U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-29-2017, 12:38 PM
 
6,308 posts, read 4,765,469 times
Reputation: 8437

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
Since the economic progress has left 99% of us behind in the last 40 years, we have to look for other signs of improvement.
More like 80% of us. The top 15-20% is doing fine.

Quote:
I like this chart, but it's important to read it correctly. Real GDP/capita has increased ~1.9%/yr since the mid 1800s. A consistent yearly % increase will take the form of an exponential rise (consistently steeper slope). Over long time periods you'd expect wages to keep pace with per capita GDP, and this was the case from 1860 to the mid 1970s. Prior to 1930 wages lagged a bit (~1.6%/yr rise), but the imbalance was corrected in the following 45 years when wages increased at a ~3%/yr rate. And then the bottom fell out. Since then the yearly increase has been 0.0%.
The immigration laws were changed to allow much faster immigration from a much wider variety of countries in 1965. Women started to move into the workplace (other than as teachers and nurses) in the 1960s. While I regard both of these as favorable developments, is it really a surprise that the growth of men's wages might have slowed down in the face of that kind of competition?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-29-2017, 12:56 PM
 
24,706 posts, read 26,777,106 times
Reputation: 22704
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
I would be careful about romanticizing that period. One reason that divorces were lower in the 60's than in subsequent decades is that divorces were a complicated and expensive legal fight. In 1970 California became the first state to have 'no fault divorce', before that you had to prove abuse or adultery to get a divorce. And in the 60's those perfect families weren't all they seemed to be. Domestic violence was largely ignored by law enforcement unless the victim require hospitalization and even then her abuser might get off with 'counseling'.
I'm not romanticizing. Yes, I get it. Things weren't as good as the image projected. That doesn't mean they weren't better in at least some ways.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,170 posts, read 4,730,147 times
Reputation: 4206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Siegel View Post
More like 80% of us. The top 15-20% is doing fine.
I addressed this earlier (I think in this thread?... maybe another). The 80-99.9%ile are certainly doing better than those below, but only the 99.9+%ile has exceeded per capita GDP gains (and them by a lot!).

Quote:
The immigration laws were changed to allow much faster immigration from a much wider variety of countries in 1965. Women started to move into the workplace (other than as teachers and nurses) in the 1960s. While I regard both of these as favorable developments, is it really a surprise that the growth of men's wages might have slowed down in the face of that kind of competition?
We had much higher unskilled immigration in the late 1800s and early 1900s without a negative effect on wages. Any increase in the workforce merely increases the size of the economy (more production and more consumption, more supply and more demand), there is nothing in it that would depress wages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 01:44 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
17,977 posts, read 17,131,123 times
Reputation: 30086
Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
I bought a copy of Arthur Frommer's "Europe on $5 a Day" and started planning. Spent most of '68 touring Europe, on an average of $7 a day. 210 days on $1500, lodging/food/transport. In London, B&B in Edgeware Road was 15 shillings (75p). I think the RT ticket across the Atlantic was $135.
I did that. Spent a summer in Europe. Then came home and shared an old house with four other working people. But then we bought a house for $20,000. Not a dream house--small, no garage, one bathroom, dirt driveway, and a long commute to work--but it was a decent house.

That was with two people working full time and no kids. One car that we shared, no frills, second hand furniture, home cooked meals all the time.

The boomers had it good for a while but we also had a terrible recession in the 1970s and we had more troubles along the way. Most of us were for sharing and helping and many of us still are. Then there are those (of any generation) who have got theirs and resent anyone else who has anything and don't want a safety net for those who are less fortunate. I don't know what it's going to take for people to care about others again.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 02:02 PM
 
11,891 posts, read 14,355,740 times
Reputation: 7526
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
The only reason the US economically has seemed to "decline" is because it was inevitable that other countries gained strength. Same thing with the UK 150 years ago, and so on. Someday the Chinese will be lamenting the same thing.

And remember in the 80's when Japan was supposed to be kicking our butts? Look what happened to that.

BTW that report in the OP was a report of the president. Of course it's going to paint things pretty rosy.
Certainly true about Japan, though it peaked later. The US may have gradually declined, but Japan fell faster and further. You can see it manifest in many ways. Young people not wanting to have children. The term "shut-in" in most countries means usually elderly often disabled. But in Japan, it could apply to young able bodied.

As far as the President at the time, wanting to be adulated for Medicare, he was reviled for his unending support for the war.

Last edited by pvande55; 12-29-2017 at 02:05 PM.. Reason: Add line
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,170 posts, read 4,730,147 times
Reputation: 4206
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
The US may have gradually declined
Nope. No signs of a decline yet. They only thing that has changed is a big shift of wealth from the middle class to the uber rich.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 02:45 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,026,502 times
Reputation: 2071
Just wish we had the prices the baby boomers had in home pricing.. much less inflation pricing..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 03:07 PM
 
Location: State of Denial
1,664 posts, read 769,992 times
Reputation: 8531
Quote:
Originally Posted by hitpausebutton2 View Post
Just wish we had the prices the baby boomers had in home pricing.. much less inflation pricing..
My first house, bought in 1972, cost $17,000. It was a nice little house, too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 03:16 PM
 
Location: N of citrus, S of decent corn
34,531 posts, read 42,694,765 times
Reputation: 57179
My first husband, a professional, was just out of college in 67, and his first job paid $8000. a year. He retired from that job after 44 years.

A few years later, in 72, we bought a new, 4 bedroom house on a lovely lot, for $34,000.

Plenty of men with blue collar jobs were the sole breadwinners then, and raised big families on their income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-29-2017, 03:28 PM
 
2,360 posts, read 1,026,502 times
Reputation: 2071
Quote:
Originally Posted by gentlearts View Post
My first husband, a professional, was just out of college in 67, and his first job paid $8000. a year. He retired from that job after 44 years.

A few years later, in 72, we bought a new, 4 bedroom house on a lovely lot, for $34,000.

Plenty of men with blue collar jobs were the sole breadwinners then, and raised big families on their income.
Yea listening to stories my parents and grandparents had.. Seems my grandparents had it easy compare to what we have now. Amazing how you can inflate the dollar with fake excuses. Now days, you need the entire family to put out or they get out approach. Just wish their was a blockade against inflation, because its redonkelous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top