The Rise and Fall of Middle-class Wealth

[DifferentDrummr]

I have saved since a teenager

And I now have a nice nest egg that will cover our retirement

If you're lucky.

I am not the 1%....in wealth or earnings

I am top 5% in both.....

Because you didn't report your taxes? lol

And if your income never grows, you aren't a very good employee

Ahlevah just proved you wrong in post 17.

Getting skills, and improving them are choices.....

Some people make bad ones.....

Or don't you believe in personal responsibility?

Sure, but unlike you, I don't believe in fairy tales.

 

[DifferentDrummr]

Circular how? We're talking about wealth distribution, right? Much of the wealth in this country is concentrated in private-sector capital. By definition, for a company to make a profit it must earn more than it spends, including the amount it spends on labor. So can you see how those who depend on labor to accumulate wealth are at a disadvantage to those who own the income stream of productive assets?



Hey, I've argued 'till my lungs were blue that workers have gotten a bum deal when it comes to the split between labor and capital. Real wages have been stagnant for decades, and have actually declined over the last fifteen years or so, IIRC. Even within the share of national income comprised of wages, those at the top of the scale are receiving a larger proportion than they have historically. So, yeah, we've got a problem. As to why this is so, I've presented various arguments, and there's probably a little bit of truth in each one: the decline of unionization; globalism; the disconnect between executive and worker compensation; the rise of the (relatively low wage) service economy versus (higher paying) manufacturing employment; the disproportional rates of taxation on labor versus capital; etc.

But workers have to face the fact they they've become part of the problem. They've gotten away from the idea of thrift as a virtue. It's all about me, mine, and where the next deal is coming from. Live within your means, folks, whatever they are, and don't waste your time pointing your finger at someone else. It's your fault, too.

What exactly are you referring to here? Bad mortgages? Credit cards?

It does zero good to proclaim that someone has a problem without even trying to define it, much less propose a solution.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Personal responsibility? Hard work? Thrift? Waiting to get married before having children? Now, those are some revolutionary ideas in today's world.

Whatever will happen to the new strategy of casual sex, children out of wedlock, spending more than you earn, and then blaming "society" for your troubles? If things are bad, just go to the vendor on the corner and get some happy pills. Better yet, get a prescription from your doctor and make the government pay for it. That's the ticket to success, don't you know.

Ditto, this post is class-warfare nonsense. I get tired of this kind of crap. There's plenty of data to show that the wall to economic stability is getting ever higher -- just look at those college tuition costs! And all you and others can offer is empty moralizing and shaming. Fact, is, young people are having children later than ever. Fact is, crime rates are down, teen pregnancy rates are down. There's really no data to back up the assertion that young people are morally inferior to prior generations. But there's plenty of data to show they're poorer. Sure, "work hard and take responsibility" is good advice for an individual to follow, but the data show systemic failings, not moral ones. So back up your crap moralizing with data.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Work for someone else and your ceiling will always be eight feet.

Work for yourself, and doors will continuously open if your product/workmanship is good, and you follow through on your agreements/contracts.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Circular how? We're talking about wealth distribution, right? Much of the wealth in this country is concentrated in private-sector capital. By definition, for a company to make a profit it must earn more than it spends, including the amount it spends on labor. So can you see how those who depend on labor to accumulate wealth are at a disadvantage to those who own the income stream of productive assets?



Hey, I've argued 'till my lungs were blue that workers have gotten a bum deal when it comes to the split between labor and capital. Real wages have been stagnant for decades, and have actually declined over the last fifteen years or so, IIRC. Even within the share of national income comprised of wages, those at the top of the scale are receiving a larger proportion than they have historically. So, yeah, we've got a problem. As to why this is so, I've presented various arguments, and there's probably a little bit of truth in each one: the decline of unionization; globalism; the disconnect between executive and worker compensation; the rise of the (relatively low wage) service economy versus (higher paying) manufacturing employment; the disproportional rates of taxation on labor versus capital; etc.

But workers have to face the fact they they've become part of the problem. They've gotten away from the idea of thrift as a virtue. It's all about me, mine, and where the next deal is coming from. Live within your means, folks, whatever they are, and don't waste your time pointing your finger at someone else. It's your fault, too.

This is a reasonable post. But implicit here is a glimpse of the future: Millennials are going to raise taxes; they're going to embrace European socialism; they're going to reject the current system; because the system isn't working for them.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Work for someone else and your ceiling will always be eight feet.

