Shrinking Middle Class?

[saveliberty]

I think the media and politicans have this all wrong. The middle class is not shrinking at all. We are all still here, just have less due to poor financial decisions. Many bought homes at too high a price and bailed out when they owed more than they were worth. The economic principle of putting 20% down has always been there. Middle class America ignored it and payed the price.

We all know saving money is important. Americans are not savers, so when the economy took a turn south, we paid again. What about debit? Are we really going to say that accumulating all that debt was anyone's fault but our own?

Nope, the middle class is still here. Just hopefully a lot wiser.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

 

[Stephanie]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

wtf?
no one cares about what you would EXPECT.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

wtf?
no one cares about what you would EXPECT.

I'm sure you think the OP is groundbreaking stuff, Stephanie. It was, after all, submitted for dummies like you in the first place.

 

[Stephanie]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

wtf?
no one cares about what you would EXPECT.

I'm sure you think the OP is groundbreaking stuff, Stephanie. It was, after all, submitted for dummies like you in the first place.

YOU are not the appointed JUDGE on this board to consider what is groundbreaking OR NOT. you don't like it...go buy your OWN BOARD..spare us your rude condescension.

 

[LoneLaugher]

wtf?
no one cares about what you would EXPECT.

I'm sure you think the OP is groundbreaking stuff, Stephanie. It was, after all, submitted for dummies like you in the first place.

YOU are not the appointed JUDGE on this board to consider what is groundbreaking OR NOT. you don't like it...go buy your OWN BOARD..spare us your rude condescension.

You are correct. I was not appointed. But your mistake is in thinking that I will do anything other than just that. When someone posts something so clearly lacking in accuracy, all that one can do is mock it.

Interestingly, I find you to be very rude as well. In addition, I think you are a person with very limited cognitive skills. That is not the kind of combination that makes me want to be gracious. I will, if addressed by you, as in this thread, simply make fun of you.

Merry Christmas.

 

[saveliberty]

I see you have no ability to refute any of it lonelaugher. Must be hard not to be able to blame someone and spread hate. Misinformation is so much more your speed.

 

[Old Rocks]

U.S. Poverty and a Shrinking Middle Class, by the Numbers - Yahoo! News

According the an Associated Press article from December 15, recent census data shows a shrinking middle class, with nearly half of all Americans poor or low-income. Here is a look at this portion of the U.S. population, by the numbers.


97.3 million Americans fall into the low-income category. Low-income is described as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level. 146.4 million Americans had incomes below the poverty line.


About $45,000 a year for a family of four is what is needed to stay above the low-income threshold. Many families are slipping below that number, the Associated Press reports, because of pay cuts, a forced reduction of work hours or a spouse losing a job.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I see you have no ability to refute any of it lonelaugher. Must be hard not to be able to blame someone and spread hate. Misinformation is so much more your speed.

Please.....don't confuse ability with desire.

Merry Christmas.

 

[Katzndogz]

Someone should do a statistical analysis of how a large influx of very poor, uneducated, unskilled people could skew the number of poor.

 

[rdean]

Someone should do a statistical analysis of how a large influx of very poor, uneducated, unskilled people could skew the number of poor.

Are you talking about all those pregnant teens whose parents teach "abstinence only"?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

wtf?
no one cares about what you would EXPECT.

Well, LL's point was spot on; you've never in my experience been close.

 

[Trajan]

when times are bad the numbers of those in the lower classes balloon, when times are good the numbers reflect an expansion, but I don't think its as large as people think it is. of course it appears they are 'shrinking'. so it goes.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

Speaking of learning...let's see how accomplished you are in that arena.

1. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

2. Shrinking? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

Speaking of learning...let's see how accomplished you are in that arena.

1. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

2. Shrinking? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

Ummm.......would you be so kind as to cite your source for the information that you posted here?

Thanks.

 

[Sunshine]

I think the media and politicans have this all wrong. The middle class is not shrinking at all. We are all still here, just have less due to poor financial decisions. Many bought homes at too high a price and bailed out when they owed more than they were worth. The economic principle of putting 20% down has always been there. Middle class America ignored it and payed the price.

We all know saving money is important. Americans are not savers, so when the economy took a turn south, we paid again. What about debit? Are we really going to say that accumulating all that debt was anyone's fault but our own?

Nope, the middle class is still here. Just hopefully a lot wiser.

Not all of us did those stupid things.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are you anticipating that anyone will waste the time it would take to explain the ways in which you have missed the mark with that post? I'd expect someone who has posted 14,000 times to have been involved in.........or at least read....several discussions that began in the same, lame way.

Try learning something while you are here.

Speaking of learning...let's see how accomplished you are in that arena.

1. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

2. Shrinking? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

Ummm.......would you be so kind as to cite your source for the information that you posted here?

Thanks.

Is every Libeal short of visual acuity???

Can't you read?
Everything in the post is sourced.


Oh....I get it....you can't believe that anyone reads books.

Deal with the facts.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Speaking of learning...let's see how accomplished you are in that arena.

1. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

2. Shrinking? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

Ummm.......would you be so kind as to cite your source for the information that you posted here?

Thanks.

Is every Libeal short of visual acuity???

Can't you read?
Everything in the post is sourced.


Oh....I get it....you can't believe that anyone reads books.

Deal with the facts.

Oh......you are claiming that what you posted is original research that you have done?

That is quite impressive. By that, I mean the size of your balls is quite impressive.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Speaking of learning...let's see how accomplished you are in that arena.

1. In actuality, the income of full time wage and salary workers increased between 1980 and 2004, and so did real income- either by 13% or 17%, depending on which price index is used in the calculation. Reynolds, “Income and Wealth,” p. 63.

a. If health and retirement benefits are included, as they should be, worker compensation rose by almost a third. And, even this is illusory, as it doesn’t include the “statistically invisible (not on taxes) returns inside IRA and 401(k) plans.” Reynolds, op. cit., p.64.

b. And, the way real income is computed tends to understate its growth (money income divided by some price index, to account for inflation), and government indexes are open to questions of accuracy. Many economists regard the CPI as inherently- even intentionally- an exaggeration of inflation. http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Inflation/Price-Index/CPI.html

c. An example: while the price of automobiles is increasing, also increasing are the features, once defined as add-ons, or found only in luxury autos. Therefore, not all of the increase is simply inflation. And this is true of many if not most consumer products.

2. Shrinking? The broadest and most accurate measure of living standard is real per capita consumption. That measure soared by 74% from 1980 to 2004. U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

a. A study of table 7.1 would show that between 1973 and 2004, it doubled. And between 1929 and 2004, real per capita consumption by American workers increased five fold. The fastest growth periods were 1983-1990 and 1992-2004, known as the Reagan boom.

Ummm.......would you be so kind as to cite your source for the information that you posted here?

Thanks.

Is every Libeal short of visual acuity???

Can't you read?
Everything in the post is sourced.


Oh....I get it....you can't believe that anyone reads books.

Deal with the facts.

Facts or opinions? As any good litigator knows, a forensic expert can be found to offer their expert advice on any topic necessary to 'prove' the theory most beneficial to the attorney's client.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I think the media and politicans have this all wrong. The middle class is not shrinking at all. We are all still here, just have less due to poor financial decisions.

About $45,000 a year for a family of four is what is needed to stay above the low-income threshold. Many families are slipping below that number, the Associated Press reports, because of pay cuts, a forced reduction of work hours or a spouse losing a job.

Facts and conservative will never go together.

Ummm.......would you be so kind as to cite your source for the information that you posted here?

Thanks.

It’s on any rightwing opinion blog, like all her other sources.