Growing U.S. Income Inequality

Growing U.S.
Income Inequality
A Lecture Presented for the Osher Program

San Diego State University
April 18, 2011
Denny Braun, Ph.D.

Professor Emeritus of Sociology
Minnesota State University
1
2
Major Findings in my Book:
• Absolute income inequality is increasing
(the rich are “getting richer”!)
• The middle class is shrinking
• Poverty has been increasing
• U.S. Multinational Corporations cause more
inequality both in the U.S. and in the World
• Huge inequalities exist between U.S. locales
• Huge inequalities exist between U.S. locales
• The growth of relative income inequality is
not only continuous but has become explosive
A basic truth about absolute income differences
is that the U.S. is NOT the richest country!
GDP/ GDP/
Rank Nation capita Rank Nation capita
2009 PPP
1 Luxemb. 104,512 1 Qatar 83,841
2 Norway 79,085 2 Luxemb. 78,395
3 Qatar 68,872 3 Norway 52,561
4 Switz. 67,560 4 Singapore 50,523
5 Denmark 56,115 5 Brunei 49,110
6 Ireland 51,356 6 U.S.A. 46,381
Source: 7 Nether. 48,223 7 Switz. 43,007
Inter-
national
8 U.A.E. 46,857 8 Nether. 39,938
Monetary 9 U.S.A. 46,381 9 Ireland 39,468
Fund
10 Austria 45,989 10 Australia 38,911
9
10
The Best and Worst States on Median Household Income
Highest Median Lowest Income Median
Income States Household States Household
Income 2009 Income 2009
Maryland $69, 272 Mississippi $36,646
New Jersey $68,342 West Virginia $37,435
Connecticut $67,034 Arkansas $37,823
Alaska $66,953 Kentucky $40,072
Hawaii $64,098 Alabama $40,489
Massachusetts $64,081 Oklahoma $41,664

11 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Surveys, 2008 and 2009
12
13
Percent Change in Median Household Income
Within Last Two Decades (2009 Dollars)
-11
African Americans 28
-8 2000-2009
Latinos 19 1991-2000
-5
Whites 13 14
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Source: Calculated from Census Data, Report P60-238
Who are the poor?
• What are their characteristics?
• Where do they live?
• Have their numbers increased over time?
• How about the rate of poverty? Is that
unchanged?
Percent in Poverty, 2009
30
25.8 25.3
25
20
15
12.5
10 9.4
0
16
White Black Hispanic Asian
Source: U.S. Census, Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage (Sep., 2010)
65 & Over 8.9
18 - 64 Years 12.9
Children (< 18) 20.7
0 5 10 15 20 2
32.5
35
30 22
25
20 14.3
15 5.8
10
5
0
All Persons Single (Non- Married Female
Family) Couple Headed with
Family Children
19
Facts About U.S. Poverty
•How “poor” is poor? It depends on your
family size and your age. In 2009, if you were a
single mom with 2 kids under 18, you were
“poor” if your annual income was $17,285 or
less. For a single person over 65 years old, the
cut off was $ 10,289.
• Within the past decade, the poverty rate has
increased 27% for all persons, and 30% for all
families.
• Within the past decade, the poverty rate has
increased 27% for all persons, and 30% for all
families.
• Thus, the poor grew by 12 million in the past
decade, totally obliterating the 4 million reduction in
poor persons that occurred in the 1990s.
Facts About U.S. Poverty (Cont.)
•The number of Americans who are poor today,
over 43 million, is at an all time high and
surpasses the population of most nations. One
of every 7 persons in our country is poor!
• The number of Americans who are poor
today, over 43 million, is at an all time high and
surpasses the population of most nations. One
of every 7 persons in our country is poor!
• Many, many Americans have such low
incomes that they are on the brink of poverty
at all times. In the four year period (2004-
2007), just before the onset of The Great
Recession, nearly one in three Americans fell
into poverty for 2 or more months. The 2008-
2011 figures will surely be even grimmer!
• Lastly, one of 11 elderly (65 and over) and 1
of 5 children are living under poverty today.
• These two innocent, vulnerable groups
comprise 44% of poor people, approaching the
20 million mark.
• These two innocent, vulnerable groups
comprise 44% of poor people, approaching the
20 million mark.
• Unfortunately, the United States does not do
a very good job protecting our poor through
social services and other governmental
programs.
• The U.S. has an initial poverty rate lower
than many of our industrial peers (26.3%,
compared to Sweden’s 26.7%, Germany’s 33.6%,
U.K.’s 26.3%, Japan’s 26.9%).
U.K.’s 26.3%, Japan’s 26.9%).
• After taxes and transfers, however, our
poverty rate only declines to 17.1%. Of the 20
advanced countries, we are last in reduction.
U.K.’s 26.3%, Japan’s 26.9%).
• After taxes and transfers, however, our
poverty rate only declines to 17.1%. Of the 20
advanced countries, we are last in reduction.
• For example, Sweden goes down to 5.3%,
Germany to 11%, U.K. to 8.3%, and Japan to
14.9%. (Source: Org. for Economic
Cooperation & Development - OECD)
31
The Best and the Worst in 2009 on Poverty Rates
Poorest Percent in Least Poor States, Percent in
States, 2009 Poverty 2009 Poverty
Mississippi 21.9 New Hampshire 8.5
Arkansas 18.8 Alaska 9.0
Kentucky 18.6 Maryland 9.1
D.C. 18.4 New Jersey 9.4
New Mexico 18.0 Connecticut 9.4
West Virginia 17.7 Wyoming 9.8
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2009

