This paper looks at the history of real household income growth and, using several scenarios, examines their future. In general, they point to the stagnation of Fairfax County real household incomes in a future of greater income inequality.
Título original
Fairfax County Household Income: Losing Ground as Future Income Inequality Grows
This paper looks at the history of real household income growth and, using several scenarios, examines their future. In general, they point to the stagnation of Fairfax County real household incomes in a future of greater income inequality.
This paper looks at the history of real household income growth and, using several scenarios, examines their future. In general, they point to the stagnation of Fairfax County real household incomes in a future of greater income inequality.
Losing Ground as Future Income Inequality Grows Terry Maynard October 7, 2014
Introduction In August, the Connection newspapers published an insightful article by Michael Lee Pope on the varying growth rates of personal income in the last five years in northern Virginia. The articles bottom line: Paycheck growth in Fairfax County and the city of Alexandria are lagging behind the state and the nation, according to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. A look at per capita personal income from the last five years shows Northern Virginia struggling to keep up as everybody else recovers from the recession. Fairfax County had the lowest rate of growth, only 2 percent. Alexandria isn't much better, showing a 3 percent growth in per capita personal income. Arlington has the highest per capita personal income, although its growth is just under the state and national average. The only bright spot in Northern Virginia is Loudoun County, which has seen a 15 percent rate of growth from 2008 to 2012 (the most recent year available). For the most part, Northern Virginia is stuck. . . .
Not a pretty picture if you live in Fairfax County. Moreover, it raises questions about whether this situation is different over a longer timeframe and what we might expect in the future. So we took a look at household income data and some expert forecasts for the decades ahead.
2
Looking at the Data In the process of looking at the data, we made two significant adjustments to the Connection article. First, we looked at household income vice per capita income because the household usually a nuclear family, but also an extended family, roommates, etc.--is the basic economic unit of our society. Second, we addressed income on a real, that is, inflation-adjusted dollars using the CPI-U-RS. Deflating nominal incomes by the extent of inflation provides a clearer picture of spending power of the typical household/family over a longer timeframe. A look at US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data on real (or constant 2012 dollars) household income over the 27-year period from 1985 to 2012 provides some context for examining real household income growth. For Fairfax County, its annual Fairfax County Demographic Report provides insight into the median (50 th percentile) income of county residents. 1
The following figure displays the changes in national real household income by quintiles and Fairfax County median incomes over the timeframe:
1 In general, Restons real household income runs slightly below the County average over time, typically not more than three percent. In part this is due to implementing Restons vision that the community provide housing for all incomes and ages. It also reflects a reality that the highest income Fairfax County households generally prefer to live in enclaves, such as Great Falls. 3
Looking just at the end points1985 and 2012more clearly shows the comparative winners and losers in real household income growth over the period:
Here are some observations about the data: Those with higher incomes nationally have seen their incomes grow much more rapidly in real terms than their lower earning counterparts at every level of income. With a County median income at the 80 th percentile or better of national incomes, Fairfax County households generally earn double the national median real household income. More surprising is the fact that the real median household income in Fairfax County is virtually unchanged over the period, growing only one percent since 1985 (or 4/100ths of a percent per year) while the national median household income nationally has grown about six percent since 1985. In fact, the growth rate for Fairfax household incomes is lower than that experienced by the lowest quintile nationally since 1985.
1985 Income 2012 Income Percent Change Average Annual Growth Rate Average Change per Year 20th Percentile $20,230 $20,599 1.8% 0.07% $13.67 40th Percentile $38,063 $39,764 4.5% 0.16% $63.01 50th Percentile (Median) $48,063 $51,017 6.1% 0.22% $109.41 60th Percentile $58,964 $64,582 9.5% 0.34% $208.07 80th Percentile $88,681 $104,096 17.4% 0.60% $570.91 95th Percentile $146,528 $191,156 30.5% 0.99% $1,652.88 Fairfax County (Median) $106,049 $107,096 1.0% 0.04% $38.80 FC MHHI Percentile Rank 84.5% 80.5% -4.7% -0.18% -0.15% Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table H-1: Income Limits for Each Fifth and Top 5 Percent of All Households: 1967 to 2012, 2012 Dollars. Fairfax County Annual Demographic Report. The current income results reported there are adjusted to 2012 dollars using US BLS' inflation calculator (CPI-U-RS). Change in Real Median/Quintile Household Income, 1985-2012 4
Fairfax County household incomes are, on average, not just stuck in neutral, they are losing ground to virtually all households in the country. Overall, the slippage has been from about the 85 th percentile to just above the 80 th percentile in the 27 years of available comparable data. But what about the future? First, we need to consider to what extent we can expect the past serves as prologue, especially in our rather special regional economy and Fairfax County in particular. In fact, we envision little change in the core regional income trends observed over the past four decades: a further growing gap between high- and low-income households, continuing small pay raises for federal, state, & local government employees and their retirees that barely keep pace with the cost of living, continuing intermittent Congressional dysfunction (sequestration, shutting down the government), focusing cuts on programs important to the local economysuch as defense and homeland security--or otherwise limiting federal spending, and a state legislature that is stymied by conservative down state legislators, impeding needed infrastructure and social investment in northern Virginia. There has been a growing recognition of the impact of government dysfunction on the areas economy. Nearly a year ago, Robert Powel wrote Fairfax County feels the Effects of Washingtons Blunders in Virginia Business. Last month, Mark Holan at the Washington Business Journal reported on GMU CRA Professor Stephen Fullers presentation to the mid- year Center regional update and forecast. Holan writes: We started out this year worse than we thought and have performed worse than expected, Fuller said in