Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
And the evidence continues to mount..
The American Middle-Class is Shrinking
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
And the evidence continues to mount..
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
The chart doesn't show Hospitals, Fire Departments, Libraries, Schools, Police, Parks, Pools closing because of lack of tax dollars.
Nor does it show the expense of increased stress or lack of education of the country as a whole.
We should be American first, then Capitalist or Communist, depending where the Buck stops. jmo.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
Lack of tax dollars?
Did you drink the bullshit-kool aid this morning?
A new type of Destroyer the Navy is building (with R&D costs) comes to roughly 5 billion dollars each...
There isn't a revenue problem, there's a spending problem.
The_Herban_Legend
Well-Known Member
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
And the evidence continues to mount..
But how can this be? A Democrat has been POTUS 16 of the last 24 years. Are you implying that the cause of the American middle class contraction is Democratic policy?
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Not another (whiney) one,
Who gives a shit? Obama sure doesn't and neither do I.
Isn't time to stop the victim bullshit, make money, and become a "have" rather than starting thread after thread on the same old boring whiney shit typical of a lazy, pot smoking "have-not" ?
Reminds me of all the lame, boring, misguided defoliation threads around here.
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/
And the evidence continues to mount..
Who gives a shit? Obama sure doesn't and neither do I.
Isn't time to stop the victim bullshit, make money, and become a "have" rather than starting thread after thread on the same old boring whiney shit typical of a lazy, pot smoking "have-not" ?
Reminds me of all the lame, boring, misguided defoliation threads around here.
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
And you wonder why China put Wal-Mart under tight reigns? lol
Exxon/Shell....Melting polar caps....Security.....fools.....=Battleship
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
The government took in record revenues this year and has near record level deficits. But it is a revenue problem? BTW, those things you listed are local issues, not federal and they should stay local.
Proportions are part of the equation everywhere but The GOP-of-Oz.
Last edited:
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Same for my Dollar/Quality of Life.
What is the value of your voice compared with a lobbing dollar? (3.14 Billion in 2014)
Step up, your gonna need to use the mic.
bearkat42
Well-Known Member
Your level of ignorance is astounding.
GrowUrOwnDank
Well-Known Member
I'll be the first to admit that I am Hellabroke. I see peeps all around me with more money than I got. I work full time and all that noise. What i do have tho is.
A roof over my head and 13 more years to pay til it's mine. With central hear and air. Very comfy crib and way too much for one man.
Decent old truck that has been payed for for 14 years. Heat and air don't work but that bitch starts and the tires are good.
Electronics. I got the smart phone. 50 inch HD. Just gave my ex the gigantic touchscreen all in one puter I paid $1000 for cause I never use it and she will.
A 63 ground up resto that looks amazing like it did in 1963. Even the AM radio is rebuilt.
Gigantic dirt bike. Yammy 450 racing with after market extras.
Fuck I got so much shit I been giving it away because my GARAGE is full and my GIGANTIC shed was too.
My parents were middle class and they didn't have it as good as I do. They had nice stuff tho.
I think we need to rewrite the description of what and who is middle class. I may be Po and Hellabroke. But, I assure you there are millions out there who would love to have what I got.
I get your point OP and I agree that our workers don't get a big enough slice of the pie. It really is unfair.
A roof over my head and 13 more years to pay til it's mine. With central hear and air. Very comfy crib and way too much for one man.
Decent old truck that has been payed for for 14 years. Heat and air don't work but that bitch starts and the tires are good.
Electronics. I got the smart phone. 50 inch HD. Just gave my ex the gigantic touchscreen all in one puter I paid $1000 for cause I never use it and she will.
A 63 ground up resto that looks amazing like it did in 1963. Even the AM radio is rebuilt.
Gigantic dirt bike. Yammy 450 racing with after market extras.
Fuck I got so much shit I been giving it away because my GARAGE is full and my GIGANTIC shed was too.
My parents were middle class and they didn't have it as good as I do. They had nice stuff tho.
I think we need to rewrite the description of what and who is middle class. I may be Po and Hellabroke. But, I assure you there are millions out there who would love to have what I got.
I get your point OP and I agree that our workers don't get a big enough slice of the pie. It really is unfair.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
If you're so smart how come you aint rich?
bearkat42
Well-Known Member
Define rich.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
-In early 2015, 120.8 million adults were in middle-income households, compared with 121.3 million in lower- and upper-income households combined
-While the share of U.S. adults living in both upper- and lower-income households rose alongside the declining share in the middle from 1971 to 2015, the share in the upper-income tier grew more.
