Home › Forums › Open Discussion › American Middle Class – How we doin??
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 12, 2013 at 4:20 pm #792585
wakefloodParticipantAnd we seem to have left the early pay-in program out of this discussion. It was instituted specifically to give parents significant insulation from rising tuition costs. It works. I know people who wouldn’t be putting their kids through college without it.
That’s a personal responsibility backstop for everyone who makes above some $X/yr. and can afford to put something (not insignificant but doable)away for the future. Those who choose to not take advantage of it and actually have the resources to do it, are making a choice and should live with the consequences.
Bottom line of this discussion for me is:
1. Wages for ALL Americans (save literally some thousands) have been essentially flat for 30yrs.
2. Real productivity of the avg. American worker over that same period has increased something like 3X.
3. The middle class is being systematically dismantled. Example: Of the small gains made in economic growth since the manufactured recession of 2008, ALL of it went to the 1%. Which means, as a group, everyone else hasn’t gained back any of the wealth lost in that recession.
Anyone care to argue that that bodes well for the middle class…or ANYONE but the 1%?
July 12, 2013 at 4:29 pm #792586
WFMemberyes washington has the get program that allows parents to pre-pay college.
the issue is that the cost of college tuition has risen 550% since 1992. government revenue has grown in excess of the CPI and population during this same time period. why has tuition gone up so much? i put most of the blame on the D’s who have controlled olympia for years.
July 12, 2013 at 4:45 pm #792587
wakefloodParticipantOnce more, WF…with FEELING!
July 12, 2013 at 5:15 pm #792588
skeeterParticipantWF – #102 – I already answered your question. The reason tuition has gone up is primarily because the legislature has spent more money on healthcare for poor people instead of college tuition. The legislature believes that healthcare for poor people is more important than college tuition.
July 12, 2013 at 5:30 pm #792589
skeeterParticipantWakeflood, I like your passion. But I’m seeing things differently.
I think this is how you see things changing over the past 30 years:
a. The 1% is doing much, much better.
b. The 99% (including the middle class) is doing significantly worse.
Here’s how I see things changing over the past 30 years:
a. The 1% is doing much much better.
b. The 99%(including the middle class) is doing about the same.
Here’s my problem. I don’t have any numbers or statistics – as you have pointed out. But here is what I see walking around West Seattle and talking with friends, neighbors, coworkers, etc.
30 years ago, most middle-class owned a home. Today, we still own a home.
30 years ago, middle-class could send their kids to college. Today, we still can. (This might be my most debatable point. But it is my experience that through loans, savings, sacrifice, the middle class can afford college. If that was not the case, the colleges would be empty, which they are not.)
30 years ago, middle-class could afford to drive a relatively new and reliable vehicle, maybe two. Today, we are actually driving better/safer vehicles.
30 years ago, middle class could spend one or two weeks at the Oregon Coast, or Disneyland, or Yosemite. Today, we still can.
30 years ago, the middle class had access to medical care. Today, we still do.
I guess my point is this – I’m not seeing where/how the middle class is doing any worse. The increased wealth of the 1% is not at the cost of the 99% in my opinion.
Wakeflood, you actually sound like a very interesting person and I’d enjoy meeting you someday. Maybe there will be a forum social or something like that?
July 12, 2013 at 5:38 pm #792590
WFMemberskeeter that is the point I have been indirectly stating. the State Constitution identifies Education as the paramount duty of the State. And the D’s have failed to meet this duty!
neighboring Oregon spends 50% of its budget on education whereas Washington spend 44%. Consequently Oregon Tuition is 25% less.
UW tuition/fees $12,483/year
U of Oregon $9,310
July 12, 2013 at 5:46 pm #792591
wakefloodParticipantSkeets, I get what you’re putting down but I don’t think it’s necessarily representative. West Seattle used to be a blue collar town. A plumber, a Boeing worker, etc. could survive here on a single income. Most of those folks don’t live here anymore, they’re out in the burbs, etc. Not as many of those folks around WS owning homes on single – middle of the road – incomes.
WS, like most desirable urban places, is filled with white-collar, higher than average salary, two income families.
And lots of folks have inflated their standards of living through debt and underfunded retirements. Living in the now has replaced planning for the future.
All I know is most of my European friends have a few less pieces of extraneous stuff around that they hoard, but what they have is very nice and serves them well. They also have more free time, and take tons more vacation than I have ever dreamed of or get paid for.
July 12, 2013 at 5:51 pm #792592
wakefloodParticipantAnd as further illustration, the chart I posted way back at the top of this thread. We’re #27th in terms of median income. Look at some of those above us. We should be them. Only reason we aren’t, is we’ve allowed a very few to reap all the benefits of the productivity/economic growth.
