This Story is Archived
New Study: Middle Class in Turmoil - OpEd »
Posted by: jaxguy 1 year, 11 months agoAmerica's middle class families are caught in an unprecedented crunch. Despite a growing economy, their incomes have remained stagnant or flat. And because prices for big ticket items such as housing and health care have gone through the roof, families are not able to put away a rainy day fund.
Read Full Story at americanprogress.org »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 129
-
jaxguy
Oct. 19, 2006, 12:49 p.m.Republicans boast about the Economy being so great, and I suppose it is great if you own a major corporation whose profits have gone up in the last few years. The opposite is happening with the Middle class and economic security is becoming less feasible for many people who have good jobs and are productive citizens. Can you feel the squeeze?
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:38 p.m.Ah yes! The rich just keep getting richer, and the market hit an all-time high thanks to the Bush tax cut for the rich! All is going according to plan for those who paid for the party....
-
-
geographer47
Oct. 19, 2006, 2:10 p.m.Real hourly wages have not increased since 1978. More and more jobs no longer have medical or retirement benefits. It's necessary to borrow to pay for college. Credit cards are readily available, but the interest rates are high. Is it any wonder the savings rate is so low and the bankruptcy rate so high?
-
jordan11
Oct. 19, 2006, 8:46 p.m.Consumer debt is at an all time high, & it's all on those high interest credit cards. People are charging more, which props up the economy, but with stagnant wages and rising prices, it's all going to come crashing down. It has no place else to go.
-
-
Virginia
Oct. 19, 2006, 4:23 p.m.Saw a program sponsered by the group on CSPAN talking about the upcomming election and about health care policies. While they seem nonpartisan, they probably are more on the side of Democratic candidates. I have hopes that when Democratic candidates are elected that the big issue of health care and the uninsured and give aways to big pharm and big oil will be high in their list of national issues to tackle.
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:45 p.m.Right after impeachment, conviction and the swearing in of President Pelosi!
-
-
-
Virginia
Oct. 19, 2006, 6:35 p.m.I couldn't comment for a while either. Actually sent Karina several messages asking if I had been blocked. See her story about social ediquette and that they had blocked several people because of some kind of ruckus last night. I wasn't on then but figured if they are blocking individuals then I might get cut too in some type of sweep. She hasn't replied but I'm back on, so don't know what happened.
-
-
jordan11
Oct. 19, 2006, 10:56 p.m.What do you think about economists saying that it's credit card debt that is bolstering the economy, and that the 'tax cuts' have been merely moved to state/local levels as they are getting less back in federal taxes?
-
Webfeed
Oct. 20, 2006, 9:28 a.m.It seems to me that the "debt" is exactly what has the middle class in turmoil. From the article:
"To maintain their day-to-day consumption, families took on a record amount of debt equivalent to 126.4 percent of disposable income in the first quarter of 2006."
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:46 p.m.Traditionally, If you laid all economists end to end, they would point in every direction! (Who said that?)
Our state (PA) has a record SURPLUS, thanks to Gov. Rendell (D)!! I do notice nearby states raising sales and other taxes!
-
-
ErichKaestner
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:28 a.m.You challenge BU**SH** himself in your ability to lie. I can see you now on a Pat Robertson show, nodding your sycophants' head in agreement with every "there's a man with a hangnail in Topeka ... and ... yes! he has just this second been cured! Hallelujah"
But thanks, anyway, for revealing yourself as just another stupid Bushnik who can't quite accept the reality-based world!
-
jdixon63
Oct. 20, 2006, 11:28 a.m.Gee, thx DocJ, for the tired old conceptual, macro-level crap. Only millionaires get to worry about GDP and "economic indicators".
I'm the little guy, and what matters first is how much I am squeezed in running my household. Just looking at my big ticket items:
1. My new mortgage has soared because of way overpriced housing.
2. My healthcare cost is through the roof because my employer has passed more of the cost on to me, all to make docs, ins. co., etc. richer.
3. My energy costs for home & travel have skyrocketed (yes, gas will return to $3 / gal next summer and, no, airfairs won't come down again.)
4. My kid's college ed. has jumped about 30% since about 2002.
5. Forget retirement: my stocks & MFs are still worth less than I paid for them pre-2000, despite CEOs raking in multi-million $ compensation.
Save your arguments and presidential comparisons for the millionaires.