-Fully 49% of U.S. aggregate income went to upper-income households in 2014, up from 29% in 1970. The share accruing to middle-income households was 43% in 2014, down substantially from 62% in 1970.
-In 2014, the median income of these households was 4% less than in 2000. Moreover, because of the housing market crisis and the Great Recession of 2007-09, their median wealth (assets minus debts) fell by 28% from 2001 to 2013.
-In 2015, 20% of American adults were in the lowest-income tier, up from 16% in 1971. On the opposite side, 9% are in the highest-income tier, more than double the 4% share in 1971.
-In this study, which examines the changing size, demographic composition and economic fortunes of the American middle class, “middle-income” Americans are defined as adults whose annual household income is two-thirds to double the national median, about $42,000 to $126,000 annually in 2014 dollars for a household of three.3 Under this definition, the middle class made up 50% of the U.S. adult population in 2015, down from 61% in 1971.
-Although the middle class has not kept pace with upper-income households, its median income, adjusted for household size, has risen over the long haul, increasing 34% since 1970. That is not as strong as the 47% increase in income for upper-income households, though it is greater than the 28% increase among lower-income households.
-Moreover, some demographic groups have fared better than others in moving up the income tiers, while some groups have slipped down the ladder. The groups making notable progress include older Americans, married couples and blacks. Despite this progress, older Americans and blacks remain more likely to be lower income and less likely to be upper income than adults overall. Those Americans without a college degree stand out as experiencing a substantial loss in economic status.
-In addition to changes in the size and economic standing of the American middle class, its demographic profile has changed significantly in recent decades. Some of the changes reflect long-term demographic trends in the U.S., as the middle class is in many ways a mirror of the broader population. For example, the aging of the country, the growing racial and ethnic diversity, the decline in marriage rates and the overall rise in educational attainment are all reflected in the changing composition of the middle class.
"The Middle-Class Shrinks
The hollowing of the American middle class has proceeded steadily for more than four decades. Since 1971, each decade has ended with a smaller share of adults living in middle-income households than at the beginning of the decade, and no single decade stands out as having triggered or hastened the decline in the middle.
Based on the definition used in this report, the share of American adults living in middle-income households has fallen from 61% in 1971 to 50% in 2015. The share living in the upper-income tier rose from 14% to 21% over the same period. Meanwhile, the share in the lower-income tier increased from 25% to 29%. Notably, the 7 percentage point increase in the share at the top is nearly double the 4 percentage point increase at the bottom.
The rising share of adults in the lower- and upper-income tiers is at the farthest points of the income distribution, distant from the vicinity of the middle. The share of American adults in the lowest-income tier rose from 16% in 1971 to 20% in 2015. Over the same period, the share of American adults in lower-middle income households did not change, holding at 9%.
The growth at the top is similarly skewed. The share of adults in highest-income households more than doubled, from 4% in 1971 to 9% in 2015. But the increase in the share in upper-middle income households was modest, rising from 10% to 12%. Thus, the closer look at the shift out of the middle reveals that a deeper polarization is underway in the American economy."
"Trends in Wealth
The Great Recession of 2007-09, which caused the latest downturn in incomes, had an even greater impact on the wealth (assets minus debts) of families. The losses were so large that only upper-income families realized notable gains in wealth over the span of 30 years from 1983 to 2013 (the period for which data on wealth are available).
Before the onset of the Great Recession, the median wealth of middle-income families increased from $95,879 in 1983 to $161,050 in 2007, a gain of 68%. But the economic downturn eliminated that gain almost entirely. By 2010, the median wealth of middle-income families had fallen to about $98,000, where it still stood in 2013.
Upper-income families more than doubled their wealth from 1983 to 2007 as it climbed from $323,402 to $729,980. Despite losses during the recession, these families recovered somewhat since 2010 and had a median wealth of $650,074 in 2013, about double their wealth in 1983.
The disparate trends in the wealth of middle-income and upper-income families are due to the fact that housing assumes a greater role in the portfolios of middle-income families. The crash in the housing market that preceded the Great Recession was more severe and of longer duration than the turmoil in the stock market. Thus, the portfolios of upper-income families performed better than the portfolios of middle-income families from 2007 to 2013. When all is said and done, upper-income families, which had three times as much wealth as middle-income families in 1983, had seven times as much in 2013."
"Demographic Winners and Losers
As the middle has hollowed, some demographic groups have been more likely to advance up the income tiers (winners) while others were more likely to retreat down the economic ladder (losers).
