UTICA, New York – Forty percent of Americans expect to have less disposable income this time next year, while half as many (21%) anticipate their disposable income will increase by the start of 2011 and 34% believe it will remain about the same, a new Zogby Interactive survey shows.

Expectations for a boost in disposable income over the next year are greatest among younger Americans – 30% of those age 18-29 hope to have more spending money this time next year, compared to just 7% of those age 65 and older. More than half (53%) of these oldest Americans, many who may be living on fixed incomes, expect their disposable income to decrease by 2011. Despite the relative optimism of those younger than 30, 32% of these young Americans anticipate they will have less disposable income this time next year.

Those with less than $25,000 and between $50,000 and $75,000 in household income are the least likely (16%) to expect an increase in disposable income by this time next year while those with more than $100,000 in household income are most likely to think their level disposable income will increase (25%). But even more of these wealthiest Americans are concerned their disposable income will be less by the start of 2011 (31%).

”Other findings from this survey include:”

* Few Americans say they are planning a major purchase in the coming year, such as a house or condo (6%), a car (13%), a major appliance (12%), an HD television (12%), or a computer (16%).

* Nearly one in four Americans (24%) who plan on making a major purchase in 2010 intend to shop for a used product, while 68% say they are more likely to buy something new.

This interactive survey of 2,841 adults nationwide was conducted Dec. 28-30, 2009. A sampling of Zogby International’s online panel, which is representative of adult Americans, was invited to participate. Slight weights were added to region, party, age, race, religion, gender, and education to more accurately reflect the population. The margin of error is +/- 1.9 percentage points. Margins of error are higher in sub-groups.

Comments

comments