-
rrrtx
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:16 p.m.Maybe you are doing something wrong.
My mortgage went up but it was because I upgraded to a house twice the size. In a better school district.
My health care costs went down becuase I changed jobs.
My energy costs have gone up a little (gas) but my home energy costs are the same for my big house as for my little house because it is better insulated.
My kids are in a fund that locks in today's tuition rates for when they enroll in college.
My stocks are up, because CEO's are doing a good job running the companies I invest in.
To assume things must be worse just because you've had a hard time isn't any more relevent than me saying things are perfect because I'm doing OK.
The macro level analysis is relevent because it is more objective than you or I.
-
-
Matteu00
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:14 p.m.I would agree with you were it not for a simple fact that the growth was borrowed. $3.5 trillion dollars worth of debt is not a growing economy but one that has put the facade of good times on at the expense of creating jobs and earnings growth. This is like me borrowing the equity out of my house and telling people I earned more money this year.
National Debt 2000 $5.1 Trillion
National Debt 2006 $8.5 Trillion (and growing exponentially)
The tax cuts were supposed to pay off the $5.1 trillion and give us balanced budgets by now. With $500 billion spent on war that leaves $3 trillion of new debt. Some of that went to huge farm subsidy increases, highway bills, and other corporate walfare. The rest equals the tax cuts almost all of which went to the top 1% of earnings. Go to the bank borrow $40,000 dollars and give it to your rich uncle this Christmas and tell him it's a gift from a surplus you plan to have someday.
-
kaizersozey83
Oct. 19, 2006, 6:40 p.m.DocJ,
I see you follow closely in the steps of the administration, having no reserves about making up numbers to suit your taste. Docj - You are Low Rent.
-
jaxguy
Oct. 19, 2006, 6:43 p.m.I posted this report on another story but it came from this one. Click on this if you want to cut straight to the chase...
Middle Class in Turmoil http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/09/MidClassReport.pdf
-
mamasan
Oct. 19, 2006, 6:58 p.m.Since Bush has been in office my health care cost have gone up substancialy.
The deducable and the basic cost to have it. through the roof.
-
LuvMerlyn4Ever
Oct. 19, 2006, 9:41 p.m.mama why do you need health insurance how will you die early if you receive proper medical treatment. Whats wrong will you? Let them eat cake.
-
-
-
-
bubba2
Oct. 19, 2006, 8:44 p.m.Here are some fun facts for you -
The tax cuts enacted in recent years have gone disproportionately to high-income Americans. In 2006, the 0.2 percent of households with incomes above $1 million will receive nearly $112,000, on average, from tax cuts enacted since 2001, according to estimates by the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. In contrast, households in the middle of the income spectrum will receive an average tax cut of $750. The Tax Policy Center estimates also show that the tax cuts represent a larger fraction of income for high-income households than for low- or middle-income households, a clear indication of the tax cuts' regressivity.
-
bubba2
Oct. 19, 2006, 8:45 p.m.More ...
The President's tax policies, however, have widened the differences in take-home pay between high- and low- and middle-income households, according to Tax Policy Center estimates. When the tax cuts are fully in effect, households with incomes above $1 million will receive tax cuts equivalent to an increase of 7.1 percent in their after-tax income. Households in the middle of the income spectrum will receive tax cuts equal to only 2.3 percent of their income. And households in the bottom quintile will gain by less than one percent.
Put another way, households with incomes over $1 million will hold a larger fraction of total U.S. after-tax income than they would have received without the tax cuts, while households in the middle and bottom quintiles will hold a smaller share. The tax cuts thus have widened, rather than narrowed, income gaps, making them regressive.
-
bubba2
Oct. 19, 2006, 8:58 p.m.Lou Dobbs has a new book out, "War on the middle class" and CNN aired a story about it.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/17/Dobbs.Oct18/index.html
The book is about American families facing the tough issues that are all but being ignored by our elected officials in Washington (gee, I wonder who that is? Could it be .... REPUBLICANS?)
From the story / book ...
Paula in Texas said, "Lou, can you tell me why I should not be outraged to find out that my son and his fellow military personnel are receiving the lowest 2.2 percent pay raise for their efforts in Iraq, and yet the grand ol' body in Congress passes a hidden expense of $20 million for a 2007 Victory party for the successes in Afghanistan and Iraq? Now that is just an outrage. My son just returned from Iraq and I pray he doesn't have to go back. He might miss the party."
-
-
ErichKaestner
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:15 a.m.Any PARTY that these sons of bi*tches throw is going to be like the parties in the Hitler bunker before the Russian flamethrowers fried the bastards!
The only real PARTY for the American people can take place only when we impeach this sorry excuse for a human being and kick his war-criminal ass over to the Hague Court!
-
-
LuvMerlyn4Ever
Oct. 19, 2006, 9:34 p.m.Well we can all get jobs cleaning their toilets oh sorry they already have the illegals doing that! Don't worry all that wealth will trickle down Oh sorry that was Reagan.
-
Taganan
Oct. 20, 2006, 2:13 a.m.DocJ - You are right. The economy is better under Bush with the tax cuts. But what is good news for the country is bad news for the Left. They always think it's a lie.
Tax cuts are in percentages, if everyone gets the same percent cut then it is fair. But not to the Left. If a million dollar income pays 50% [$500,000] in taxes and a $100,000 income pays 30% [$30,000] and they both get a 10% tax cut; then the million $ pays $400,000 and gains $100,000 while the lower income pays $20,000 and gains only $10,000. The Left sees differing amounts of dollars and wrongly decries it as unfair.
Wages and prices rise together. A loaf of bread and a pound of butter takes the same amount of time to earn now as in 1930. The dollar is simply a way of counting the value of labor and the value of goods to avoid barter. Actually due to technology we can buy more of some items now than we could then.
-
-
ErichKaestner
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:07 a.m.If you weren't so ignorant and dangerously subservient to this BU**SH** assault on America, you would be pathetic! Maybe you're in Bush's top 1%! But I rather think that you are just one of the dogs licking at his heels!
-
bubba2
Oct. 20, 2006, 10 a.m.I'll post this again just for you - everyone is NOT getting the same percentage of tax cuts!
The President's tax policies, however, have widened the differences in take-home pay between high- and low- and middle-income households, according to Tax Policy Center estimates. When the tax cuts are fully in effect, households with incomes above $1 million will receive tax cuts equivalent to an increase of 7.1 percent in their after-tax income. Households in the middle of the income spectrum will receive tax cuts equal to only 2.3 percent of their income. And households in the bottom quintile will gain by less than one percent.
Put another way, households with incomes over $1 million will hold a larger fraction of total U.S. after-tax income than they would have received without the tax cuts, while households in the middle and bottom quintiles will hold a smaller share. The tax cuts thus have widened, rather than narrowed, income gaps, making them regressive.
-
-
ind06
Oct. 20, 2006, 2:44 a.m.I think the problem with the economy (at least as far as the Republicans are concerned) is that America is becoming more of a service oriented economy which means the middle class is earning less (in general) and unless you're making a goodly deal of expendable income you're not going to be investing much in the market if at all. So if the Dow hits an all time high you are just not going to be feeling anything great is going on. If fewer people are investing (because fewer can afford to) then fewer people care if the market is doing well and if the middle class wastes away yammering on about how great the economy is won't do either party any good.
-
Lurch
Oct. 20, 2006, 4:53 a.m.I think you are holding a very narrow view of the term `services`.
No reason that services (professional/commercial services) employees should be getting paid less.
Services-led companies earn profits on the average of around 25% or more.
Product-led companies earn profits on the average of around 5%.
-
-
Lurch
Oct. 20, 2006, 3:35 a.m.I paid over $370 on a car loan the other day and just got back the statement.
$140 to principal
$230 to interest
Somehow the bank claims that works out to 7.25% interest and that I don`t know any better.
For a while there I was too busy to check, but now I have. According to the number of payments I have made in the past, and not counting the extra ten or twenty I send in every month over the minimum, the bank says I still owe $1600 more than I actually should at this point.
If you think you are not being attacked, check your bank statements more thoroughly. It`s happening every day of the week in America and our government just helps the bastards steal from us.
-
ErichKaestner
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:02 a.m.There are MANY instances of this sort of thing. Paul Krugman of the NY Times expresses by saying that we have gone from a WITT (We're In This Together) to a YOYO (You're On Your Own) cultural climate, and this has been greatly accelerated during the last six years.
Confidence in almost all of our institutions has pretty much gone into the toilet during these years of rule by BU**SH**. THIS is what has 'trickled down' on middle class Americans! The people at the very TOP of the government (the bastards who are stealing from us) are out to do us in!
-
rrrtx
Oct. 20, 2006, 9:50 a.m.You can print an amortization schedule that will explain everything.
Early in the note your payments will have a high percentage going to interest. That will decrease as you pay down the principle.
I'm not saying banks don't make mistakes. But they won't systematically try and defraud people on their loan payments. My wife has been in banking over 20 years. They are very uptight about that kinda stuff.
-
dr-don-from-denver
Oct. 20, 2006, 12:53 p.m.It's called "Rule of 78's" AKA how to screw the consumer. Join a Credit Union - many of them use simple interest!
-
-
Lurch
Oct. 20, 2006, 4:28 a.m.Taganan,
>The Left sees differing amounts of dollars and wrongly decries it as unfair.
The Left really does have a problem don`t it? Why don`t they like paying a larger percent of their salaries in taxes than the rich? Why do they then complain when the rich get the same percent back in so-called tax cuts (actually not but that`s another debate)?
How about the rich pay at least as much in tax percent as the middle class, including capital gains and social security? Now who`s beyatching?
Would that be wrong and unfair even though the amounts were the same?
>Wages and prices rise together.
Completely wrong as the two have no relationship. Wages have shrunk in real terms (adjusted for inflation) over the last twenty years for the middle class. Costs vary completely unrelated to wages; demand, home prices, technology, luxury good, etc - all unconnected to wages. For example, easy debt has more to do with housing growth than wages.
-
ErichKaestner
Oct. 20, 2006, 6:48 a.m.The BU**SH** neocon ruled United States is running only on a momentum inherited from the past, and this momentum is rapidly being consumed by the greed and corruption and incompetence of this republican controlled government.
There is not a single thing that this republican controlled government, in its dog-like subservience to this Cowboy from Crawville, has done FOR the lower 98% of the American people! Government-Corporation collusion and its manipulation of the people and wealth of this country has led to a nearly complete breakdown.
Of course, George W. Bush is failing in his lie-based war in Iraq! Of course, he and his henchmen are the cause of the US being judged a dangerous rogue state in the eyes of the rest of the world!
He has from his first day in office deliberately wiped his feet on the interests of middle class Americans! He truly hates most Americans for voting for Bill Clinton and against his father!
-
LuvMerlyn4Ever
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:53 a.m.I actually remember momma Bush saying she would get everyone that criticized her son. I don't doubt she has a vendetta against the average working stiff. They certainly appear to have an aristacracy mentality. Jeb Bush recently in Pennsylvania blowing a kiss to iron workers protesting the Iraq war he's a real piece of work.
-
-
Mackenzy
Oct. 20, 2006, 6:56 a.m.This is really not new news....The Middle Class has been carrying the nation's economy since the Industrial Revolution.
-
tchef
Oct. 20, 2006, 7:35 a.m.All I know is that I'm making more mone now than I ever have. And at the same time I can't afford to buy a new house, and my health care keeps going up. I have no debt (other than my mortgage) I have to purchase my own health insurance (I work for a small business and for them to get insurance it for the employees it would cost twice as much) Dispite my raising income I don't seem any better off than I was 6 years ago.
-
mcgrievysr
Oct. 20, 2006, 8:15 a.m.What's interesting is that many of the Republicans who defend Bush's policies(not just fiscal policies)can't all be upper class in terms of income. So, many of his supporters are in the same financial boat as the struggling middle class. Yet, they defend him. I find that to be ironic.
-
-
rrrtx
Oct. 20, 2006, 10:12 a.m.I'm not sure where you get this mythical desperate middle class from. Maybe things are bad where you live. I don't see it. I've been hearing that the middle class is about to disappear for 20 years now. And curiously it is still there. Same as it ever was.
FYI most people with even a rudimentary understanding of economics and business usually back Republican candidates. I know Democrats are trying to position themselves as the fiscally responsible party. But when you look at their platform there is nothing in it that is pro-growth or talks about spending cuts.
-
-
LuvMerlyn4Ever
Oct. 20, 2006, 8:25 a.m.True I do know some wealthy individuals that detest George perhaps only because they percieve him to be an idiot?
The first 70 comments are shown. Show all 129 comments »
Got a Story?