advance of early delivering the Center for Regional Analysis' mid-year review and forecast for 2015 on Aug. 20 at the Capital One Financial Corp. headquarters in McLean. Its more negative than people realize. . . . Everybody is doing better than we are, Fuller said. We are not doing well. Drilling down to the type of jobs added or lost since last summer reveals a problem that Fuller has been talking about for a while. More low-paying retail and hospitality jobs are being added while federal government employment shrinks and private sector business and professional services tread water. Moreover, there is little evidence that the government will play a substantially different role in Fairfax Countys economy in the years ahead. The role of government employment in the County has changed little, slipping from 22% to 21% since 2002 according to the US Census American Community Survey. That one percentage point shift has largely gone to private sector employer-based jobs which have seen an increase of about one percent over the same timeframe to 72% as the County job market has grown. While not all those jobs go to Fairfax residents, we suspect the shares are little different in other beltway suburban Washington-area counties with government employment much higher in Washington, DC. 5
In a similar way, we expect federal contracts are likely to continue to be an important contributor to the County economy and Fairfax household incomes, probably plagued by the same intermittent governmental dysfunctions we have already seen. Immigrations Impact on Fairfax County in the Last Decade One factor that may change is the significant drag on recent Fairfax County median income growth caused by the tremendous influx of foreign-born households in the County in the 2000-2009 period, a trend that appears to be subsiding. During the last decade, the arrival of foreign-born persons accounted for all the net population gain in the County and more than 90% of the gain in households. Nonetheless, County median household income grew at its fastest pace from 2000-2007, falling only with the Great Recession, as federal spending locally jumped in the wake of 9/11 and multiple wars. In the three years from 2010-2012, however, only about 3,000 foreign-born persons per year (fewer than 500 households per year) settled in the County and, as a group, they were more educated that prior tranches of immigrants to the County. In general, these foreign-born households initially earn household incomes that are about two-thirds the County median soon after they arrive in the County, but US Census data show that foreign-born households experience significant real household income growth over the years.
Nonetheless, the large cohort of immigrant households in the last decade was a substantial drag on the growth of median household income that is unlikely to continue and the downward pressure of new foreign-born households on County median household income will continue to subside over time as new immigrants settle in areas with faster growing economies.
Subject Total Foreign born; Entered 2010 or later Foreign born; Entered 2000 to 2009 Foreign born; Entered before 2000 Foreign-born population 317,820 9,044 112,186 196,590 People per year 3,015 11,219 -- Percent of FC Population Increase 8.1% 100.2% Foreign-born Households 121,018 1,355 30,108 89,555 Households per year 452 3011 -- Percent of FC HH Increase 10.1% 91.3% Median Household Income (2012 Dollars) Fairfax County $107,096 FC foreign-born households $85,277 $71,838 $70,607 $91,968 Percent of Median FC HHI 79.6% 67.1% 65.9% 85.9% Bachelor's or advanced degree 45.5% 54.0% 46.8% 44.7% Sources: 2012 5-Year American Community Survey, Fairfax County Demographic Information The Role of Foreign-born Households in County Household Incomes 6
Some Alternative Future Scenarios To begin to understand how these characteristics will play out in the future, we need to make some basic assumptions about the future of real US household income growth over the next several decades. We have looked at four cases: More of the same. A base case continuation of real household income growth as we have experienced over the last 27 years (1985-2012). In general, that means median household income will grow more rapidly in the rest of the countryalmost seven-fold-- than it will in Fairfax County, 0.28% annually nationwide vs. 0.04% annually in Fairfax County. The end of growth. Dr. Robert Gordon, Northwestern University, is famed for his forecast of a very low-growth economy resulting in real per capita (not household, but it will have to do) incomes growing on average about 0.20% annually for the next generation. Thats about three-quarters the rate the nation has experienced over the last 27 years, but still five times as fast as median household income has grown in Fairfax. Return to a higher longer term trend. Real median household income grew at a rate of 0.39% per year from 1967-2012, according to BLS data using the CPI-U-RS 2 index. This rate is significantly higher than more recent real income increases and suggests a more prosperous future for Americans. . More education, better technology, more growth. Jan Hatzius, Goldman Sachs Chief Economist, using an approach based on Gordons, is more optimistic, suggesting that median household incomes could grow about 1.3% per yearmore than five times the rate of the last quarter-century and 32X higher than Fairfax County has experienced in that timeframe. (This Financial Times blog post by Gavyn Davies gives a good overview of Hatzius forecast as well as Gordons.) Frankly, that forecast seems over the top; its clearly the optimistic alternativealthough there are more optimistic ones. Some Disturbing Results So what happens to US real household incomes in these four cases if you look out three decades? The tables attached to this paper show the arithmetic results of adjusting each of the average annual growth rates (AAGR) in the historic growth rates experienced between 1985 and 2012. Two key trends appear likely. Nationally, higher real household income growth leads to even greater income inequality. The most obvious observation is the grotesque growth in the difference between the incomes of the top five percent and the bottom 20 percent which is only exaggerated by rapid growth in the economy. (See chart below.) If household income follows Hatzius growth projection and nothing is done to prevent the already growing income inequality in our country, the income of
2 Throughout we have used the CPI-U-RS inflation index (based on 2012 US dollars) so all the comparisons are consistent. To see a discussion of this inflation index versus the CPI and the PCE, see Doug Shorts Median Household Income Growth: Deflating the American Dream. Mr. Short, an advisor with Advisor Perspectives, a firm advising investment advisors, provides an excellent series of articles examining economic, business, and investment matters on his blog. 7
the 95 th percentile will be nearly 40 times that of families living on an income at the 20 th
percentile. With the much lower historic and end-of-growth rates, income inequality would expand, but only moderately by comparison.