33
Poverty translates into Hunger
• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food

insecurity” in 2009—which translates to over 17 million
American families.
Source: USDA, Economic Research Report No. (ERR-108), Nov. 2010

• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food

insecurity” in 2009—which translates to over 17 million
American families.
• These households were stalked by hunger and at times
did not have enough money to buy enough food at various
times during the year.

• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food insecurity”

in 2009—which translates to over 17 million American families.
• These households were stalked by hunger and at times did not
have enough money to buy enough food at various times during
the year.
• Nearly 7 million households (with one million children) had
such severe financial problems that they were forced to miss
meals on a regular basis.
Poverty translates into Hunger (Cont.)
• The number of households with hunger is at

an all-time high since data began to be
gathered in 1995.

Poverty translates into Hunger (Cont.)
• The number of households with hunger is

at an all-time high since data began to be
gathered in 1995.
•The number of households experiencing

hunger has tripled in the 3 years between
2006 and 2009.
39
How is the American Middle Class Doing?
In one word—”Badly”!
 Since peaking in 1999 (at $38,720), median
earnings for male workers is 6% lower
eleven years later ($36,331 in 2009).
eleven years later ($36,331 in 2009)
 Female workers have done slightly better,
going from $23,738 to $26,030 in the same
period—a 9.7% increase.
eleven years later ($36,331 in 2009)
 Female workers have done slightly better,
going from $23,738 to $26,030 in the same
period—a 9.7% increase
 Thus, in a two-earner, husband/wife
family, earnings have been stagnant for 10
years.
 Even more threatening is anemic job growth.
Only 7 million new jobs were created in 2002-
2007 (before the crash)—compared to 20 million
created in the same 5-year period in the 1990s.
 Even more threatening is anemic job growth.
Only 7 million new jobs were created in 2002-
2007 (before the crash)—compared to 20 million
created in the same 5-year period in the 1990s.
 The Bottom Line: Fewer Americans are employed
today than a decade ago, despite our population
growing by 25 million.
46
How have the very rich been doing?
 In 2007, just before the Great Recession hit
us, the top 25 CEOs of investment houses
“earned” $22 billion (about the GDP of
Costa Rica). The top 5 managers each got
over $1 billion. (Page and Jacobs)
 In 2007, just before the Great Recession hit
us, the top 25 CEOs of investment houses
“earned” $22 billion (about the GDP of
Costa Rica). The top 5 managers each got
over $1 billion! (Page and Jacobs)
 In 2007, America’s top 1% of earners
received 23% of the nation’s total income
(almost triple the 8% share they got in
1980). (Robert Reich)
 In the 1960s, CEOs of major American companies
earned 25 times the wages of their typical
workers; by 1980 40 times; by 1990 100 times; by
2007 350 times. (Robert Reich). As of 2009,
Michael Hiltzik (LA TIMES) reported a Harvard
study putting this ratio at 411 to 1.
 In the 1960s, CEOs of major American
companies earned 25 times the wages of their
typical workers; by 1980 40 times; by 1990 100
times; by 2007 350 times. (Robert Reich). As of
2009, Michael Hiltzik (LA TIMES) reported a
Harvard study putting this ratio at 411 to 1.
 The combined wealth in 2005 of Sam Walton’s
family at $90 billion (Walmart ), Bill Gates
(Microsoft) at $46 billion, and Warren Buffet at
$44 billion is much more than the $95 billion
combined wealth of the bottom 40% in the U.S.
In short, 3 families own as much as 120 million
Americans. (Robert Reich)
Average Pay of Top 500 Corporate CEOs, 1989 - 2009
52 Source: Forbes.com. Pay is in constant 2008 dollars

