Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK, so you have a "family home." I get the concept.
One of the main flaws in the concept is that this one family home is in one location. That location may not serve any family members well. Careers are becoming more and more specialized, and where this home is may not serve the career needs of any individual. I'm from east Tennessee and there is little in the way of professional employment for me there. Gone are the times when people could live in the same area and make ends meet.
See my first paragraph again:
Quote:
The "family home" concept is flexible enough to accommodate that--you just make sure as houses are bought and sold that there is always one which is known as the "family home."
I wouldn't call it a "decline" per se. Median wages are in the same ballpark as the past. Disappointingly stagnant, but not in real decline. If you expand the comparison range - we might be a little less well off relative to the 1950s and 60s (if you don't count the gains of minorities and women) and the short period 1995-2000, but we are still better off relative to most every other time. If you look to economic history prior to the Great Depression, the middle class is WAY better off than they were 100 years ago.
I would more accurately term the middle class's predicament to be "rising tide" of primary costs - mostly health care, college and housing. The order of severity among those 3 problems depends on your location.
If you define "middle class" as your kids being more well off than their parents - those days seem to have ended. Part of this is probably because many families have reached a saturation point for affluence. To be better off than a middle class family with two middle class jobs on a normal career trajectory... let's say a civil engineer and a teacher whose careers are stable and grow at expected rates..... Really the kids would have to cross into the low wealthy class to outdo their parents. In that scenario there are actually good odds for at least 1 of the kids being worse off.
I wouldn't call it a "decline" per se. Median wages are in the same ballpark as the past. Disappointingly stagnant, but not in real decline. If you expand the comparison range - we might be a little less well off relative to the 1950s and 60s (if you don't count the gains of minorities and women) and the short period 1995-2000, but we are still better off relative to most every other time. If you look to economic history prior to the Great Depression, the middle class is WAY better off than they were 100 years ago.
I would more accurately term the middle class's predicament to be "rising tide" of primary costs - mostly health care, college and housing. The order of severity among those 3 problems depends on your location.
If you define "middle class" as your kids being more well off than their parents - those days seem to have ended. Part of this is probably because many families have reached a saturation point for affluence. To be better off than a middle class family with two middle class jobs on a normal career trajectory... let's say a civil engineer and a teacher whose careers are stable and grow at expected rates..... Really the kids would have to cross into the low wealthy class to outdo their parents. In that scenario there are actually good odds for at least 1 of the kids being worse off.
Contrary to the fallacy of a rising tide lifting all boats, I've been saying a rising tide capsizes all boats not lifted.
Lack of ownership leaves citizens extremely vulnerable to escalating rents.
Precisely so; I believe we are in the process of adopting intergenerational tenure, where children will generally grow up to own homes if their parents owned, and generally grow up to not own homes if their parents did not.
It does, but ownership leaves homeowners very exposed to the risk of having to relocate for a better job (or to keep their job) and not being able to sell their house.
Romania's very high homeownership rate implies very little mobility.
The problem you claim is not existent in Portland.
I wouldn't call it a "decline" per se. Median wages are in the same ballpark as the past. Disappointingly stagnant, but not in real decline. ........
I would agree. Overall we in the middle class are not doing badly in spite of all of the gloom and doomers on this forum. Unfortunately there seems to be a trend that points toward future issues. At one time the middle class was comprised largely of high school graduates. Now more and more the middle class includes a high percentage of those who are college graduates. Now more and more the bottom of the middle class is largely comprised of those without college degrees or strong skills. The future is starting to look disappointing for those at the bottom.
I see education, including vocational education, as being the key for future success. I think other solutions are likely to fail. Trump claims he can bring back the past which would include good jobs for those at the bottom. I doubt the past will return. Globalization is only one small factor. Others are automation, robotics, computers and economies of scale including those in agriculture and retailing. Sanders and others claim they can solve the issue with a big increase in minimum wage and other benefits. I doubt that will do much except push for more job reductions for the unskilled.
Meanwhile the upper portion of the middle class seems to be doing very well. The number of households with 6 figure incomes has grown nicely to over 60 million.
The future seems clear. The top of the middle class is prospering even in tough economic times. The bottom is declining with no hope in sight.
I would agree. Overall we in the middle class are not doing badly in spite of all of the gloom and doomers on this forum. Unfortunately there seems to be a trend that points toward future issues. At one time the middle class was comprised largely of high school graduates. Now more and more the middle class includes a high percentage of those who are college graduates. Now more and more the bottom of the middle class is largely comprised of those without college degrees or strong skills. The future is starting to look disappointing for those at the bottom.
I see education, including vocational education, as being the key for future success. I think other solutions are likely to fail. Trump claims he can bring back the past which would include good jobs for those at the bottom. I doubt the past will return. Globalization is only one small factor. Others are automation, robotics, computers and economies of scale including those in agriculture and retailing. Sanders and others claim they can solve the issue with a big increase in minimum wage and other benefits. I doubt that will do much except push for more job reductions for the unskilled.
Meanwhile the upper portion of the middle class seems to be doing very well. The number of households with 6 figure incomes has grown nicely to over 60 million.
The future seems clear. The top of the middle class is prospering even in tough economic times. The bottom is declining with no hope in sight.
As someone pointed out up-thread large numbers of Americans made it into the middle class during the post war years due to unions /well paying manufacturing jobs. In fact the link I posted to a CBS article says pretty much the same thing; the middle class is being emptied out due to a lack of well paying manufacturing jobs.
So yes, you either have a college and or post graduate degree and thus a shot at being in or above middle class; or you don't and unless you can latch onto any of the remaining jobs that pay well but only require a high school diploma (such as some civil service positions), you'll be lower income or working class.
Trump is an idiot and is taking a page from almost every politician on both sides. No one is or wants to tell Americans the sad but real truth; the past is gone and not coming back. There isn't anything a POTUS, Congress and or anyone else can do that will bring back thousands of good paying manufacturing jobs. Nor can they stop the relentless and fast moving pace of technology that is allowing employers to get more work out of fewer employees and or making more and more jobs redundant. As things stand now any sort of work that can be digitized is subject to being taken over in whole or part by technology.
So what does that leave us? More of what we are seeing already, a two tier society with retail/service/low and unskilled labor making up more of the job market while highly skilled and or educated occupy the top but are a smaller portion of the overall population.
This is why you are seeing so much anger focused on raising the minimum wage, creating "affordable housing" and so forth. If the jobs many people have do not allow them to live with "dignity", then government is going to have to step in and provide. Be it forcing employers to raise wages and or provide certain benefits, or via wealth redistribution (taxes) providing things for those who cannot.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