25% of our children in the US are living at or below the poverty level, for goodness sake. Can that be construed in any way as progress??
July 12, 2013 at 6:20 pm #792593
WFMemberwakeflood – out of that 25% of children in poverty what is the % due to single parent household situation?
July 12, 2013 at 6:25 pm #792594
wakefloodParticipantI’m not sure, WF. You ask the question in a leading fashion. Perhaps you can also do the research and post your own answer?
July 12, 2013 at 6:25 pm #792595
skeeterParticipantWakeflood – #107 – that’s a valid point. Perhaps West Seattle is now “upper” middle class as opposed to “middle” middle class. So my observations and conclusions about how the middle class is doing are skewed. Maybe if I spent more time in Renton or Puyallup I would see that the middle class is not as well off as I have observed. (Not trying to pick on Renton or Puyallup. That’s just what popped into my head.)
The two-income observations are interesting. My parents often tell me that two income households caused a lot of problems. They tell me that 30 years ago a single earner family could be middle-class. Now it takes two earners to be middle-class. They conclude that if only one spouse worked outside the home then we’d be just as affluent and we wouldn’t have to rely on daycare to help raise our kids. I don’t know if I agree with their conclusion. So many variables with what is now a global economy.
July 12, 2013 at 7:12 pm #792596
WFMemberwakeflood you are correct it was leading question; we both know that the answer is that a very high % of kids in poverty are from single parent households. And too many of these households are due to bad decision making and welfare policies that enable these bad decisions.
regarding daycare – a good daycare is a benefit to the kid it improves social skills, strengthens the immune system and provides early learning!
July 12, 2013 at 7:21 pm #792597
wakefloodParticipantWe both also know that one party has been systematically gutting economic support to Head Start, and child care, nutrition programs, etc. One party keeps cutting rungs out of the ladder.
Why?
July 12, 2013 at 7:23 pm #792598
wakefloodParticipantAnd btw, if you don’t show me some reasonable, unbiased data, I DON’T KNOW that it’s a higher percentage of single parent households. I might suspect that, but there’s a difference.
July 12, 2013 at 7:58 pm #792599
JoBParticipantWF..
lets play the generalization game…
having been a single mother myself and having been raised by a single mother i can tell you for a fact that the majority of single parents aren’t single by choice.
most are the result of divorce..
poverty in those families is more often than not due to a father who thinks he should maintain his lifestyle regardless of whether his children can maintain theirs..
that has changed some in the upper middle income bracket.. as women are deciding being a responsible single parent is a better choice than playing matrimony roulette and finding themselves and their children impoverished through no choice of their own.
but the truth is that more often than not the bad lifestyle choices you site aren’t made by the custodial parent.
July 12, 2013 at 11:24 pm #792600
skeeterParticipantWF – I understand your frustration. Example: We used to be able to visit state parks at no cost. Our taxes paid for the parks. Now you need to purchase a pass. What has changed? My taxes didn’t go down. If anything, they have gone up through the years. (Combined sales tax rate is almost 10% now.) Yet we receive fewer services for our money – whether it is college or visiting a state park.
I guess it’s just a matter of priority. Health insurance is insanely expensive and more and more people need it and can’t afford it so the taxpayers need to adjust expectations.
July 13, 2013 at 1:07 am #792601
WFMemberjob the single parent that i am concerned about is the teenager with zero resources to care for a child; adoption is a far better decision. and if government stop enabling bad decision the cycle of poverty could be snapped!
skeeter – why is health insurance insanely expensive. a few reasons
– some people who have cadillac plans over consume
– extremely poor health habits of many folks
– high fructose corn syrup/over-consumption of junk food
July 13, 2013 at 1:49 am #792602
JoBParticipantWF
teen pregnancies 329,797
http://www.cdc.gov/teenpregnancy/aboutteenpreg.htm
deadbeat dads roughly 7,260,000
http://www.urban.org/publications/310334.html
one of these is a much bigger problem than the other.
don’t you think it’s time you stopped worrying about those teen moms and started worrying about dad’s who aren’t supporting their kids?
July 13, 2013 at 3:00 am #792603
WFMemberboth are problems job; it is time the cycle of poverty be cut off at the root.
July 13, 2013 at 3:27 am #792604
WFMemberadd another reason why people are less healthy and raising health cost – soda pop
July 13, 2013 at 3:27 am #792605
dobroParticipantI’m convinced that WF is hooper reincarnated with a better spellcheck. It’s that same one-note style.
July 13, 2013 at 3:53 am #792606
WFMemberdobro who is hooper?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.