out here and get some practical
experience so they would have some objectivity around those numbers.   It's
called science.    What they are practicing is philosophical logic and
philosophers aren't making much money these days either unless they can sing
and dance and give workshops on how everyone else should do what they say
(even though it doesn't practical sense.).

REH

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Gurstein
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 6:55 AM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Subject: [Futurework] As spending by wealthy weakens, so does economy


Who knew?

M


Jeannine Aversa, AP Economics Writer, On Sunday August 1, 2010, 2:09 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Wealthy Americans aren't spending so freely anymore. And
the rest of us are feeling the squeeze.

The question is whether the rich will cut back so much as to tip the economy
back into recession -- or if they will spend at least enough to sustain the
recovery.

The answer may not be clear for months. But their cutbacks help explain why
the rebound could be stalling. The economy grew at just a 2.4 percent rate
in the April-June quarter, the government said Friday, much slower than the
3.7 percent rate for the first quarter.

Economists say overall consumer spending has slowed mainly because the
richest 5 percent of Americans -- those earning at least $207,000 -- are
buying less. They account for about 14 percent of total spending. These
shoppers have retrenched as their investment values have sunk and home
values have languished.

In addition, the most sweeping tax cuts in a generation are due to expire in
January, and lawmakers are divided over whether the government can afford to
make any of them permanent as the federal budget deficit continues to
balloon. President Barack Obama wants to allow the top rates to increase
next year for individuals making more than $200,000 and couples making more
than $250,000. The wealthy may be keeping some money on the sidelines due to
uncertainty over whether or not they will soon face higher taxes.

The Standard & Poor's 500 stock index has tumbled 9.5 percent since its
high-water mark in late April. Home values fell 3.2 percent in the first
quarter, according to the Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller 20-city home price
index.

Think of the wealthy as the main engine of the economy: When they buy more,
the economy hums. When they cut back, it sputters. The rest of us mainly go
along for the ride.

Earlier this year, gains in stock portfolios had boosted household wealth.
And the rich responded by spending freely. That raised hopes the recovery
would strengthen.

No longer. The dizzying plunge on Wall Street in May and June and lingering
stock market turbulence have shrunk Americans' wealth. The Dow fell 10
percent for the April-June quarter. The broader Standard & Poor's 500 index
dropped 11.9 percent. And the rich are once again more cautious about
spending, economists say.

The affluent went back to tightening their belts in June after months of
vigorous showing. Data from MasterCard Advisors' SpendingPulse showed luxury
spending fell in June for the first time since November. The decline
followed a solid rise in sales revenue earlier in the spring.

"It isn't a good omen for the consumer recovery, which cannot exist without
the luxury spender," said Mike Niemira, chief economist at the International
Council of Shopping Centers.

At the same time, government reports show shoppers as a whole cut back on
their spending in both May and June.

Companies have responded by refusing to step up hiring. The housing market
is stalling. And Americans are seeing little or no pay raises. It adds up to
a recipe for a grinding recovery to slow further.

And it helps explain why economists expect the rebound to lose momentum in
the second half of the year. Especially if the rich don't resume bigger
spending.

"They are the bellwether for the economy," says Mark Zandi, chief economist
at Moody's Analytics. "The fact that they turned more cautious is why the
recovery is losing momentum. If they panic again, that would be the fodder
for a double-dip recession."

That's because whether they're saving or spending, the wealthy deliver an
outsize impact on the economy. What's not clear is whether they will remain
too nervous to spend freely again for many months. That's what happened when
the recession hit in December 2007 and then when the financial crisis
ignited in September 2008.

As their stock holdings and home values sank, the affluent lost wealth.
Their jobs weren't safe, either. Bankers, lawyers, accountants and mortgage
brokers were among those getting pink-slipped. Those who did have jobs
feared losing them. Neither group spent much.

Instead, Americans' savings rate spiked. And most of the increase came from
the richest 5 percent, according to research by Moody's Analytics.

In the first quarter of this year, stocks rebounded, layoffs slowed and the
rich were spending again.

But now the rich are building up their savings and splurging less on
discretionary items. That's starting to show up in softer sales at upscale
retailers, such as Neiman Marcus and Saks Inc. It's because people like
Angeli Gianchandani, 40, have cut back.

She used to hit the mall every two weeks -- flicking through the racks at
Saks or Bloomingdale's and returning home with a new frock. Not anymore.
She's limiting her splurges now. The downturn in the stock market has played
a role.

"Rather than spending more money, I'm keeping more," says Gianchandani, who
lives in New Jersey.

Even with recent losses, household net worth has risen 13 percent from its
bottom during the recession. Net worth -- the value of assets like homes,
checking accounts and investments minus debts like mortgages and credit
cards -- grew 2.1 percent in the first quarter.

However, net worth would have to grow 21 percent more to regain its
pre-recession peak. In the meantime, don't expect the wealthy to suddenly
start spending lavishly.

"The affluent -- as their wealth goes down -- they'll become more and more
conservative," predicts David Levy, chairman of the Jerome Levy Forecasting
Center.

Associated Press Writer Anne D'Innocenzio in New York contributed to this
report.


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to