Nationally, the share of adults in the upper-income tier increased from 14% in 1971 to 21% in 2015, a gain of 7 percentage points. Meanwhile, the share of adults in the lower-income tier also rose, from 25% to 29%, an increase of 4 percentage points. The difference – 3 percentage points – is the net gain for American adults. By the same measure, the net gain in economic status varied across demographic groups.
The biggest winners since 1971 are people 65 and older. This age group was the only one that had a smaller share in the lower-income tier in 2015 than in 1971. Not coincidentally, the poverty rate among people 65 and older fell from 24.6% in 1970 to 10% in 2014. Evidence shows that rising Social Security benefits have played a key role in improving the economic status of older adults. The youngest adults, ages 18 to 29, are among the notable losers with a significant rise in their share in the lower-income tiers.
The economic status of adults with a bachelor’s degree changed little from 1971 to 2015, meaning that similar shares of these adults were lower-, middle- or upper-income in those two years. Those without a bachelor’s degree tumbled down the income tiers, however. Among the various demographic groups examined, adults with no more than a high school diploma lost the most ground economically.
Winners also include married adults, especially couples where both work. On the flip side, being unmarried is associated with an economic loss. This coincides with a period in which marriage overall is on the decline but is increasingly linked to higher educational attainment.
Gains for women edged out gains for men, a reflection of their streaming into the labor force in greater numbers in the past four decades, their educational attainment rising faster than among men, and the narrowing of the gender wage gap.
Among racial and ethnic groups, blacks and whites came out winners, but Hispanics slipped down the ladder. Although blacks advanced in income status, they are still more likely to be lower income and less likely to be upper income than whites or adults overall. For Hispanics, the overall loss in income status reflects the rising share of lower-earning immigrants in the adult population, from 29% in 1970 to 49% in 2015. Considered separately, both U.S.-born and foreign-born Hispanics edged up the economic tiers."
-While the share of U.S. adults living in both upper- and lower-income households rose alongside the declining share in the middle from 1971 to 2015, the share in the upper-income tier grew more.
-Fully 49% of U.S. aggregate income went to upper-income households in 2014, up from 29% in 1970. The share accruing to middle-income households was 43% in 2014, down substantially from 62% in 1970.
-In 2014, the median income of these households was 4% less than in 2000. Moreover, because of the housing market crisis and the Great Recession of 2007-09, their median wealth (assets minus debts) fell by 28% from 2001 to 2013.
-In 2015, 20% of American adults were in the lowest-income tier, up from 16% in 1971. On the opposite side, 9% are in the highest-income tier, more than double the 4% share in 1971.
-In this study, which examines the changing size, demographic composition and economic fortunes of the American middle class, “middle-income” Americans are defined as adults whose annual household income is two-thirds to double the national median, about $42,000 to $126,000 annually in 2014 dollars for a household of three.3 Under this definition, the middle class made up 50% of the U.S. adult population in 2015, down from 61% in 1971.
-Although the middle class has not kept pace with upper-income households, its median income, adjusted for household size, has risen over the long haul, increasing 34% since 1970. That is not as strong as the 47% increase in income for upper-income households, though it is greater than the 28% increase among lower-income households.
-Moreover, some demographic groups have fared better than others in moving up the income tiers, while some groups have slipped down the ladder. The groups making notable progress include older Americans, married couples and blacks. Despite this progress, older Americans and blacks remain more likely to be lower income and less likely to be upper income than adults overall. Those Americans without a college degree stand out as experiencing a substantial loss in economic status.
-In addition to changes in the size and economic standing of the American middle class, its demographic profile has changed significantly in recent decades. Some of the changes reflect long-term demographic trends in the U.S., as the middle class is in many ways a mirror of the broader population. For example, the aging of the country, the growing racial and ethnic diversity, the decline in marriage rates and the overall rise in educational attainment are all reflected in the changing composition of the middle class.
"The Middle-Class Shrinks
The hollowing of the American middle class has proceeded steadily for more than four decades. Since 1971, each decade has ended with a smaller share of adults living in middle-income households than at the beginning of the decade, and no single decade stands out as having triggered or hastened the decline in the middle.
Based on the definition used in this report, the share of American adults living in middle-income households has fallen from 61% in 1971 to 50% in 2015. The share living in the upper-income tier rose from 14% to 21% over the same period. Meanwhile, the share in the lower-income tier increased from 25% to 29%. Notably, the 7 percentage point increase in the share at the top is nearly double the 4 percentage point increase at the bottom.
