No.
The recession, while made worse by this administration, does not represent the usual events of the last few decades.
What the text indicates is that the middle class is hardly shrinking nor stagnating.
But, the bigger picture...there is no perpetual wealthy class, America is the land of opportunity, and the more one works, the wealthier one becomes. The case made by the Left is to manipulate those who won't do their own research.
If you're willing to accept a superficial perspective, then you will remanin a vassal of the Left.
My father and grandfather worked their asses off their whole lives, both working two jobs and rarely coming home till 9pm after starting their day when the sun came up. I defy you to find anyone, anywhere who worked harder than they. And I followed in their footsteps. Yet none of us ever became rich.
I find that three things contrubute to almost all wealthy people. They are willing to take chances, they are lucky and/or they invest well. Any one or combination.
So to say that hard work alone will make you wealthy is a slap in the face to many working people who do, in fact, work their asses off every day.
1. "Yet none of us ever became rich."
That conclusion would be left to the individual, wouldn't it?
2. "So to say that hard work alone will make you wealthy is a slap in the face to many working people who do, in fact, work their asses off every day...."
Well, then...rather than slap anyoneone during this joyous season, let me make it clear that wealth is related to "work"...or, perhaps a better term, "productivity."
Income and wealth inequality
or demographics. In
Alan Reynolds Income and Wealth, he studied the data, and found the following. Certainly the top fifth of households has a far greater proportion of same, but it also has
six times as many full-time workers as the bottom fifth, heavily composed of two-earner couples with older children or other relatives who work. The bottom fifth is heavily composed of aged or younger couples, the retired or the still in school. Also, some in the bottom fifth because they are part of the underground economy, or in crime, so income is not reported. Or suffer addictions which preclude work.
a. In 2004, 56.4% of households in
the bottom fifth featured no work by anyone for the entire year.
HINC-05--Part 1
b.The total number of full time, year round workers in the bottom fifth for 2004 was less than 3 million
which compares to
16.4 million in the top fifth of households. Ibid.
The difference in income does not reflect inequality, but rather,
productivity.
The fact that the lowest fifth are neither starving, nor living in the streets reflects the intrinsic generosity of our society, and the transfer of incomes via government programs.
80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers; it is only 2% for the top fifth.
c. Other pertinent factors include age and experience of head of household, educational differences, the rise of working women, which increased the number of two-earner families, increased in college educated workers, percent of immigrants in the workforce, which also give the impression of inequality.
d. One more point: "
80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers"
This is very significant: too many soft-hearted folks are fooled by the Left, as they do not tell you this fact.
Again: 80% of income in the bottom fifth is from such transfers
This means that when the Left, the 'poverty industry,' tells you that a family of four is poor because it earns $22,050 [http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml], it neglects to note that the government provides food stamps, housing, income, etc. equivalent to $88,200.
This means that ineffect, this family of four has the total income the same as a working family of $110,250...roughly.
What a country, huh?
So, how's that for "a slap in the face to many working people who do, in fact, work their asses off every day"????