Work for yourself, and doors will continuously open if your product/workmanship is good, and you follow through on your agreements/contracts.

No business can grow without employees. 350 million entrepreneurs isn't going to work out either. Do the right thing. Pay your employees a living wage.

 

[RetiredUSN]

No business can grow without employees. 350 million entrepreneurs isn't going to work out either. Do the right thing. Pay your employees a living wage.

If you don't like your financial status.......get off your azz and improve yourself, or go look for some fool who will pay you what YOU think you are worth.

Nobody has to guaranteee anyone a job, so the living wage BS is a non starter to begin with.

 

[GhostlyJoe]

If you don't like your financial status.......get off your azz and improve yourself, or go look for some fool who will pay you what YOU think you are worth.

Nobody has to guaranteee anyone a job, so the living wage BS is a non starter to begin with.

Move; leave your family behind; take out student loans; live in a bus in the woods .. whatever it takes!!!

Your taxes need to be raised.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Ditto, this post is class-warfare nonsense. I get tired of this kind of crap. There's plenty of data to show that the wall to economic stability is getting ever higher -- just look at those college tuition costs! And all you and others can offer is empty moralizing and shaming. Fact, is, young people are having children later than ever. Fact is, crime rates are down, teen pregnancy rates are down. There's really no data to back up the assertion that young people are morally inferior to prior generations. But there's plenty of data to show they're poorer. Sure, "work hard and take responsibility" is good advice for an individual to follow, but the data show systemic failings, not moral ones. So back up your crap moralizing with data.

Higher than it was for my parents' generation, growing up in the Great Depression, then going to fight Hitler and Hirohito, coming back to work and support families?

Sure, there are some serious roadblocks on the road to the middle class. Some of those are taken away by scholarships for poor students.

And, here are some interesting stats:

With little fanfare, the federal government has posted its annual compilation of birth data, including out-of-wedlock births. Here’s the bad news (essentially unchanged from last year): Preliminary data indicate that 40.7 percent of all 2012 births were out-of-wedlock, which is appalling, and there are vast differences among racial and ethnic groups. Among non-Hispanic blacks, the figure is highest, at 72.2 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, it’s 66.9 percent; 53.5 percent for Hispanics; 29.4 percent for non-Hispanic whites; and a mere 17.1 percent for Asians/Pacific Islanders.

Read more at: | National Review

Does it matter? Well, let's see:

Abstract: Child poverty is an ongoing national concern, but few are aware that its principal cause is the absence of married fathers in the home. Marriage remains America’s strongest anti-poverty weapon, yet it continues to decline. As husbands disappear from the home, poverty and welfare dependence will increase, and children and parents will suffer as a result. Since marital decline drives up child poverty and welfare dependence, and since the poor aspire to healthy marriage but lack the norms, understanding, and skills to achieve it, it is reasonable for government to take active steps to strengthen marriage. Just as government discourages youth from dropping out of school, it should provide information that will help people to form and maintain healthy marriages and delay childbearing until they are married and economically stable. In particular, clarifying the severe shortcomings of the “child first, marriage later” philosophy to potential parents in lower-income communities should be a priority.

source

 

[Lafayette]

A goodly chunk of Europe has been stuck in what amounts to a depression. The rest of it is languishing in slow growth and deflation even as the euro loses purchasing power on the world market.

And who isn't?

Do you really think Europe is the only part of the world passing through the worst recession since the Great One in the 1930s. Even the US Employment-to-Population Ratio at 59.7% is at at low with regard to pre-cataclysmic 2008 (at 62.9%)

Still, the stats show that Europe's E-to-P Ratio is greater than that of the US, at 75%*. Even China is just getting out of the Economic Doldrums ....

*Mind you, I am not sure that economic variable is counted in the same manner in both countries.
________________________

 

[GhostlyJoe]

Higher than it was for my parents' generation, growing up in the Great Depression, then going to fight Hitler and Hirohito, coming back to work and support families?

Yes, actually, I do think, solely in terms of economic mobility and wealth accumulation, that the "greatest generation" had it easier. Here's an interesting study on generation elasticity (the chances that you'll remain in your parents' economic bracket, essentially) that helps make that point, although it's not clear cut. But the gist is that economic mobility snapped back to depression-era levels around 1980. There's plenty to chew on in that data for both sides of our debate, but it makes a compelling case that American meritocracy has gone off the rails.