The rising share of adults in the lower- and upper-income tiers is at the farthest points of the income distribution, distant from the vicinity of the middle. The share of American adults in the lowest-income tier rose from 16% in 1971 to 20% in 2015. Over the same period, the share of American adults in lower-middle income households did not change, holding at 9%.
The growth at the top is similarly skewed. The share of adults in highest-income households more than doubled, from 4% in 1971 to 9% in 2015. But the increase in the share in upper-middle income households was modest, rising from 10% to 12%. Thus, the closer look at the shift out of the middle reveals that a deeper polarization is underway in the American economy."
"Trends in Wealth
The Great Recession of 2007-09, which caused the latest downturn in incomes, had an even greater impact on the wealth (assets minus debts) of families. The losses were so large that only upper-income families realized notable gains in wealth over the span of 30 years from 1983 to 2013 (the period for which data on wealth are available).
Before the onset of the Great Recession, the median wealth of middle-income families increased from $95,879 in 1983 to $161,050 in 2007, a gain of 68%. But the economic downturn eliminated that gain almost entirely. By 2010, the median wealth of middle-income families had fallen to about $98,000, where it still stood in 2013.
Upper-income families more than doubled their wealth from 1983 to 2007 as it climbed from $323,402 to $729,980. Despite losses during the recession, these families recovered somewhat since 2010 and had a median wealth of $650,074 in 2013, about double their wealth in 1983.
The disparate trends in the wealth of middle-income and upper-income families are due to the fact that housing assumes a greater role in the portfolios of middle-income families. The crash in the housing market that preceded the Great Recession was more severe and of longer duration than the turmoil in the stock market. Thus, the portfolios of upper-income families performed better than the portfolios of middle-income families from 2007 to 2013. When all is said and done, upper-income families, which had three times as much wealth as middle-income families in 1983, had seven times as much in 2013."
"Demographic Winners and Losers
As the middle has hollowed, some demographic groups have been more likely to advance up the income tiers (winners) while others were more likely to retreat down the economic ladder (losers).
Nationally, the share of adults in the upper-income tier increased from 14% in 1971 to 21% in 2015, a gain of 7 percentage points. Meanwhile, the share of adults in the lower-income tier also rose, from 25% to 29%, an increase of 4 percentage points. The difference – 3 percentage points – is the net gain for American adults. By the same measure, the net gain in economic status varied across demographic groups.
The biggest winners since 1971 are people 65 and older. This age group was the only one that had a smaller share in the lower-income tier in 2015 than in 1971. Not coincidentally, the poverty rate among people 65 and older fell from 24.6% in 1970 to 10% in 2014. Evidence shows that rising Social Security benefits have played a key role in improving the economic status of older adults. The youngest adults, ages 18 to 29, are among the notable losers with a significant rise in their share in the lower-income tiers.
The economic status of adults with a bachelor’s degree changed little from 1971 to 2015, meaning that similar shares of these adults were lower-, middle- or upper-income in those two years. Those without a bachelor’s degree tumbled down the income tiers, however. Among the various demographic groups examined, adults with no more than a high school diploma lost the most ground economically.
Winners also include married adults, especially couples where both work. On the flip side, being unmarried is associated with an economic loss. This coincides with a period in which marriage overall is on the decline but is increasingly linked to higher educational attainment.
Gains for women edged out gains for men, a reflection of their streaming into the labor force in greater numbers in the past four decades, their educational attainment rising faster than among men, and the narrowing of the gender wage gap.
Among racial and ethnic groups, blacks and whites came out winners, but Hispanics slipped down the ladder. Although blacks advanced in income status, they are still more likely to be lower income and less likely to be upper income than whites or adults overall. For Hispanics, the overall loss in income status reflects the rising share of lower-earning immigrants in the adult population, from 29% in 1970 to 49% in 2015. Considered separately, both U.S.-born and foreign-born Hispanics edged up the economic tiers."
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I am starting a new business. I expect my income to be 60-80,000 within 3 years and 100,000+ within 5 years and by that point I should be doing about 1/2 the work. Sky's the limit.
Why do I need a lobbying dollar?
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Congratulations, and good luck, remember, never quit!
Who lobbied to sell Navel Oil Reserves and a west Texas Field to China, when a mere 10 yrs ago it was against National Interests?
Lets hope one day you will never need a lobbying dollar. Just a vote.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
You are battling the cause, not the source of the problem.
The politicians are the ones passing legislation favorable to one group over another. They are the criminals, not the lobbies ts that congress continues to allow to be legal. Until you take the power away from the legislators you are never going to separate the money from politics. If you make donations illegal then only the dirty politicians will have extra funding. Not going to solve the problem of the corruption in Washington.