December 25th, 2017

# Retail is suffering because the middle classes have lost $1,355 trillion in income since 1970 (written by lawrence krubner, however indented passages are often quotes). You can contact lawrence at: lawrence@krubner.com Nowadays, there are a lot of articles being written about the collapse of retail in the USA. Some people blame Amazon and online shopping, but that is only a trivial part of the problem.$1,355,610,000,000 of consumer spending is missing from the demand side of USA spending, and that should be kept in mind whenever you read an article about retail going through hell. The big boom in retail in the mid-20th century was thanks a strong middle class. Conversely, the collapse of income of the middle quintiles of income must lead to a contraction of retail. Consider these charts:

Table H-2. Share of Aggregate Income Received by Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of Households

https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-income-households.html

Percent of income for the 3 middle quintiles in 1970:

10.8

17.4

24.5

total: 52.7%

In 2016:

8.3

14.2

22.9

total: 45.4%

The difference: 7.3%

The GDP of the USA in 2016:

18.57 trillion

So if the middle classes still had the same share of national income as they had in 1970, they would have an additional $1,355,610,000,000 to spend or save. Retail spending in the USA in 2016 was around$5 trillion:

https://www.emarketer.com/Article/US-Retail-Sales-Near-5-Trillion-2016/1013368

Hold the spend/save ratio constant and we can say that retail spending would be 27% higher in 2016, if the middle quintiles still had the same percentage of national income as they had in 1970.

You can make some adjustments for the increased spending in the top quintile, but most of the income has gone to the top 1% and most of that goes to savings rather than spending.

Obviously, all of our current stories about retail would be different if the middle classes still had the same percentage of national income that they had in 1970.

And please, please, please note, Amazon only had $131 billion in sales during 2016. It’s impact is very small compared to that missing$1,355 trillion.

Source

Check out my book:

April 14, 2019 4:34 pm

April 14, 2019 12:28 pm

"Well, wouldn't you know, the slagging of Katy Bouman who is the algorithm designer for the black hole image is..."

April 11, 2019 4:30 pm

"In a similar vein, yesterday a woman scientist wrote about how Wikipedia articles about woman scientists are o..."

March 30, 2019 5:31 pm

"Orbay, with any type of creative endeavor, I think you'll find 90% of the output is mediocre. That is true for..."

March 30, 2019 4:51 am

"I agree, but you consider a great game a great achievement, not money from wasting other people's lives? I..."

March 21, 2019 10:38 pm

"Thank you for this post. This sums up what I have been feeling for years now with OOP in such a great way. I..."

March 13, 2019 1:58 pm

"Same shit here. I regret ever making a spraybook account..."

February 20, 2019 10:41 am

"A couple of my favorite bloggers started doing twitter. Instead of permanent additions to knowledge, there is..."

February 20, 2019 3:24 am

"If you have occasional sleep paralysis, you can take steps at home to control this disorder. Start by making s..."

February 19, 2019 11:09 am

"If static typing lead to greater programmer productivity (via a reduction in bugs) then corporate Americ..."

February 3, 2019 2:32 pm

"wait wait wut? what's the liberals doing here?..."

January 18, 2019 10:22 am

"The reason cyberpunk doesn't die is because it all came true. From Noah Smith on twitter: "The cool thing a..."

December 16, 2018 9:06 am

"Cat Mara, thank you for catching that. I've fixed it now. (The URL was a "v" by mistake. Looks like I was tryi..."

December 16, 2018 5:16 am

December 12, 2018 7:50 pm

"Jussi Nurminen, thank you for writing. I believe you are correct, in the sense that Python 2.x had all the bas..."

December 28, 2017
7:15 pm

By Anonymous

Apparently, $1,355,610,000,000 =$1,355 trillion.

December 28, 2017
7:59 pm

By lawrence

I suppose we should round that to \$1.356 trillion.