Middle class stagnation

Way to completely shift off topic. It has nothing to do with women wanting to work & be a part of the work force. It has everything to do with both spouses HAVING to work.

Could you be any dumber?

Onceler if not for the debt and more house and vehicles than most people really need one spouse could support over half of the middle class families.


I want it all, I want it all, and I want it now!
 
you can still make the sacrifice and live to your means if one spouse makes a good salary, but it has to be a very good salary.
 
you can still make the sacrifice and live to your means if one spouse makes a good salary, but it has to be a very good salary.


High paying white collar jobs, in large metropolitan areas.

The good paying, blue collar jobs in small town and rural america are largely gone.
 
you can still make the sacrifice and live to your means if one spouse makes a good salary, but it has to be a very good salary.

There is the key, live within your means.

If more did that demand would be down so would prices.

but alas most of americas self esteem depends on posessions , not what they are.
 
There is the key, live within your means.

If more did that demand would be down so would prices.

if suddenly there was a massive shif and woman said fuck it im staying home.. then yes it would reverse the course.. but thats unlikely.
 
How many of you turbo-libs have had more than two college economics classes. Obviously USGED hasn't had any college period.
Seriously, cypress /Lorax, dunghsit

It's insulting to woman to say their only justification in the workplace is to help the husband get by and if they didn't need to they'd have no business being their.
That's one you didn't consider. The second and major factor dems need to put in the play book is this. Many people transition from middle to upper middle and making there accomplishment or their dream seem impossible doesn't seel.
The upper third is light years better off than at the end of the carter years. All of you are there, and your all in denial. Except USC he's just uneducated.
 
How many of you turbo-libs have had more than two college economics classes. Obviously USGED hasn't had any college period.
Seriously, cypress /Lorax, dunghsit

It's insulting to woman to say their only justification in the workplace is to help the husband get by and if they didn't need to they'd have no business being their.
That's one you didn't consider. The second and major factor dems need to put in the play book is this. Many people transition from middle to upper middle and making there accomplishment or their dream seem impossible doesn't seel.
The upper third is light years better off than at the end of the carter years. All of you are there, and your all in denial. Except USC he's just uneducated.


Top Quixote, tilting at Strawmen.
 
I heard an economist talking recently on this one. I'll have to see if I can find it again. I have to remember what show it was. I need the statistics.

Basically what he had to say, and what he showed, was that the upper class has grown, the middle class stayed about the same size and the lower class had gotten smaller. The numbers showed that people have moved from middle to upper class and from lower to middle at about the same rates, making the middle class appear "stagnant" while in reality those at the top moved up, new ones were added to the bottom making their wages appear "stagnant".

In other words. Topspin is correct in "more millionaires than ever before"....

I'll see if I can find the guy again.
 
thats not a small point either, most every middle class person wants to be at least upper middle.
Granted a million is not having it made, I can't retire on it.
But the middle class net worth at 100,000 is going up year after year.
 
How many of you turbo-libs have had more than two college economics classes. Obviously USGED hasn't had any college period.
Seriously, cypress /Lorax, dunghsit

It's insulting to woman to say their only justification in the workplace is to help the husband get by and if they didn't need to they'd have no business being their.
That's one you didn't consider. The second and major factor dems need to put in the play book is this. Many people transition from middle to upper middle and making there accomplishment or their dream seem impossible doesn't seel.
The upper third is light years better off than at the end of the carter years. All of you are there, and your all in denial. Except USC he's just uneducated.

hmm if this relates to my posts you have a serious reading comprehension problem dude.
 
I would not advise a presidential candidate in 2008 to say that the middle class is doing great, and we should just sit back and let the magic of the free markets work everything out.
 
I would not advise a presidential candidate in 2008 to say that the middle class is doing great, and we should just sit back and let the magic of the free markets work everything out.
Nor would I, however that is because we both understand that regardless to what actually may be truth perception is what is important in politics.
 
I heard an economist talking recently on this one. I'll have to see if I can find it again. I have to remember what show it was. I need the statistics.

Basically what he had to say, and what he showed, was that the upper class has grown, the middle class stayed about the same size and the lower class had gotten smaller. The numbers showed that people have moved from middle to upper class and from lower to middle at about the same rates, making the middle class appear "stagnant" while in reality those at the top moved up, new ones were added to the bottom making their wages appear "stagnant".

In other words. Topspin is correct in "more millionaires than ever before"....

I'll see if I can find the guy again.


How are those terms defined. I'm sure that I could make the opposite true by changing the definition of the terms "middle class" and "upper middle class", etc. . .

From what I have read, the recent growth in the economy (from 2001 onward) has largely been concentrated in the top 10% of wage earners whereas median wages have been stagnant.
 
How are those terms defined. I'm sure that I could make the opposite true by changing the definition of the terms "middle class" and "upper middle class", etc. . .

From what I have read, the recent growth in the economy (from 2001 onward) has largely been concentrated in the top 10% of wage earners whereas median wages have been stagnant.
That's one of the reasons I need to seek the information out. I'll work on it. However, the top 10% is also a growing group as we do have a larger population. But here you speak of "wage earners", which would be middle class.
 
That's one of the reasons I need to seek the information out. I'll work on it.

I'd be interested to see it; it just doesn't ring true that there is some sort of equal assembly line process going on, where the % of lower class moving to middle class is the same as the % of those moving from middle to upper. The #'s don't wash with overall %'s in America.

That is why "more millionaires" is such a bad gauge of the overall economy. It doesn't apply to a huge majority of Americans. For many of those Americans, their wages are stagnant; they don't just "appear" stagnant because they are all of a sudden upper class, and someone lower class has just taken their place.
 
not doing great is a quantum leap from stagnant since the 80's
I know your not good with numbers cypress but that was weak.
No candidate on either side is saying the middle class is great. Neither am I, heck the upper class is struggling too. I'm down 100,000 in the last couple months on paper.
 
Back
Top