Most Americans are Woefully Ignorant about
How Exorbitant CEO Corporate Pay Actually Is
• When asked how much they believe typical

corporate CEOs “earn” in a year, Americans
estimate their pay at $500,000 (20 times that of
unskilled workers or sales clerks).
•When asked how much they believe typical

corporate CEOs “earn” in a year, Americans
estimate their pay at $500,000 (20 times that of
unskilled workers or sales clerks).
• In reality, the CEOs of the largest Standard and
Poors 500 corporations make $14 million per year.
(See Jacobs and Page, CLASS WAR).
• When asked how much they believe typical

corporate CEOs “earn” in a year, Americans estimate
their pay at $500,000 (20 times that of unskilled
workers or sales clerks).
• In reality, the CEOs of the largest Standard and Poors
500 corporations make $14 million per year. (See
Jacobs and Page, CLASS WAR).
• This is 700 times more than the average factory
worker and 540 times the salary of the average sales
clerk!
Most Americans are Woefully Ignorant about How
Exorbitant CEO Corporate Pay Actually Is (Cont.)
•Hacker and Pierson (WINNER TAKE ALL

POLITICS) assert that these CEOs form the bulk of
the top 0.1% of income recipients.
Most Americans are Woefully Ignorant about How
Exorbitant CEO Corporate Pay Actually Is (Cont.)

POLITICS) assert that these CEOs form the bulk of
the top 0.1% of income recipients.
• This top 0.1% increased their share of all income
from 2.7% in 1974 to 12.3% in 2007.

POLITICS) assert that these CEOs and their
lieutenants form the bulk of the top 0.1% of
income recipients.
• This top 0.1% increased their share of all income
from 2.7% in 1974 to 12.3% in 2007.
• When the capital gains of this richest 1-in-1000 is
counted, this equals $1 trillion per year.
59
Economic Policy Institute 2011
60
The 7 Highest Paid CEO Layoff Leaders
Company CEO in 2009 Total 2009 Layoffs
Pay (11/08-4/10)
Schering-Plough Fred Hassan $49,653,063 16,000
Johnson & William Weldon $25,569,844 8,900