More importantly, that generation didn't require as much education to establish long-term employment, gainful employment was readily available after the war, and unionization, pensions, and social programs helped sustain that generation through the golden years.

I'm not a millennial (I'm turning 40 soon), but I certainly see that they're getting screwed, even more than my generation. Moral failing didn't cause this.

Sure, there are some serious roadblocks on the road to the middle class. Some of those are taken away by scholarships for poor students.

And, here are some interesting stats:



Does it matter? Well, let's see:



source

Which came first, the chicken or the nest egg? Check this out.

The problem isn't that people are having kids too soon -- it's that they can't get enough economic footing to sustain families. I would argue that economic pressure as well as changing social norms are behind that unwed birth stat.

Regardless, the answer isn't just "work harder and get more schooling." We need to lower economic barriers, cheaper education, and we're probably going to need more robust social programs as my generation and those below me age. It's time to raise taxes on the wealthy.

 

[Lafayette]

And another thing about unemployment.

Some definitions, from here.

Short-term unemployment is any period of joblessness that lasts fewer than 27 weeks. Long-term unemployment lasts 27 or more weeks. Moreover, Unemployment impacts the economy and society by increasing inequality, impeding long-term economic growth, wasting resources, and reducing economic efficiency.

When that is broken down, UI-durations look like this (Source):

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION (duration percentage; May 2015/May 2016)
*Less than 5 weeks (29.5% / 29.4%)
*5 to 14 weeks (24.4% / 29.8%)
*15 weeks and over (29.8% / 40.8%)
Average (mean) duration, in weeks (May 2015/May 2016): 31.9% / 26.7%

Interpretation (mine)?
*Average duration of unemployment is diminishing.
*Long-term unemployment (15 weeks and over) is seriously increasing. Meaning if you were unemployed too long, it is even more difficult to find another job. (What's this? People forget how to drive a truck?!?)
*Short-term unemployment (less than 5 weeks) has stagnated.
*It takes longer to find a job, so the category "15 to 24 weeks" is increasing.(So, why is the unemployment rate descending, or does this mean the category shows a lot of "job-hoppers" from one short-term job to another short-term job?)
*Medium-to-Long term unemployment (15 weeks and over) is taking much longer to find a job. Which is why I suggest that (during this period) we should make UI dependent upon taking vocational-courses in skills-enhancement, which could make a difference. It also means that we need to know who is in this category - by age, schooling and work-experience.
___________________

 

[Lafayette]

If you don't like your financial status.......get off your azz and improve yourself, or go look for some fool who will pay you what YOU think you are worth.

Nobody has to guaranteee anyone a job, so the living wage BS is a non starter to begin with.

Borrrinnnnngggggg!

You assume people are lazy, which is why they cannot find a job. Which is biased opinion.

Still, laziness often occurs in the young who "do not know what to do to occupy their lives". Which is why they spend so much time "playing games" on the Internet. If we wanted to pay the cost of doing so, perhaps we could occupy them better at school and after school in task-related work (for which they are marked). Frankly, if laziness is something that is tolerated in the home, it is why we see so much of it in today's youth.

(Maybe that's why they join the Navy? No real threat of loosing their job? See, I can get snotty too ...)
__________________

 

[Lafayette]

Work for someone else and your ceiling will always be eight feet.

Work for yourself, and doors will continuously open if your product/workmanship is good, and you follow through on your agreements/contracts.

Right, so everybody should work for themselves?

It's a simplistic highly two-dimensional world (work for yourself or die) in which you live ...
_____________________________

 

[RetiredUSN]

Borrrinnnnngggggg!

You assume people are lazy, which is why they cannot find a job. Which is biased opinion.

Still, laziness often occurs in the young who "do not know what to do to occupy their lives". Which is why they spend so much time "playing games" on the Internet. If we wanted to pay the cost of doing so, perhaps we could occupy them better at school and after school in task-related work (for which they are marked). Frankly, if laziness is something that is tolerated in the home, it is why we see so much of it in today's youth.

(Maybe that's why they join the Navy? No real threat of loosing their job? See, I can get snotty too ...)
__________________

I joined the Navy because I knew that I would love it, and I did. It wasn't a job for me, it was a way of life........huge difference!

Accepting a job for a agreed wage is a decision made by the worker and nobody else. The worker either lives with the decision or moves on.

Sitting around crying about it solves nothing. Nobody owes you anything...period!

