In '80, the rate was 52%
In '03, the rate was 44%
The one HUGE thing they don't mention anywhere is where the 8% has gone... ABOVE (75k, into upper class)or below (25k, into poor/poverty). In reading this trash article, it clearly implies that they all went into the poverty bucket...
I'd bet my bottom dollar that they went into the upper bracket, in disproportionate numbers...
This would be a good thing, no? You would think just the opposite by reading this, and all of the other Bush-hit pieces in this trash paper.
If anyone knows where the data can be pulled (stats below and above middle class) for '80 and '03, please post it here. Thanks
Sorry, in '03, it was 45%, not 44%, so that leaves 7% moving out of middle class.
Actually, it's taxes and Social Security that are killing me - and, by the way, I'm so glad I work the first half of the year to pay for illegal aliens' health care and wasteful government bureaucracy.
I didn't read the article because I already know it is a lot of hogwash.
Every single time I've been to a mall in the past 3 years (ever since after 9/11) the places have been packed. I don't know where all those "poor Americans from the other America" are. Because all the rest of us are at the mall.
John F'in K and the staff of the NY Slimes probably don't know that, because they are too elite to actually go to malls.
Subtitle:
"Dog Squeeze Squeeze Plaguing NYT"
I think it's time for someone to write a book that chronicles the misinformation and outright lies the New York Slime prints.
It could be a best seller on the New York Times best sellers list, which would be ironic.
I sure felt squeezed when I got that $800 check
from the govt. last summer.
A refund of MY MONEY.
Recycle your Karl Rove Bribe [TM].
Donate to the Swift Boat Veterans NOW!
We all know the reason.
The definition of what constitutes upper, middle, and lower classes should, IMHO, account for lifestyles (actual or potential) in addition to price tags: 75K/yr in a pricey place simply does not go that far, and 25K/yr there does not go far at all.
I would like to suggest the following definitions, and would request others' input:
Upper class person does not HAVE TO work for a living, and can afford not to, while maintaining comfortable (independent) or luxurious (rich) living standard. All the price tags are somewhat subjective, of course.
Middle class person HAS TO work for a living, and cannot afford not to, so as to maintain comfortable (or better) living standard. Better-off retirees/pensioners with middle-class living standards can find themselves in the lower reaches of upper class.
Lower class person HAS TO work for a living, and cannot afford not to, so as to maintain lower than comfortable living standard.
Underclass person DOES NOT WANT TO work for a living, is not a pensioner, is frequently accompanied by social pathologies, and exists under lower than comfortable living standard.
Using their threshold numbers (25 and 75K) the upper class in this definition would be ca. 10million (4% of population, composed of 1.5M+ net worthers and better-off retirees); underclass would be 10-20mil (4-8%), and almost everyone with white-collar or skilled blue collar job would comprise the middle class (90 mil out of 140 mil workforce - some 65+% of the population, if families are included.)
If the "middle class" is defined as those households with income between $25,000 and $75,000 (in dollars adjusted for inflation to 2002 levels) then that group did indeed shrink slightly during those two years. That shouldn't be surprising. There was an eight-month economic recession that started in March, 2001, and the unemployment rate climbed from 3.9% at the end of 2000 to 6.0% at the end of 2002.
During those two years, the share of households with less than $25,000 in income rose by 1.4 percentage points, while those in the middle declined by just under one percent. The middle did shrink. It's also true that the share of households in the top group also shrank. Those with income over $75,000 a year declined by 0.4%.
But Kerry naturally said nothing about the "declining upper class."
And most of those insurance woes are due to John Edwards and his band of trial lawyers raping the insurance companies. Hope these whiners will figure it out one of these elections...
"I'm a pretty staunch Bush Republican and I have a great job at I.B.M.," said Todd Canny, who was sharing ice cream with his three children and wife in a new mall. "But we're paying a lot more for health care co-pays and premiums, which is through my wife's job as a teacher. And trying to save for college for these three little ones has gotten a lot harder."
+_____
So what is his point? That he'll make it that much worse by voting in a domocrat--real smart there buddy.
No self-respecting conservative would vote for Kerry or even consider it.