Johnson
Hewlett Packard Mark Hurd $24,201,448 6,400
Walt Disney Robert Iger $21,578,471 3,400
IBM Samuel Palmisano $21,159,289 7,800
AT&T Randall Stephenson $20,244,312 12,300
Wal-Mart Michael Duke $19,234,269 13,350
61
Source: Institute for Policy Studies
62
What About “Relative”
Income Inequality?
63
Income Inequality?
• It was PresidentJohn Kennedy who termed the phrase—
”A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats”—meaning the poor also
benefit from economic growth.
Income Inequality?
• It was President John Kennedy who termed the phrase—
”A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats”—meaning the poor also
benefit from economic growth.
• It is true that our Real GDP doubled between 1983-2007
while our population increased only by one-third, i.e., per
capita real GDP actually did grow over this past quarter
century.
Income Inequality?
• It was John Kennedy who termed the phrase—”A Rising
Tide Lifts All Boats”—meaning the poor also benefit from
economic growth.
• It is true that our Real GDP doubled between 1983-2007
while our population increased only by one-third, i.e., per
capita real GDP actually did grow over this past quarter
century.
• On average, then, Americans should be better off—but
this is definitely not the case.
Income Inequality?
• It was John Kennedy who termed the phrase—”A Rising Tide
Lifts All Boats”—meaning the poor also benefit from economic
growth.
• It is true that our Real GDP doubled between 1983-2007 while
our population increased only by one-third, i.e., per capita real
GDP actually did grow over this past quarter century.
• On average, then, Americans should be better off—but this is
definitely not the case.
• To get a better idea of who benefits vs. those who do not,
researchers often divide income recipients into fifths (called
Quintiles, or 20% segments).
Income Inequality?
• It was John Kennedy who termed the phrase—”A Rising Tide Lifts
All Boats”—meaning the poor also benefit from economic growth.
• It is true that our Real GDP doubled between 1983-2007 while
our population increased only by one-third, i.e., per capita real
GDP actually did grow over this past quarter century.
• On average, then, Americans should be better off—but this is
definitely not the case.
• To get a better idea of who benefits vs. those who do not, income
recipients are often divided into fifths (Quintiles, or 20%
segments).
• If income were even, each pie slice would be the same size.
Percent of all Household Income Received
by each Quintile (5th): 2009
Lowest 5th,
3.4%
Second 5th,
8.6%
Middle 5th,
14.6%
Highest 5th,
50.3%
Fourth 5th,
23.2%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau,

Current Population Reports,
P60-238, Income, Poverty, and
Note: Top 5% received 21.7% of Health Insurance Coverage in the
69 ALL household income in the U.S. United States: 2009
70
71
Some Dramatic Shifts
•Between 1945 and 1980, incomes increased on

average by $19,000. While the richest 10% of our
population captured over 1/3 of this growth in
real dollars, the bottom 90% still received the
other 2/3rds of the income increase.
Some Dramatic Shifts
• Between 1945 and 1980, incomes increased on average by

$19,000. The richest 10% of our population captured over
1/3 of this growth in real dollars, but the bottom 90% still
received the other 2/3rds of the increase.
• Real income rose another $12,000 in the 27 years between
1981 and 2008. BUT—the richest 10% got almost all of this
increase of income (96%), while the bottom 90% received
only 4% of the growth. In short, the very great majority of
Americans have simply been totally shut out of any
73
increase in living standards.
Mean Household Income of Top 5% Divided
by Mean Household Income
of Bottom 40% in 2009 Dollars
27.0
Multiplication Factor
25.0
23.0
21.0
19.0
17.0
15.0
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Year
74
Source: Calculated from Census Data in 2010 Income and Poverty Report P60-238
(Y-Axis)
(X-Axis)
75
Household Gini Ratio by Year: 1968-2009
0.5
0.49
0.48
0.47
0.46
0.45
Gini 0.44
Ratio 0.43
0.42
0.41
0.4
0.39
0.38
0.37
0.36
76 0.35
1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007
Family Income Gini Score by Country: 2009
78
Source: CIA- The World Fact Book 2009
Most Equal Country Gini Most Unequal Country Gini
Sweden .230 Namibia .707
Norway .250 South Africa .650
Luxembourg .260 Lesotho .632
Czech Republic .260 Botswana .630
Slovakia .260 Sierra Leone .629
Serbia .260 Central Africa Republic .613
Malta .260 Bolivia .592
Austria .260 Haiti .592
Albania .267 Columbia .585
Germany .270 Brazil .567
Belarus .279 Bosnia & Herzegovina .562
Iceland .280 Panama .561
Hungary .280 Guatemala .551
Belgium .280 Chile .549
Slovenia .284 Honduras .538
79
Source: CIA, The World Factbook 2009
Why worry about relative income inequality?
Research shows that high relative income inequality is associated with:
80
 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)


