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.
F*** WaPo is annoying with the anti-adblock and anti-private browsing nonsense. I'll just go by the chart, they left off taxes which exceed any other expense I have by a considerable margin.
Not to mention F this chart....which is laughably short of so many things it begs legitimacy from Peter Pan.
My home value is $260k that is about as low as you can get a decent small SFH for in an ok suburb.
I’m not sure why I thought you made a lot more money than 78k a year but with a masters degree surely you could find something else, somewhere else in the US. You choose to live where you do and thus you choose to accept the tax rate and political climate you are in. You are literally voting with your dollars
Not to mention F this chart....which is laughably short of so many things it begs legitimacy from Peter Pan.
The point is that the primary costs of being middle class have risen rapidly while the benefits of deflation in various consumer goods, TV being probably the most prominent, does not make up for that.
The study itself anticipated your question:
Any number of objections might be raised to these particular parameters: Why focus on male wages, when most women work, too? Why count a health-insurance premium’s total cost, when employers often cover a substantial share? A detailed discussion of each of these choices is presented in the description of methodology below (III.A. Index Components). But broadly, the choice of parameters flows from the question to be answered. Here, the question is how well the typical male worker can provide for a family.
This report shows that his ability to do so has degraded dramatically. A generation ago, he could be confident in his ability to provide for his family not only the basics of food, clothing, and shelter but also the middle-class essentials of a comfortable house, a car, health care, and education. Now he cannot. Public programs may provide those things for him, a second earner may work as well, his family may do without, although his television may be larger than ever. The implications of each is surely worth pondering. But the fact that he can no longer provide middle-class security to a family is an unavoidable economic reality of the modern era.
One of the key drivers in the price of housing is the emergence, in the late 1960s, of the dual income family, which in turn was in part enabled by the emergence & adoption of The Pill.
Given that dual-income families are the norm in HCOL areas, I find it odd the authors select male wages as the benchmark against which expenses are measured.
Agreed. It should be median family income and it should also then include childcare costs.
One of the key drivers in the price of housing is the emergence, in the late 1960s, of the dual income family, which in turn was in part enabled by the emergence & adoption of The Pill.
Given that dual-income families are the norm in HCOL areas, I find it odd the authors select male wages as the benchmark against which expenses are measured.
Incorrect, dual-income families are the norm across the majority of the US, not just in HCOL areas. In most lower cost areas, wages were depressed for many years, necessitating two incomes to maintain a basic middle class existence.
Then move. That's a popular thing people tell each other here.
That’s a GREAT answer!
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.