Posted on 01/09/2023 8:52:44 AM PST by grundle
Yes, the America middle class is disappearing. At least as defined by the above WSJ chart. 38% of US families were middle class in 1979 vs. 32% in 2014.
But where did that 7% (6.8 percentage points to be exact) go? Well, of the five income groups (poor, lower middle class, middle class, upper middle class, and rich) displayed, the bottom three got smaller, the top two bigger.
The poor shrank by 4.5 percentage points, the lower middle class by 6.8, the middle class also by 6.8% But the upper middle class got a lot bigger, expanding by 16.4 points, and the rich by 1.8 points. Oh, and here is how upper middle class is defined, using research from economist Stephen Rose of the Urban Institute:
Using Census Bureau data available through 2014, [Rose] defines the upper middle class as any household earning $100,000 to $350,000 for a family of three: at least double the U.S. median household income and about five times the poverty level. At the same time, they are quite distinct from the richest households. Instead of inheritors of dynastic wealth or the chief executives of large companies, they are likely middle-managers or professionals in business, law or medicine with bachelors and especially advanced degrees.
Smaller households can earn somewhat less to be classified as upper middle-class; larger households need to earn somewhat more.
Mr. Rose adjusts these thresholds for inflation back to 1979 and finds the population earning this much money has never been so large. One could quibble with his exact thresholds or with the adjustment that he uses for inflation. But using different measures of inflation, or using higher income thresholds for the upper-middle class, produces the same result: substantial growth among this group since the 1970s.
(Excerpt) Read more at aei.org ...
our house is paid off....
**********
This is one of the keys.
I couldn’t imagine retiring while still carrying a bank note on a mortgage.
It's easier just to have hubby jump in for the set for lead guitar.
He's really quite good (I just play bluegrass for my own amusement.)
“How old are they?
How much debt do they have?
Do they have family money?”
Every age from 19 to 70’s.
Not my business, but I bet they control that well.
I can think of one couple that does, my young next door neighbors. But they work hard. I don’t know if parents give them money, not my business. One long-time friend went from rags to riches alone. His parents had money, didn’t leave to him since he had done so well. They left it all to a sister who didn’t do well. He doesn’t care.
People that want to unhappy will be unhappy. I’ve played music for crowds of thousands, now I play for handfuls. It’s still great and I’m still getting better as I approach 74.
Look at the following chart :
Notice that when we got out of the only other time our national debt exceeded GDP was when we were at peak manufacturing capacity and energy production for the entire world, we did not have fiat currency, an population of 150 million of which the majority were at working age.
Even though our GDP is almost 10x greater than it was the last time our national debt exceeded 100% of GDP (and that was due to WWII), our population is 2x more than it was then, while our manufacturing capabilities are only a shadow of what is was then, with a much older population.
I don't see how this is anything but dire for the outlook of our nation.
So it seems this is using national averages. And its taking the poverty level as one cutoff. The medium national income as another cutoff between the lower middle class and the middle class. And they are saying the upper middle class is five times the poverty level. Not sure how they calculate rich. But as many pointed out, where you live would have a large impact on the actual dollars.
But the numbers do seem to prove Thatchers theory that a good economy lifts all boats.
The people at the bottom are generally there because of mental illness. Whether its super low IQ or addiction or depression or other mental illness, these are people that don’t or can’t hold jobs. And they are people that commit the lions share of all violent crimes. Solving their problems is not an economic solution. Its a social and health issue. More jobs won’t help these people. And if you just hand them cash they won’t have it a few hours or days later.
I eat regularly...have heat in the winter...and am able to barbecue in the back yard during the summer.And it sounds like you might have similar circumstances. However,it seems unlikely that either of us will be buying a Rolls Royce in the near future. ;-)
Thsts because they are using “class” as interchangeable in meaning with income level. In fact the two terms are connected but not the same. Social class is a matter of tastes, values, goals, educational level, communication style, experiences, etc. I know people who are unquestionably upper class who have become poor, and still live with dignity, as they learned to do in childhood. And we all know people who are quite rich but are truly lower class in their tastes and behavior. If you live in the hood and you win the lottery you do not suddenly become upper class, just upper. Income.
One of the benefits of looting and shoplifting.
Just eyeballing it, I think it is the lower-middle and lower classes that appear to have lost the most share to the upper middle. Is that a bad thing? It almost looks like we’ve got a trend toward Lake Wobegone—except we know better than that.
Exactly, if you are house-poor because of where you insisted on living in a blue state? SCHADEN-F-----G-FREUDE.
At least 10% of FR articles lately are hilariously clustered around this. "Super Storm Destroys $80sqft Commercial Rental Properties: Kalifornia Guarantees Remuneration Unless You Vote Republican"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.