Connect with us

Money

The Decline of Upward Mobility in One Chart

Published

on

Decline Upward Mobility

The Decline Of Upward Mobility In One Chart

For decades, a majority of Americans have been able to climb the economic ladder by earning higher incomes than their parents. These improving conditions are known as upward mobility, and form an important part of the American Dream.

However, each consecutive generation is finding it harder to make this ascent. In this graphic, we illustrate the decline in upward mobility over five decades using data from Opportunity Insights.

Understanding The Chart

This graphic plots the probability that a 30-year-old American has to outearn their parents (vertical axis) depending on their parent’s income percentile (horizontal axis). The 1st percentile represents America’s lowest earners, while the 99th percentile the richest.

As we move from left to right on the chart, the portion of people who outearn their parents takes a steep decline. This suggests that people born into upper class families are less likely to outearn their parents, regardless of generation.

The key takeaway, though, is that the starting point of this downward trend has shifted to the left. In other words, fewer people in the lower- and middle-classes are climbing the economic ladder.

Decade BornChance of Outearning Parents (Bottom Percentile)Chance of Outearning Parents (50th Percentile)Chance of Outearning Parents (Top Income Percentile) 
194095%93%41%
195090%81%15%
196086%62%7%
197090%59%16%
198079%45%8%

Declines can be seen across the board, but those growing up in the middle-class (50th percentile) have taken the largest hit. Within this bracket, individuals born in 1980 have only a 45% chance of outearning their parents at age 30, compared to 93% for those born in 1940.

Stagnating Wage Growth a Culprit

One factor behind America’s deteriorating upward mobility is the sluggish pace at which wages have grown. For example, the average hourly wage in 1964, when converted to 2018 dollars, is $20.27. Compare this to $22.65, the average hourly wage in 2018. That represents a mere 11.7% increase over a span of 54 years.

However, this may not be as bad as it sounds. While the prices of some goods and services have risen over time, others have actually become more affordable. Since January 1998, for example, the prices of electronic goods such as TVs and cellphones have actually decreased. In this way, individuals today are more prosperous than previous generations.

This benefit is likely outweighed by relative increases in other services, though. Whereas inflation since January 1998 totaled 58.8%, the costs of health and education services increased by more than 160% over the same time frame.

Income Distribution

While wages have been stagnant as a whole, it doesn’t paint the full picture. Another factor to consider is America’s changing income distribution.

Income Class1970 Share of U.S. Aggregate Income2018 Share of U.S. Aggregate Income
Upper 28%48%
Middle62%43%
Lower 10%9%

Source: Pew Research Center

Like the data on upward mobility, the middle class takes the largest hit here, with its share of U.S. aggregate income falling by 19 percentage points. Over the same time frame, the upper class was able to increase its share of total income by 20 percentage points.

Is It All Bad News?

Americans are less likely to earn more than their parents, but this doesn’t mean that upward mobility has completely disappeared—it’s just becoming less accessible. Below, we illustrate the changes in size for different income classes from 1967 to 2016.

The upper middle class has grown significantly, from 6% of the population in 1967 to 33% in 2016. At the same time, the middle class shrank from 47% to 36% and the lower middle class shrank from 31% to 16%.

The data suggests that some middle class Americans are still managing to pull themselves up into the next income bracket—it’s just not an effect that was as broad-based as it’s been in the past.

Does The American Dream Still Exist?

The American Dream is the belief that upward mobility is attainable for everyone through their own actions. This implies that growth will be continuous and widespread, two factors that have seemingly deteriorated in recent decades.

Researchers believe there are numerous complex reasons behind America’s stagnating wages. A decline in union membership, for example, could be eroding employees’ collective bargaining power. Other factors such as technological change may also apply downwards pressure on the wages of less educated workers.

Income inequality, on the other hand, is clearly shown by the data. We can also refer to the Gini-coefficient, a statistical measure of economic inequality. It ranges between 0 and 1, with 0 representing perfect equality and 1 representing perfect inequality (one person holds all the income). The U.S. currently has a Gini-coefficient of 0.434, the highest of any G7 country.

Long story short, the American Dream is still alive—it’s just becoming harder to come by.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Comments

Financing

The 25 Largest Private Equity Firms in One Chart

How big is private equity? We show funds raised by the largest 25 private equity firms over the last five years and their notable investments.

Published

on

PrivateEquityTop25-Infographic-Share1

The 25 Largest Private Equity Firms Since 2015

Frequent the business section of your favorite newspaper long enough, and you’ll see mentions of private equity (PE).

Maybe it’s because a struggling company got bought out and taken private, just as Toys “R” Us did in 2005 for $6.6 billion.

Otherwise, it’s likely a mention of a major investment (or payout) that a PE firm scored through venture or growth capital. For example, after Airbnb had to postpone its original plans for a 2020 initial public offering (IPO) in light of the pandemic, the company raised more than $1 billion in PE funding to plan for a new listing later this year.

Yet many people don’t fully understand the size and scope of private equity. To demonstrate the impact of PE, we break down the funds raised by the top 25 firms over the last five years.

How Private Equity Firms Operate

First, we need to differentiate between private equity and other forms of investment.

A PE firm makes investments and provides financial backing to startups and non-public companies (or public companies that are being taken private).

Each firm raises a PE fund by pooling capital from investors, which it then uses to carry out transactions such as leveraged buyouts, venture and growth capital, distressed investments, and mezzanine capital.

Unlike other investment firms such as hedge funds, private equity firms take a direct role in managing their assets. In order to maximize value, that can mean asset stripping, lay-offs, and other significant restructuring.

Traditionally, PE investments are held on a longer-term basis, with the goal of maximizing the target company’s value through an IPO, merger, recapitalization, or sale.

The List: The Most PE Funds Raised in Five Years

So which names should you know in private equity?

Here are the largest 25 private equity firms by their five-year PE fundraising total over the last five years, with data on funds and investments from respective firms and Private Equity International.

They include well-known private equity houses like The Blackstone Group and KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts), as well as investment managers with private equity divisions like BlackRock.

RankPrivate Equity Firm5-Year Funds Raised ($B)Notable Current Investments
1The Blackstone Group95.95Refinitiv, Merlin Entertainments
2The Carlyle Group61.72ZoomInfo, PPD
3Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. 54.76Axel Springer SE, Epic Games
4TPG Capital38.68Cirque du Soleil, Cushman & Wakefield
5Warburg Pincus37.59Airtel, Sundyne
6Neuberger Berman36.51Marquee Brands, Telxius
7CVC Capital Partners35.88Petco, Premiership Rugby
8EQT Partners34.46Dunlop Protective Footwear, SUSE
9Advent International33.49Cobham, Serta Simmons Bedding,
10Vista Equity Partners32.1Finastra, Mindbody
11Leonard Green & Partners26.31Lucky Brand, Signet Jewelers
12Cinven26.15Kurt Geiger, Hotelbeds
13Bain Capital25.74Virgin Voyages, Canada Goose
14Apollo Global Management25.42ADT, Chuck E Cheese's
15Thoma Bravo25.29Dynatrace, McAfee
16Insight Partners22.74Monday.com, HelloFresh
17BlackRock22.46Authentic Brands Group, Qumulo
18General Atlantic22.42Airbnb, Vox Media
19Permira22.21Dr. Martens, Informatica
20Brookfield Asset Management21.69Multiplex, Westinghouse Electric
21EnCap Investments21.33Pegasus Resources, Lotus Midstream
22Francisco Partners19.13Verifone, GoodRx
23Platinum Equity18.00Livingston International, Palace Sports & Entertainment
24Hillhouse Capital Group17.89Miniso, Belle International
25Partners Group17.87Civica, KinderCare Education 

Most of the world’s top PE firms, including TPG Capital (which invested in Ducati Motorcycles, J. Crew, and Del Monte Foods) and Advent International (an early investor in Lululemon Athletica) are headquartered in the U.S.

In fact, of the largest 25 private equity firms in the last five years, just four are headquartered in Europe (CVC, EQT, Cinven, and Permira) and one in Asia (Hillhouse).

Another name that might be recognizable is Bain Capital, which was co-founded by Utah Senator and former Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney and found success with investments in AMC Theatres, Domino’s Pizza, and iHeartMedia.

Famous Private Equity Investments

One of the most surprising things investors discover about private equity is how many large organizations have been funded through the PE world.

