Get Ready for the Richcession

Economic downturns are usually horrible for poor people, bad for the middle class and an inconvenience for the rich. But if the economy enters a recession in 2023, or even if it manages to narrowly evade one, it might be the well-heeled who take a bigger hit than usual.

Call it the richcession.

Other than a small number of ascetics, nobody likes being poor. Doing without, living with so little savings that setbacks such as illness or job loss can be debilitating, is an ever-present source of stress. But for many poorer people, the years since the Covid crisis struck have been a bit easier financially than the years that preceded it. Several rounds of government relief helped them weather the early stages of the pandemic, and now a tight job market is providing them with wage gains that are reducing inflation’s bite. Federal Reserve figures show that the net worth of households in the bottom fifth by income was 42% higher in the third quarter than at the end of 2019, and up 17% from the end of 2021.A wage tracker developed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta shows that the 12-month moving average of annualised monthly wage growth for workers in the bottom quartile by income was 7.4% as of November.

With the important caveat that they were starting off from much higher bases, percentage gains for the rich have been more muted. Household net worth for the top fifth was 22% higher in the third quarter than before the pandemic, and was down 7.1% from the end of 2021—a consequence of the falling stock market. Paychecks haven’t risen as much, either, with the Atlanta Fed measure showing average annualized monthly wage growth for workers in the top quartile was 4.8%.

Recent layoffs have also inordinately affected higher-income workers. Many of the tech companies that have made headlines with layoff announcements pay extremely well. Securities filings show that the median worker at Facebook parent Meta Platforms made $295,785 in 2021, for example, while the median worker at Twitter made $232,626. And layoffs at those places where the typical worker is less well paid, such as Amazon.com, have largely been aimed at white-collar workers.

The consolation for higher-income workers who are laid off is that it should be relatively easier for them to find new work than it is for poorer people who lose their jobs. That is because the job skills of the more highly educated are generally more transferable than the skills of other workers. But they will still be in for a period of belt tightening, and they might not get paid quite so well at their new jobs as they were at their old ones.

Meanwhile, even though big-company layoffs have been making headlines, so far they haven’t made much of a dent in overall employment statistics. This is in part because industries that aren’t as well-represented in the stock market, and that typically employ more lower- and middle-income workers, are still straining to hire workers. In November the leisure and hospitality sector was 980,000 jobs short of its February 2020 employment level. Employment in healthcare and social assistance only recovered to its prepandemic levels in September. This is a job category that, in part because of the needs of an ageing population, grew even when overall U.S. unemployment shot higher after the 2008 financial crisis. To return to its growth trend over the decade preceding the pandemic, it would need to add about 1.1 million jobs.

That need for workers—especially as more Americans engage in services such as dining out—is part of why even among those economists expecting a recession in the coming year, many don’t think the job market will take a severe hit. This makes poorer Americans better positioned than usual to handle a weak economy. Not only are their finances in relatively good condition, they might be less likely to experience severe job losses.

Heading into the new year, businesses that cater to the well-off might be in for disappointment, while those that favour the hoi polloi over the hoity-toity might do better. And if there is a recession, the economy could be on much more equal footing as it begins to recover than is usually the case.

Wedding planner Sterling Boulet has some advice for brides-to-be regarding lab-grown diamonds, which cost a fraction of the natural ones.

“If you’re trying to get your man to propose, they’ll propose faster if you offer this as an option,” says Boulet, of Raleigh, N.C. Recently, she adds, a friend’s fiancé “thanked me the next three times I saw him” for telling him about the cheaper lab-made option.

Man-made diamonds are catching on, despite some lingering stigma. This year was the first time that sales of lab-made and natural mined loose diamonds, primarily used as center stones in engagement rings, were split evenly, according to data from Tenoris, a jewellery and diamond trend-analytics company.

The rise of lab-made stones, however, is bringing up quirks alongside the perks. Now that blingier engagement rings—above two or three carats—are more affordable, more people are dealing with the peculiarities of wearing rather large rocks.

An engagement ring made with a lab-grown diamond at Ada Diamonds in New York City. PHOTO: CAM POLLACK/THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Esther Hare, a 5-foot-11-inch former triathlete, sought out a 4.5-carat lab-made oval-shaped diamond to fit her larger hands as a part of her vow renewal in Hawaii last year. It was a far cry from the half-carat ring her husband proposed with more than 25 years ago and the 1.5-carat upgrade they purchased 10 years ago. Hare, 50, who lives in San Jose, Calif., and works in high tech, chose a $40,000 lab-made diamond because “it’s nuts” to have to spend $100,000 on a natural stone. “It had to be big—that was my vision,” she says.

But the size of the ring has made it less practical at times. She doesn’t wear it for athletic training and swaps in her wedding band instead. And she is careful to leave it at home when traveling. “A lot of times I won’t take it on vacation because it’s just a monster,” she says.

The average retail price for a one-carat lab-made loose diamond decreased to $1,426 this year from $3,039 in 2020, according to the Tenoris data. Similar-sized loose natural diamonds cost $5,426 this year, compared with $4,943 in 2020.

Lab-made diamonds have essentially the same chemical makeup as natural ones, and look the same, unless viewed through sophisticated equipment that gauges the characteristics of emitted light.

At Ritani, an online jewellery retailer, lab-made diamond sales make up about 70% of the diamonds sold, up from roughly 30% two years ago, says Juliet Gomes, head of customer service at the company, based in White Plains, N.Y.

Ritani sometimes records videos of the lab-diamonds pinging when exposed to a “diamond tester,” a tool that judges authenticity, to show customers that the man-made rocks behave the same as natural ones. “We definitely have some deep conversations with them,” Gomes says.

Not all gem dealers are rolling with these stones.

Philadelphia jeweller Steven Singer only stocks the natural stuff in his store and is planning a February campaign to give about 1,000 one-carat lab-made diamonds away free to prove they are “worthless.” Anyone can sign up online and get one in the mail; even shipping is free. “I’m not selling Frankensteins that were built in a lab,” Singer says.

Some brides are turned off by the larger bling now allowed by the lower prices.When her now-husband proposed with a two-carat lab-grown engagement ring, Tiffany Buchert, 40, was excited about the prospect of marriage—but not about the size of the diamond, which she says struck her as “costume jewellery-ish.”

“I said yes in the moment, of course, I didn’t want it to be weird,” says the physician assistant from West Chester, Pa.

But within weeks, she says, she fessed up, telling her fiancé: “I think I hate this ring.”

The couple returned it and then bought a one-carat natural diamond for more than double the price.

Couples find that lab-grown diamonds have made it more affordable to get engaged. PHOTO: CAM POLLACK/THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

When Boulet, the wedding planner in Raleigh, got engaged herself, she was over the moon when her fiancé proposed with a 2.3 carat lab-made diamond ring. “It’s very shiny, we were almost worried it was too shiny and was going to look fake,” she says.

It doesn’t, which presents another issue—looking like someone who really shelled out for jewellery. Boulet will occasionally volunteer that her diamond ring came from a lab.

“I don’t want people to think I’m putting on airs, or trying to be flashier than I am,” she says.

For Daniel Teoh, a 36-year-old software engineer outside of Detroit, buying a cheaper lab-made diamond for his fiancée meant extra room in his $30,000 ring budget.

Instead of a bigger ring, he got her something they could both enjoy. During a walk while on an annual ski trip to South Lake Tahoe, Calif., Teoh popped the question and handed his now-wife a handmade wooden box that included a 2.5-carat lab-made diamond ring—and a car key.

She put on the ring, celebrated with both of their sisters and a friend, who was the unofficial photographer of the happy event, and then they drove back to the house. There, she saw a 1965 Mustang GT coupe in Wimbledon white with red stripes and a bow on top.

Looking back, Teoh says, it was still the diamond that made the big first impression.

“It wasn’t until like 15 minutes later she was like ‘so, what’s with this key?’” he adds.

Get Ready for the Richcession

Well-off Americans could get hurt more than usual in the next downturn

Couples find that lab-grown diamonds make it cheaper to get engaged or upgrade to a bigger ring. But there are rocky moments.