|
The Census Bureau informs us that median household incomes are falling. In
2002 they fell for the third year running to $42,409. The official poverty
rate, defined as an income below $18,392 for a family of four, rose for the
second year in a row, from 11.7 percent to 12.1 percent of the population.
34.6 million Americans are said to live in poverty now. Moreover, the number
of Americans without health insurance, which is believed to be an important
symptom of poverty, rose by 5.7 percent to 43.6 million, which is the biggest
single-year increase in a decade.
No matter what we may think of official statistics concocted by busy officials
in a government bureau, they may make an important point: many Americans linger
in poverty despite modest growth of the economy. Armies of civil servants,
federal and state, are catering to the peoples welfare, especially to that
of the poor and underprivileged --yet, their numbers are rising. This is all
the more confounding as numerous technological innovations have made human
labor more productive than ever before. Computer-aided manufacturing has raised
labor productivity significantly which, other conditions being equal, should
have improved the standards of living of all. Without the magnificent technological
improvements in our time, American productivity and living conditions might
have fallen visibly.
Economists trying to explain this puzzling development point to a fundamental
economic principle: human well-being depends primarily on the productivity
of human labor which in turn hinges on the amount of capital invested per head
of population. American workers equipped with $100,000 worth of power tools
are more productive than men carrying bows and arrows or even working with
horses and buggies. Throughout American history economic conditions improved
remarkably because many people saved, invested, and reinvested part of their
incomes and created much capital.
Business capital consists of a myriad of facilities of production as well
as liquid funds used in the production of other goods. It comprises industrial
and office buildings, machinery, equipment, resources for the generation, transmission,
and distribution of electricity, gas, and water. Labor productivity and levels
of living tend to rise when capital formation increases faster than the growth
of population; they tend to fall when capital is consumed or its rate of formation
falls behind that of growth of population. A common cause of decline is the
consumption of savings by government suffering large budget deficits; a visible
symptom of decline is the aging, wear and tear, and disrepair of the facilities
of production, idle machinery, and plant closings.
If the Census Bureau is correct in its findings that American household incomes
are declining, economists must conclude that general labor productivity is
decreasing. Surely, it has risen in high-tech industries which frequently make
headlines, but it must have declined per head of American population. Industrial
productivity reportedly grew by an astonishing eight percent during the third
quarter, but output was running at only 73 percent of capacity. The productivity
of the average American household more than six percent of which are suffering
unemployment and underemployment probably stagnated or even declined.
The Census Bureau finding does not surprise economists who observe the deficit
spending by all levels of government; deficits consume capital en masse. In
fiscal 2003 the Federal government alone needed to raise $555 billion to cover
its deficits and may need even more in coming years. Many governments of states
and municipalities rely on the capital market to cover their deficits. Moreover,
encouraged by record low interest rates, many individuals have gone on consumption
sprees. Household debt is rising at an 11 percent annual rate and home mortgage
debt at 14.2 percent. Total debt in the United States has soared since 1998.
Despite low interest rates, household's debt-service payments are alarmingly
high at 13 percent of household income. Should interest rates ever return to
market levels, the payments would rise higher yet and exert painful pressure
on hapless debtors.
Federal tax cuts and tax rebates spurred the joy of spending, but they also
increased the Federal debt and drained the capital market. If it were not for
the creation of massive quantities of fiat money by the bubble-blowing Federal
Reserve System and the creation of even more fiduciary credit by commercial
banks, interest rates would rise immediately and call a halt to the pleasures
of deficit spending. And if it were not for foreign creditors, in particular,
Japanese, Chinese, and Indonesian banks investing their trade surpluses in
U.S. Treasury obligations, interest rates would soar and embarrass many debtors.
When the present bubble finally bursts, the Census Bureau will keep us informed
about falling household income.
|