 

[Pin dÁr]

The Rise and Fall of Middle-class Wealth Historically:

And all this by design! So we gradually enter a communist/fascist system!

Right out Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto

what else is next? hhh the family! ahhhhh private property!!!!




Ring any bells?

 

[RetiredUSN]

Right, so everybody should work for themselves?

It's a simplistic highly two-dimensional world (work for yourself or die) in which you live ...
_____________________________

Why wouldn't you want to own your own business. It is a hell of a lot better than working for someone else.

 

[Pin dÁr]

Why wouldn't you want to own your own business. It is a hell of a lot better than working for someone else.

That is true, however, there is a lot of redtape and there will become much morer redtape.until the middleclass can't take it anymore.


years and yeas ago, I told my family and friends that the small shops will disappear in the towns!

They laughed in my face! Now look at it!

 

[RetiredUSN]

That is true, however, there is a lot of redtape and there will become much morer redtape.until the middleclass can't take it anymore.


years and yeas ago, I told my family and friends that the small shops will disappear in the towns!

They laughed in my face! Now look at it!

Malls are closing at very high rate:

Shopping Malls Are Going Extinct - Business Insider

A dying breed: The American shopping mall - CBS News

Macy's, Sears, J.C. Penney Stores Close, Changing Malls

Smaller retail stores and shops are on the comeback:

Perhaps Bigger is Not Better – Small Stores Make a Comeback | eft - Supply Chain & Logistics Business Intelligence

Filling in the Strip Mall: Small Stores Make a Comeback : Media Center

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/the-human-cost-of-stuff/bright-spots-on-main-street


There is hope yet!

 

[Pin dÁr]

Malls are closing at very high rate:

Shopping Malls Are Going Extinct - Business Insider

A dying breed: The American shopping mall - CBS News

Macy's, Sears, J.C. Penney Stores Close, Changing Malls

Smaller retail stores and shops are on the comeback:

Perhaps Bigger is Not Better – Small Stores Make a Comeback | eft - Supply Chain & Logistics Business Intelligence

Filling in the Strip Mall: Small Stores Make a Comeback : Media Center

http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/the-human-cost-of-stuff/bright-spots-on-main-street


There is hope yet!

There is always hope, of course.


However , what you are putting out is to make people confused and don't see what is really going on.(not by you, that is not what I ment)

If we don't do anything about it, the middle class will disappear.

Such is the plan.




If you watch the Hunger Games Movie, you can, in theme, see what they have planned for us.

That is what they want, a hunger game society!

 

[RetiredUSN]

There is always hope, of course.


However , what you are putting out is to make people cofused and don't see what is really going on.

If we don't do anything about it, the middle class will disappear/

Such is the plan.




If you watc the Hunger Games Movie, you can, in theme, see what they have planned for us.

That is what they want, a hunger game society!

I think the bigger issue is the mindset of the typical 40 hour factory/office/service worker. The world of business has changed drastically over the years and people have been really slow in accepting this. The old standard of 40 hours, 40 years, a gold watch on retirement day.....is long gone.

A willingness to adapt, venture out, and putting in the hard work, is what will separate the successful from the rest.

 

[Pin dÁr]

I think the bigger issue is the mindset of the typical 40 hour factory/office/service worker. The world of business has changed drastically over the years and people have been really slow in accepting this. The old standard of 40 hours, 40 years, a gold watch on retirement day.....is long gone.

A willingness to adapt, venture out, and putting in the hard work, is what will separate the successful from the rest.

nope,



Keep them busy, busy m busy on the farm!

It's a kind of slavery, mate.

 

[Lafayette]

DIFFERENT RULES

Why wouldn't you want to own your own business. It is a hell of a lot better than working for someone else.

I have owned a number of them, and am starting up another here in France. Yes, I prefer the "freedom-of-action" and the business-liberty as well as the business-headaches that such gives one. Yes, one takes the knocks as well as the honors.

And, of course, having Wealth is a damn-fine safety belt against the hazards of existence on earth.

It's not that. Not at all.

What's more important is that such an existence is not made for everybody - in fact, it is a very special breed. The US is the perfect place for them, though they exist in Europe - but far more constrained than in the US. It is a very American notion that Might Makes Right. A notion once applied to monarchs. In fact, they are the New World Monarchs (just without the title before their names) given the way they manipulate policy.