 High rates of imprisonment (nations and U.S.
States)

States)
 High Teen Birthrates (nations and states)

States)
 High rates of illegal drug use (nations)

States)
 High infant mortality rates (nations)

States)
 Lower life expectancy (nations)

States)
 High rates of Mental Illness (nations)

States)
 Low rates of contraceptive usage (nations)

States)
 Low rates of contraceptive usage (nations)
 Lower access to safe water (nations)
For detailed charts and graphs
exploring these findings, see: Richard
Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, THE SPIRIT
LEVEL: WHY GREATER EQUALITY
MAKES SOCIETIES STRONGER, 2009.
See especially their free, downloadable

Power Point presentation at
www.equalitytrust.org.uk
91
Percent Who Say Others Cannot be Trusted
by Household Income Inequality and Year
65
63
2006
1996
61 1994
% Cannot Be Trusted
1993
59 1983 1986
2000 2004
1990 1998 2002
57 1975
1988 1991
1978 1989
55
53 1976 1987
1980
51 1973
1972
49 1984
47
45
0.39 0.4 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48
Household Gini Ratio
94
Source: General Social Survey (GSS) Data
Percent of Those Eligible who Voted in 2008
75.0
by State Household Income Gini Score
MN
70.0 NH ME
WI LA
IA MS
SD ND
65.0
% Eligible who Voted
NE MT MI
OH MO VA NC
WY VT WA RI SC
AK MD OR CO
PA KY MA AL PA
60.0 KS GA
IN
ID
NM IL
OK NJ FL
55.0
AZ TN
NV WV
AR
CA
50.0 UT NY
TX
HI
45.0
0.41 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.49
Household Gini Ratio 2007
95
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports
96
Obesity Rates By Inequality in U.S. States
35
33 MS
AL
31 WV
TN
OK
SC KY
Percent Obese 2008
29 OR
MO AR NC LA
SD MI
PA TX
27 NEDE ND KS GA
AK IN IL
IA MD
WI WA
25 WY
ME NV VA NM
OR AZ FL NY
NH ID MN CA
23 MT
VT NJ
UT
HI
RI
21 MA CT
19 CO
17
15
97
0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5
Household Gini Ratio 2007
Source: Center for Disease Control
2010 Unemployment Rate
in States by Gini Ratio
14 NV
MI
CA
12 RI
% Unemployed 2010
FL MS
OH OR SC AL
IL
10 IN NC GA TN
AZ NJ
MO PA MA
ID WA CT
DE WV TX
8 AK ME CO NM
WI NY
UT MT AR
WY IA MN VA OK LA
HI KS
6 NH
VT
NE
SD
4
ND
2
0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 0.49 0.5
Source: Bureau of
Labor Statistics
Household Income Gini Ratio 2007
99
100
What is to be Done?
Policies at the National Level
• Allow the Bush-era tax cuts for the very rich to expire.
• Since 1995, the richest 400 households have had their
taxes cut 45%, or $46 million per household per year.
• Even for those earning $1 million per year, their tax cut
equals $128,000 annually.
• For those with middle class incomes, our yearly tax cut
savings comes to $300.
• If these “temporary” tax cuts are discontinued, $1 trillion
will be gained over the next decade, making it easier to
101
finally balance our national budget.
What is to be Done?
 Allow the Bush-era tax cuts for the very rich to expire.
 Cut defense spending/stop fighting needless wars
(Stiglitz estimates the Iraq War has cost $3 trillion)
What is to be Done?
 Invest in R & D (cutting-edge Green Technology)
What is to be Done?
 Re-industrialize our country, especially hi-tech areas!
What is to be Done?
 Continue to fully fund our public university system—the
envy of the world and the font of our national
productivity.
What is to be Done?
productivity.
 Reduce our national debt.
What is to be Done?
productivity.
 Reduce our national debt.
 Reinstate more progressive tax rates to protect the middle class
(see Robert Reich, AFTERSHOCK, NY: Knopf, 2010).
What is to be Done?
Personal Actions You Can Take
What is to be Done?
• “Thing Globally—Act Locally”. Join local action groups

that address social ills (hunger, homelessness, political
advocacy, etc.)
What is to be Done?

advocacy, etc.)
• Consume less, and when you do—buy carefully, e.g.,
coops. (Sounds Un-American—right?) Read Annie
Leonard, THE STORY OF STUFF.
What is to be Done?

advocacy, etc.)
• Read widely (NEVER STOP LEARNING), use unbiased
news sources/avoid hate-mongering broadcast media
pundits, e.g., beware of the FOX in the hen-house.
What is to be Done?

advocacy, etc.)
• Read widely (NEVER STOP LEARNING), use unbiased
news sources/avoid hate-mongering broadcast media
pundits, e.g., beware of the FOX in the hen-house.
• Use “social cause” VISA cards like WORKING ASSETS.
What is to be Done?
Personal Actions You Can Take (Cont.)
• Invest your retirement, IRAs, 401K money in Social

Responsible Investment (SRI) funding companies that “Do
No Evil”, e.g., Calvert Fund.
What is to be Done?

• Avoid simplistic, extremist politicians hawking know-
nothing solutions (cutting taxes will not solve all of our
problems, but only reward the rich).
What is to be Done?

• Network, Network, Network—especially through the
internet. Power accrues to individuals when they act as
groups!
What is to be Done?

• Network, Network, Network—especially through the
internet. Power accrues to individuals when they act as
groups!
• Fatal acceptance leads to defeat. Never lose hope! To
preserve equality and democracy, we must not fail to act.
Thank You so much!

Growing U.S. Income Inequality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Growing U.S. Income Inequality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Growing U.S.

A Lecture Presented for the Osher Program

Denny Braun, Ph.D.

New Jersey $68,342 West Virginia $37,435

Connecticut $67,034 Arkansas $37,823

Alaska $66,953 Kentucky $40,072

Hawaii $64,098 Alabama $40,489

Massachusetts $64,081 Oklahoma $41,664

65 & Over 8.9

Children (< 18) 20.7

Arkansas 18.8 Alaska 9.0

Kentucky 18.6 Maryland 9.1

D.C. 18.4 New Jersey 9.4

New Mexico 18.0 Connecticut 9.4

West Virginia 17.7 Wyoming 9.8

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2009

• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food

Source: USDA, Economic Research Report No. (ERR-108), Nov. 2010

• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food

Source: USDA, Economic Research Report No. (ERR-108), Nov. 2010

• About 15% of U.S. Households experienced “food insecurity”

• The number of households with hunger is at

Source: USDA, Economic Research Report No. (ERR-108), Nov. 2010

• The number of households with hunger is

•The number of households experiencing

52 Source: Forbes.com. Pay is in constant 2008 dollars

• When asked how much they believe typical

•When asked how much they believe typical

• When asked how much they believe typical

•Hacker and Pierson (WINNER TAKE ALL

•Hacker and Pierson (WINNER TAKE ALL

•Hacker and Pierson (WINNER TAKE ALL

Johnson & William Weldon $25,569,844 8,900

Walt Disney Robert Iger $21,578,471 3,400

IBM Samuel Palmisano $21,159,289 7,800

AT&T Randall Stephenson $20,244,312 12,300

Wal-Mart Michael Duke $19,234,269 13,350

Source: U.S. Census Bureau,

•Between 1945 and 1980, incomes increased on

• Between 1945 and 1980, incomes increased on average by

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

 High homicide Rates (nations and U.S. states)

See especially their free, downloadable

• “Thing Globally—Act Locally”. Join local action groups

• “Thing Globally—Act Locally”. Join local action groups

• “Thing Globally—Act Locally”. Join local action groups

• “Thing Globally—Act Locally”. Join local action groups

• Invest your retirement, IRAs, 401K money in Social

• Invest your retirement, IRAs, 401K money in Social

• Invest your retirement, IRAs, 401K money in Social

• Invest your retirement, IRAs, 401K money in Social

You might also like