More well-known investments include KKR’s $31.1 billion takeover of food and tobacco conglomerate RJR Nabisco in 1989, and Blackstone’s $26 billion buyout of Hilton Hotels Corporation in 2007.

But other well-known companies have been funded, saved, or restructured through private equity. That list includes grocery chain Safeway, fast food chain Burger King, international racing operator Formula One Group, and hotel and casino company Caesars Entertainment (then called Harrah’s Entertainment).

Many other notable investments could soon pay off for private equity. With IPOs back in season, tech companies like Airbnb and Epic Games are ripe for payouts. At the same time, restructuring companies like J. Crew and Chuck E Cheese’s always offers a chance to recapitalize.

With the COVID-19 economic downturn resulting in newly distressed companies and potential takeover targets, expect the private equity world to be very active in the foreseeable future.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Continue Reading

Politics

Charting America’s Debt: $27 Trillion and Counting

America’s debt recently surpassed $27 trillion. In this infographic, we peel back the layers to understand why it keeps on growing.

Published

on

Why America’s Debt Doesn’t Stop Growing

Public sector debt has been a contentious topic for many years. While some believe that excessive government borrowing can be harmful over the long term, others have argued that it acts as a powerful tool for stimulating growth.

In the U.S., the latter view appears to have taken hold. Since 2008, America’s national debt has surged nearly 200%, reaching $27 trillion as of October 2020. To gain a better understanding of this ever-growing debt, this infographic takes a closer look at various U.S. budgetary datasets including the 2019 fiscal balance.

America’s Debt vs. GDP

Government debts are often represented by incredibly large numbers, making them hard to comprehend. By comparing America’s debt to its annual GDP, we can get a better grasp on the relative size of the country’s financial obligations.

YearTotal Public Debt (USD)GDP (USD)Debt as % of GDP
1994$4.5T$7.1T63%
1995$4.8T$7.5T64%
1996$5.0T$7.9T63%
1997$5.3T$8.4T63%
1998$5.5T$8.9T62%
1999$5.6T$9.4T60%
2000$5.8T$10.0T58%
2001$5.7T$10.5T54%
2002$5.9T$10.8T55%
2003$6.4T$11.2T57%
2004$7.0T$11.9T59%
2005$7.6T$12.8T59%
2006$8.2T$13.6T60%
2007$8.7T$14.2T61%
2008$9.2T$14.7T63%
2009$10.6T$14.4T74%
2010$12.3T$14.7T84%
2011$14.0T$15.3T92%
2012$15.2T$16.0T95%
2013$16.4T$16.6T99%
2014$17.3T$17.1T101%
2015$18.1T$18.0T101%
2016$18.9T$18.5T102%
2017$19.9T$19.2T104%
2018$20.5T$20.2T101%
2019$21.9T$21.1T104%
2020$23.2T$21.6T107%
April 2020$23.7T$19.5T122%

Source: Federal Reserve, U.S. Treasury

In this context, U.S. debt was relatively moderate between 1994 to 2007, averaging 60% of GDP over the timeframe. This took a drastic turn during the Global Financial Crisis, with debt climbing to 95% of GDP by 2012.

Since then, America’s debt has only increased in relative size. In April 2020, with the COVID-19 pandemic in full force, it reached a record 122% of GDP. This may sound troubling at first, but there are a few caveats.

For starters, there are many other advanced economies that have also surpassed the 100% debt-to-GDP milestone. The most noteworthy is Japan, where the debt-to-GDP ratio has climbed beyond 200%. Furthermore, this is not the first time America has found itself in this situation—by the end of World War II, debt-to-GDP peaked at 106% before declining to historic lows in the 1970s.

What’s Preventing the Debt From Shrinking?

Although the U.S. continuously pays off portions of its debt, the total amount it owes has increased each year since 2001. That’s because the federal government runs consistent budget deficits, meaning it spends more than it earns. During economic crises, these deficits can become incredibly large.

Fiscal Year (Sept 30)Budget Surplus or Deficit (USD billions)
2000+$236B
2001+$128B
2002-$158B
2003-$378B
2004-$418B
2005-$318B
2006-$248B
2007-$161B
2008-$458B
2009-$1,412B
2010-$1,294B
2011-$1,299B
2012-$1,076B
2013-$680B
2014-$485B
2015-$441B
2016-$585B
2017-$665B
2018-$779B
2019-$984B
2020-$3,131B

Source: Federal Reserve

In the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis, the U.S. recorded an annual deficit of $1.4 trillion in FY2009. This was largely due to the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which provided tax rebates and other economic relief.

In the economic battle against COVID-19’s impacts, the boundaries have been pushed even further. The annual deficit for FY2020 weighs in at a staggering $3.1 trillion, the largest ever. Contributing to this historic deficit was the $2 trillion CARES Act, which provided wide-ranging support to the entire U.S. economy.

Breaking Down the 2019 Fiscal Balance

Even in the years between these two economic crises, government spending still outpaced revenues. To find out more, we’ve broken down the 2019 fiscal balance into its various components.

Federal Spending

Total spending in FY2019 was roughly $4.4 trillion, and can be broken out into three components.

The first component is Mandatory Spending, which accounted for 62% of the total. Mandatory spending is required by law, and includes funding for important programs such as social security.

CategoryAmount (USD billions)Percent of Total Federal Spending
Health programs$1,121B25.5%
Social security$1,039B23.6%
Income security$301B6.8%
Federal civilian and military retirement$164B3.7%
Other$109B2.5%
Total mandatory spending$2,735B62.2%

Figures may not add to 100 due to rounding. Source: Peter G. Peterson Foundation

The largest category here was Health, with $1.1 trillion in funding for programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Social security, which provides payments to retirees, was the second largest at $1.0 trillion.

The second component is Discretionary Spending, which accounted for 30% of the total. Discretionary spending is determined on an annual basis by Congress and the President.

Discretionary SpendingAmount (USD)Share of Total Federal Spending
Defense$677B15.4%
Transportation$100B2.3%
Veteran's benefits & services$85B1.9%
Education$72B1.6%
Health$66B1.5%
Administration of justice$59B1.3%
International affairs$52B1.2%
General government$51B1.2%
Housing assistance$49B1.1%
Natural resources and environment$44B1.0%
General science, space, and technology$32B0.7%
Community and regional development$27B0.6%
Training, employment, and social services$23B0.5%

Total discretionary spending


$1,338B


30.4%

Figures may not add to 100 due to rounding. Source: Peter G. Peterson Foundation

At $677 billion, the Defense category represents over half of total discretionary spending. These funds are spread across the five branches of the U.S. military: the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, and Space Force.

The third component of spending is the net interest costs on existing government debt. For FY2019, this was approximately $327 billion.

Federal Revenues

Revenues in FY2019 fell short of total spending, coming in at approximately $3.5 trillion. These inflows can be traced back to six categories.

CategoryAmount (USD billions)Percent of Total Revenues
Individual income taxes$1,732B50.0%
Payroll taxes$1,247B36.0%
Corporate income taxes$242B7.0%
Other$104B3.0%
Excise taxes$104B3.0%
Customs duties$69B2.0%
Total revenues$3,464B100.0%

Figures may not add to 100 due to rounding. Source: Peter G. Peterson Foundation

Revenues overwhelmingly relied on individual income and payroll taxes, which together, accounted for 86% of the total. Corporate income taxes, on the other hand, accounted for just 7%.

Is America’s Debt a Cause for Concern?

The general consensus following the events of 2008 is that large fiscal stimulus (supported by government borrowing) was effective in speeding up the consequent recovery.

Now facing a pandemic, it’s likely that many Americans would support the idea of running large deficits to boost the economy. Surveys released in July 2020, for example, found that 82% of Americans wanted federal relief measures to be extended.

Looking beyond COVID-19, however, does reveal some warning signs. One frequent criticism of the ever-growing national debt is its associated interest costs, which could cannibalize investment in other areas. In fact, the effects of this dilemma are already becoming apparent. Over the past decade, the U.S. has spent more on interest than it has on programs such as veterans benefits and education.

us federal net interest costs chart

With low interest rates expected for the foreseeable future, the federal government is likely to continue running its large annual deficits—at least until the effects of COVID-19 have fully subsided. Perhaps after this crisis is over, it will be time to assess the long-term sustainability of America’s rising national debt.

Subscribe to Visual Capitalist

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Continue Reading

Subscribe

Join the 200,000+ subscribers who receive our daily email

Thank you!
Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!
Please provide a valid email address.
Please complete the CAPTCHA.
Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Popular