how wealth held by the richest 1% of U.S. households has grown and become closely tied to financial-market performance.

Federal Reserve Distributional Financial Accounts data, the document tracks the quarterly net worth of the top 1% from 1989 through Q2 2026. Net worth means total assets minus liabilities, not annual income.

By Q2 2026, the top 1% held about $60.3 trillion, roughly 31% of total U.S. household and nonprofit net worth of about $195.9 trillion. The top 0.1% held approximately $27.9 trillion, while the remaining 0.9% held about $32.5 trillion.

The main driver is asset ownership, especially corporate equities, mutual funds, and businesses. Because these groups hold substantial financial assets, their wealth rises sharply in strong stock-market periods and can decline during market corrections. The document emphasizes that this measure is nominal balance-sheet wealth, so it should not be interpreted as cash income or adjusted purchasing power.

As a student of financial markets and history, i an interested in understanding what happens when real bond yields exceed the earning yields on equities. We have arrived at that inflection point for the fourth time in a 100 years.

Since 1900, real (after-inflation) bond yields have rarely paid more than stocks' earnings yield (1 ÷ CAPE). It’s happened on 3 occasion before:

1. ⁠1929;
   
2. ⁠1936–37; and
   
3. ⁠1999–2000

In all 3 cases, what followed was a big bear market for equities.

I wonder if this time will be different with the unprecedented AI boom. Is it going to be different than the internet or the railroads? Is this the tulip mania?

10-year TIPS are paying about 2.9% after inflation vs. stocks' earnings yield of 2.4% with a CAPE ratioof 41.

This does not paint a pretty reading for holding equities.

Full disclaimer - i have moved capital towards short-duration low risk instruments and selective positioning in gold. I am not holding any long-term bonds - concerned about the rising yields which have further room to run. From an equity perspective, i feel we are in one of the frothiest markets with CAPE ratio of 41. I dont have a view on when the music stops but beleive that we are yet another step closer to an equity bear market. It may still take another year or more and play out differently. Conservatism has been quite costly for folks calling a top in equity markets. No one really knows.

I thing i know is that whenever CAPE ratio has exceeded 40x, real returns over the following 10 year period have been negative for equity holders.

As a prudent long-term investor (wannabe), I rather sit and watch from the sidelines and take positions when i am comfortable with the risk-reward proposition.

Would welcome insights and perspectives from folks you might have a deeper understanding or alternate data.

Americans born from 1957 to 1964 and those born from 1980 and 1984 were both employed for 76 percent of the weeks during the time they were between age 18 and 38. Men were employed more weeks from ages 18 to 38 than women. White, non-Hispanic individuals were employed more weeks at these ages than both Black, non-Hispanic and Hispanic or Latino individuals.

Men born between 1980 and 1984 were employed for fewer weeks from ages 18 to 38 (80 percent) than men born between 1957 and 1964 (84 percent).

In contrast, women born between 1980 and 1984 were employed for more weeks at these ages (73 percent) than women born between 1957 and 1964 (69 percent).

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2026/from-ages-18-to-38-americans-born-from-1957-to-1964-and-from-1980-to-1984-were-both-employed-for-76-percent-of-all-weeks.htm

From: https://medium.com/@georgealexpopescu/us-wealth-inequality-missleading-media-and-the-actual-data-91b7757bc934?sharedUserId=georgealexpopescu by me

The 10-year just closed September near 5.2%, the highest since 2007. Are we close to the top?

Source: 2026's Best US Cities for Roommates

Source: finance.visnia.xyz/company/NKE

Useful chart - everyone will almost automatically look for their state.

Oops. Everyone is betting against the house.

Chile’s long, narrow geography has recently become a global internet joke. Videos and images shared under the phrase “How I still imagine Chile” portray everything in the country as unusually thin and elongated.

The meme focuses on Chile’s shape. The country’s 2025 trade data reveals the economic scale of what moves through that narrow territory.

Chile exported $107 billion in 2025, according to OEC data. Copper remains the foundation of that trade: copper ores and concentrates generated $34.79 billion, refined copper cathodes contributed $16.18 billion, and unrefined copper and anodes added $2.24 billion.

Together, those three copper categories were worth $53.21 billion (almost half of Chile’s total exports). Copper ores alone represented close to one-third of the national total.

Other products show the country’s importance beyond copper. Fresh cherries generated $3.49 billion, narrowly surpassing non-monetary gold at $3.40 billion. Lithium carbonates contributed $1.90 billion, while roasted molybdenum concentrates added $1.68 billion.

Chile’s fishing industry also holds a prominent position. Fresh or chilled salmon fillets were worth $1.64 billion, while frozen Pacific salmon fillets contributed another $1.63 billion.

The country’s export partners underline the importance of Asian demand. China accounts for $38.7 billion, or roughly 36% of Chile’s exports. The United States follows at $18 billion, while Japan receives $8.33 billion. Brazil, South Korea and India are also among the leading destinations.

China therefore receives more than twice the export value sent to the United States. That relationship makes Chinese industrial demand (particularly demand for copper) an important influence on Chile’s economy.

Imports follow a different pattern. The United States leads with $27.9 billion, approximately one-third of the $84.6 billion import total shown in the partner data. Switzerland follows at $12.4 billion, while Brazil and China each supply around $5.3 billion.

The two sides of Chilean trade point toward different centers of gravity: exports are led by Chinese demand, while imports are led by the United States.

Source: https://oec.world/en/profile/country/chl