At the same, time - and in purely monetary-terms - the US variety is much better off. But only because of its upper-income flat-rate taxation. Here in Europe, the Tax Authorities have different rules to abide by. See that international comparison here:

(NB: Careful, that red arrow points to Syria and not the US just in front. Note all the EU countries at the very top of the list. With the exception notably of only one. Great Britain ...)

MY POINT?

Does higher-taxation make for "economic stagnation"? Nope, not in the least. And it would be wise if the Replicants in the US would drop this silly-argument from their lexicon. Why?

Because the rich will place their wealth in interest-bearing investments if the economy tanks. It is only when the times are good that the wise are tempted to Invest reassured by a better ROI. They all make damn fine salaries, and they have made America a "Top-Heavy Country". That is, where most of the Wealth is gushed up from Income due to upper-income flat-rate taxation.

So, as much as you would like to believe it, the rich are not propelling America and Americans to new heights of "well-being". Just a very distinct few of us.

Where the option is to tax-more and allow more of it to be spread out at the bottom. Maybe that would reduce the orgiastic USA crime-rate somewhat? Huh? Just maybe?

It makes in Europe for people who are far less rich and not so enraptured by Wealth - and also worrying every five effing-nanoseconds about how they well they are "doing" - as if life were a sports-game and the score was primordial. Here in the EU, they all live in the same large domains as in the US, they drive Rolls Royce or Bentley AND a Ferrari or Lamborghini - just like in the US. You will find a horde of them in their yachts presently tied-up in St. Tropez, France.

Wow .... ... .. !
____________________

 

[RetiredUSN]

DIFFERENT RULES



I have owned a number of them, and am starting up another here in France. Yes, I prefer the "freedom-of-action" and the business-liberty as well as the business-headaches that such gives one. Yes, one takes the knocks as well as the honors.

And, of course, having Wealth is a damn-fine safety belt against the hazards of existence on earth.

It's not that. Not at all.

What's more important is that such an existence is not made for everybody - in fact, it is a very special breed. The US is the perfect place for them, though they exist in Europe - but far more constrained than in the US. It is a very American notion that Might Makes Right. A notion once applied to monarchs. In fact, they are the New World Monarchs (just without the title before their names) given the way they manipulate policy.

At the same, time - and in purely monetary-terms - the US variety is much better off. But only because of its upper-income flat-rate taxation. Here in Europe, the Tax Authorities have different rules to abide by. See that international comparison here:

(NB: Careful, that red arrow points to Syria and not the US just in front. Note all the EU countries at the very top of the list. With the exception notably of only one. Great Britain ...)

MY POINT?

Does higher-taxation make for "economic stagnation"? Nope, not in the least. And it would be wise if the Replicants in the US would drop this silly-argument from their lexicon. Why?

Because the rich will place their wealth in interest-bearing investments if the economy tanks. It is only when the times are good that the wise are tempted to Invest reassured by a better ROI. They all make damn fine salaries, and they have made America a "Top-Heavy Country". That is, where most of the Wealth is gushed up from Income due to upper-income flat-rate taxation.

So, as much as you would like to believe it, the rich are not propelling America and Americans to new heights of "well-being". Just a very distinct few of us.

Where the option is to tax-more and allow more of it to be spread out at the bottom. Maybe that would reduce the orgiastic USA crime-rate somewhat? Huh? Just maybe?

It makes in Europe for people who are far less rich and not so enraptured by Wealth - and also worrying every five effing-nanoseconds about how they well they are "doing" - as if life were a sports-game and the score was primordial. Here in the EU, they all live in the same large domains as in the US, they drive Rolls Royce or Bentley AND a Ferrari or Lamborghini - just like in the US. You will find a horde of them in their yachts presently tied-up in St. Tropez, France.

Wow .... ... .. !
____________________

What the hell does this have to do with people improving, or wanting to improve their own station in life? Not all business owners are into it to because they are enraptured by wealth.

There are hundreds of other reason to own your own business, and many of them have nothing to do with being very wealthy.

 

[Ahlevah]

What exactly are you referring to here? Bad mortgages? Credit cards?

Yeah and yeah. The balance sheets of the bottom 90% took a hit when many of them lost their homes or went underwater on their mortgages, either through bad luck, circumstances, or greed.

It does zero good to proclaim that someone has a problem without even trying to define it, much less propose a solution.

The problem is people spend too much. The solution is to spend less and save more, work longer hours, or get a raise. :shrug: