| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Culture Wars | |
| Middle Class Aided Its Own Decline | |
| 2011-12-30 | |
| From Rasmussen Reports: This was the Year of the Middle Class -- as in, its falling incomes, loss of job security and anger. The global economic forces fueling the decline, such as foreign competition and computers, have been well reported. But what about cultural factors? Is the middle class going down partly because it stopped acting middle class?
| |
| Posted by: |
| #8 From an outsiders POV the US appears to be an Empire, with an unelected Emperor in charge, namely the Chairman of the Reserve Board. The Reserve which was meant to be an adjunct to the Treasury Dept. The takover started with Volker and the current emperor is of course the Bernank. After all the rhetoric of free enterprise, the US meekly submitted to the central planning power of the Reserve (At least the USSR fought a revolution before submitting to central planning) The similarities to the Roman Empire are eerie. A centrally planned economy, mighty military and entitlement mongering increasing exponentially. I read somewhere that 30 years after the fall, someone visited Rome. All they found were outlaws and wild animals. Bit like Detroit. It appears that is what entitlements will do to you. Just wondering how long it's going to take. 20 to 50 years perhaps? |
| Posted by: tipper 2011-12-30 21:42 |
| #7 minimum oops! |
| Posted by: Dale 2011-12-30 20:41 |
| #6 I heard today that the black teen unemployment in the 50's was 9%. It is arround 20% these days. When the minimmum wage is increased more black teen unemployment. The many programs may feed people but they distroy them also. |
| Posted by: Dale 2011-12-30 20:39 |
| #5 Actually it's a bit poorer in quite a few ways. Houses are much LESS affordable, cars more so in average wage terms (especially if you look at hedonic changes) |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2011-12-30 19:31 |
| #4 Yup. The issue isn't how many dollars it takes today versus 1950, but rather: how do we live today versus 1950? Answer: even the poor today live better than most folks did in 1950, in terms of material and consumer goods. In terms of (say) health care, the poor live every bit as well as the middle class of 1950 if not better. Ditto food supply and affordability. Yes, it takes many more dollars today compared to 60 years ago. Most of us are paid many more dollars. It all works out, and the productivity, innovation and advances of the past 60 years means that virtually everyone in a first world country is living better. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2011-12-30 15:11 |
| #3 Inflation does indeed erode the value of money. But prices aren't only linked to currency values. They're also linked to consumer demand. How many people, in the US at least, are now content to live on one average income, with far fewer household appliances, no day care or nanny, no housecleaning service, no smartphones laptops or flat screen TVs, one car in the family, few meals out at any type of restaurant, and a driving vacation as a special treat in occasional years? That 50's car - did it have power windows and antilock brakes? Air conditioning? Tinted glass? Sporty wheels? That house: how big was it, was it air conditioned? how big was the lot? |
| Posted by: lotp 2011-12-30 12:14 |
| #2 OK, what was the dollar worth back in the '50s compared to what it's worth now? Hmmmm. I remember my dad paying cash for a new Pontiac. He paid $3000. What would a comparable car cost today? And our house cost $30,000. Not a McMansion but comfortable enough. Probably cost $300,000 today. Seems to me it would be easier to live within our means if inflation hadn't reduced to value of the dollar. It'd be easier for companies to hire us too. So what does the government do to help us out? Print more money, of course. We're the new kulaks. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2011-12-30 11:27 |
| #1 The middle class (my definition:a couple who both work and can afford a full time home help) don't really exist any more. They were destroyed when affordability of labour was destroyed by progressive income taxation (unemployment creation kit). |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2011-12-30 10:10 |