Meanwhile, real household income in Fairfax County is likely to continue to grow more slowly than nationally, causing Cdounty median household income to slide in percentile rank. Under all the scenarios, Fairfax Countys median household income continues to erode. In the worst case, it erodes to 61% from 83% under the Hatzius rapid growth scenario, a one- quarter loss in relative household income rank nationally at a near constant buying power.
8
The ebbing of the median household income advantage experienced in Fairfax County will be gradual if these forecasts are accurate, allowing public officials at all levels to take countervailing action. Nonetheless, there is a possibility that the current cutting of well paying federal jobs and growth of low-income jobs described by GMUs Fuller will make this decline more severe than these national economy-based forecasts suggest. If the Countys real median household income grows at the very slow pace forecast hereslower even than the growth of income the lowest 20 th percentile in all scenariosthe County (and probably the region) will likely become less competitive in recruiting and retaining well-qualified knowledge workers high technology and other professionals with advanced degrees. The fact that the US government (and particularly the US Congress) is cutting federal employment and is unwilling to provide the remaining federal employee salary increases competitive with the private sector elsewhere will likely reinforce the trends forecast above. In fact, the smaller federal workforce and the minimal federal pay increases are also likely to temper regional private sector pay increases for comparable professional services while knowledge centers elsewhere do not have the anchor of dominating federal salaries holding back real income growth. Conclusion Although it is not a new observation, the prospect of growing household income inequality nationally is cause for alarm, especially so since this analysis suggests the upper income levels will benefit disproportionately the more rapidly median household incomes grow. Lower income households will not receive a fair share of future household income gains, and the differentiation grows with the growth rate in real household income. At worst, the trend could be politically destablizing. Yet there is no evidence that the US Congress intends to take any action that may forestall or at least constrain this outcome. Moreover, state and local elected officials are, so far, generally looking the other way as well, and they have less leverage than Congress. The obvous solutions involve higher taxespresumably higher income tax rates for high-income householdsto (a) help the less affluent learn skills that will allow them to earn a higher income and/or (b) provide a safety net for those who are unable to become higher income earners (or even earn a living), and (c) simply provide decent jobs through national infrastructure and other investment (and not going to war) for those seeking employment. The national trend plus the reliance of Fairfax County (and, to a large extent, the entire Washington metropolitan region) on federal employment and contracts bodes ill for the County. Small household income gains will limit the growth of real property values, especially residential properties as households neither have nor expect to have higher incomes, whose taxes are the primary source of County revenues. Moreover, slowed federal contract spending will continue to limit local hiring of high-paid professionals while new technologies and business management thinking mean less space for existing workers. The result will be a reduced need for County commercial office space, whose vacancies now stand well above historic averages. This also results in lower commercial property tax revenues now and into the future. 9
The effect is and will continue to be a reduced ability of the County to invest in needed infrastructure and servicestransportation, education, etc.and/or high property tax rates for homeowners and businesses. The cycle tends to be self-reinforcing in the absence of an outside infusion of capitaleither federal or stateor some other source of economic growth, and none are foreseeable at the present time. One can only wonder when our elected leaders at every level will recognize these disruptive trends and take action to prevent the consequences this analysis suggests, nationally and locally. Frankly, this writer is not optimistic that constructive action will be taken anytime soon in the face of continuing divisive partisan politics and, in the end, it will be driven by an immediate domestic economic or political crisis. In the meantime, Fairfax County will continue to bear the brunt of meeting residents and businesses needs, which are likely to grow as real County household incomes stagnate, especially in comparison with incomes elsewhere.