Hot off the presses: these popular charts are now updated to include final energy price data for 2008.
Americans are falling behind -- most of us anyway. We're working longer than ever before to maintain a standard of living that once we took for granted. With respect to gas prices, average Americans are much worse off than they were in 1970.
The working poor, in particular, are getting absolutely crushed. Their economic standing has deteriorated even faster than the middle class. At average prices in 2008, a full day's work at the federal minimum wage would scarcely pay for a single tank of gas. In a car-dependent nation, that means that even basic transportation is quickly getting out of reach for low-income families.
Interestingly, the pain is being felt way up the income ladder. In fact, you'd see the same kind of trends for virtually every income strata if I had plotted their purchasing power here (though the effect is less pronounced the higher you go). But there is one big exception to the falling behind story: the super-rich. Nowadays, I suppose they should probably be known as the super-ultra-uber-rich. But whatever you call them, they're doing great!
So that's a relief.
The kind of figures that are kicked around in the income stratosphere are so mind-boggling that they're almost beyond the comprehension of us ordinary schmoes. Forty years ago a CEO might make 60 times the minimum wage -- a huge gulf that's comparable to the spread in other wealthy nations -- but nowadays a CEO might pull down 800 or 1,000 times the minimum wage. So despite skyrocketing prices for fuel and other basic commodities, the very rich are increasingly insulated from the real economy.
But what can we do about it? First, we need to understand the cause.
The explanation for Americans working harder than ever to pay for fuel is twofold. First, energy prices went through the roof in 2008 -- we all saw the headlines last year, and the rise in prices at the pump compared to a few years back. But second, because middle class incomes have stagnated to an alarming degree. That second factor, however, almost never makes the headlines. That's a shame because middle class Gen-Xers are watching the lifestyle they grew up with -- the average Baby Boomer purchasing power -- recede over the horizon.
For median income-earners -- the middle class, by definition -- things have been getting pretty gloomy lately. In fact, if gas prices are any indication, we're worse now than we were even during the worst days of the energy crisis. See this chart:
In light of the recent economic meltdown, it's pretty clear that we need some serious changes to the economy -- and in particular we need aid for low- and median-income folks. After all, we have some control of our incomes and income equality.
On the other side of the equation there's our energy spending. We have very little control over highly volatile oil prices, which are determined by world markets and (sometimes) by speculators. But we do have control over how much oil we use. To date, we've organized our economy so that we use a lot -- and oil has paid us back by repeatedly whiplashing our economy when prices spike.
So it would seem to make economic sense then that we begin unhitching our economy from oil. That means more drilling isn't just futile, it's actively counterproductive. It's like trying to cure an addiction by looking for one last fix.
In the long run, limiting our use of fossil fuels -- as with a legal cap on climate-warming emissions -- isn't just a climate strategy to protect polar bears. It's a bread-and-butter economic strategy to help the middle class.
It's hard to know where things will go from here. On the upside, oil prices have dropped on fears of big demand reductions owing to an economic meltdown. On the downside, well, er, economic meltdown. It will be cold comfort to middle class workers facing unemployment that they won't need to commute, and they won't be able to afford even a road-trip vacation.
Notes: Gasoline price data from the US Energy Information Administration, here; gas prices include taxes. Minimum wages from US Department of Labor, here. Average income from the US Census Bureau, here. Average income refers to the median annual earnings for fulltime year-round workers. I combined earnings for men and women by using a weighted average for each year. Median earnings in 2008 are estimated at 100 percent of 2007 income. Annual wages are converted to hourly wages by dividing annual earnings into 2080 hours of work, a standard definition of fulltime work. Average CEO pay in 1970 is estimated at 62 times the pay of a minimum wage worker based on this analysis by the Economic Policy Institute. Average CEO pay in 2008 is conservatively estimated at 821 times the pay of a minimum wage worker based on the same EPI source but using the 2005 ratio. A big thanks to Laurie Kellogg who designed these charts.
This piece originally appeared on the Sightline Institute's blog, The Daily Blog.
Is there also a contribution from a fiat currency losing value against a commodity?
It would be interesting to see how these data compare with WORLD figures. Considering that we in the US have 5% of the world's population but consume 30% of the world's resources and create 30% of the world's waste.
Would we still see that the rich get richer and the burden of global redistribution of wealth goes to the poor and middle class?
Perhaps someone should ask Prof. Hans Rosling to check this out for us (see http://www.ted.com/index.php/speakers/hans_rosling.html ).
Annie Leonard's Story Of Stuff ( http://www.storyofstuff.com ), which attributes the resource use statistic to "Global Issues: An Introduction" (2001), and the waste statistic to Miller (1998) quoted in "Global Environmental Issues" by Frances Harris (2004). I have tracked down and confirmed the number in the Harris text.