Middle Class was 61% in 1971

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: Lapham3
That said, what's with the goofy 'mcmansion' stuff going strong again=didn't folks learn/re-evaluate after all the previous nuttyness with that? Probably mostly 'oldmoney'I spose


School taxes here are heavily based on property tax, so those who already own land/ vote in town elections will only allow "better" properties to be built.

Try and build affordable housing for the poor and suddenly "the roads and sewers can't handle it." You can't say (out loud) that the schools are going to be overfull and your kids are going to suffer for it.

We have a "proud" tradition of sticking trailer parks on town lines, hoping the "spill over" will go the next town over.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
The real unemployment number is around 15-17%

When 300,000 McJobs were created last month, the bozos in Washinton are bragging they are creating jobs. Mean while folks that are hard working such as military vets have a very difficult time finding work. With 2 major wars over.... the military is forcing folks who want to stay in, out on the streets.

Veterans are in for a very rude awakening if they think the average civilian HR boss cares about their military service....


My crummy work is disorganized and pretty much everyone wears three different hats. I wonder if those in charge of hiring would be intimidated by a Vet who presumably worked within defined job titles and a well-defined position. Middle management often doesn't want to be called upon to manage, or describe (fix?) the obvious compromises in their business model that they're responsible for. Since there's a perception that soldiers show leadership, that might disqualify one for a subordinate position.

 

[Gasbuggy]

Middle class doesn't proliferate like the lower class, and don't forget all the Mexicans that have come since that era.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: eljefino

My crummy work is disorganized and pretty much everyone wears three different hats.


This is something I have noticed, the jobs a lot of companies shed throughout the recession are not being replaced. Revenue is up and I put a business case together that clearly supports the need for additional headcount, but no one is willing to approve it. We're supposed to grow without adding additional headcount?

And don't give me Obamacare, these are full time jobs that had benefits before and after the recession, and the additional revenue and margin that these folks would generate would more than pay their salaries.

 

[Mr Nice]

Problem is, the big boss doesn't think more employees = More revenue and profits. Every boss has metrics to meet, they only look at a financial spreadsheet. We approve OT to the point why so much gets worked to give them a hint.

BTW, what are these extra employees needed doing for the company ?

 

[GiveMeAVowel]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: eljefino

My crummy work is disorganized and pretty much everyone wears three different hats.


This is something I have noticed, the jobs a lot of companies shed throughout the recession are not being replaced. Revenue is up and I put a business case together that clearly supports the need for additional headcount, but no one is willing to approve it. We're supposed to grow without adding additional headcount?

And don't give me Obamacare, these are full time jobs that had benefits before and after the recession, and the additional revenue and margin that these folks would generate would more than pay their salaries.


Yes, why not have employees do three jobs for the price of one?
If they refuse the threat is that they will move to Mexico or China and have more willing slaves to prey on.

Fact is that greed is the sole driving force in business today, nothing else matters.

 

[GiveMeAVowel]

Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
Problem is, the big boss doesn't think more employees = More revenue and profits. Every boss has metrics to meet, they only look at a financial spreadsheet. We approve OT to the point why so much gets worked to give them a hint.

BTW, what are these extra employees needed doing for the company ?


In the case of my company they use horrible temp employees that are probably used due to a welfare to work program, the state and fed gov't probably gives the company a tax break for using them even though these thugs cause far more trouble than they are worth, seriously it looks like the hood walking though our doors when they come to "work", which they don't do much of, and also cause many problems as well.

 

[aquariuscsm]

What I remember about the 70s,families could maintain a good lifestyle on one income. Companies took care of their employees. No one I knew growing up had both parents working. Several of my friends' fathers worked factory jobs where they were provided with company cars,country club memberships,excellent insurance and benefits,etc.

I remember as it went into the 80s,the moms had to enter the workforce,company cars were ended,the country club memberships were cancelled,families were no longer able to spend time together,and ALL of my friends parents ended up divorced and families broken up.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Now it's down to 49.9%. Actually, I'm surprised it's even that high.

LINK


Are you trying to say that the decline has been linear?
It hasn't been.
The strong economy of the nineties brought many folks into the middle class.
There were few minimum wage jobs, since employers had to pay more to fill positions.
The economy continued to do well after what proved to be a brief hiccup in '01 right up to 2007.
The loss of middle class jobs was steep during the ensuing recession and the recovery has been weak.
I find it ironic that in the largest economy in the world so many people are living a more precarious economic existence than was the case twenty years ago.
Still, if we get the government that we deserve, then that doesn't speak very well of us as a whole.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: dishdude
That was right as we started letting foreign companies dump their cheap goods on our shores for less than they cost to manufacture, allowed foreign entities to poach great American companies, made it easy for companies to ship jobs to other countries. If we had cracked down on these things starting back then, we'd be an entirely different economy right now.


Yet people on here swoon over it.


Yes, OF COURSE, their answer to EVERYTHING is "free trade/open markets/global economy", etc.

Unlike most on here, I WISH we could go back to the late '50s-early '60s economy/U.S. manufacturing base (NO MATTER WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS "FALSE" OR REAL!!), just without all of the; sexism, rascism, Mc Carthyism, and theocratic leanings of that era.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
Fact is that greed is the sole driving force in business today, nothing else matters.


But, but, I thought that abject "greed is GOOD (GOD?)" according to Mr. Gekko, and all of those of a certain worldview/persuasion who spout on and on about open markets, globalism, and "free" trade??

 

[dhise]

middle class and unions disappeared at the same time, get over that [censored]...

 

[dishdude]

 

[javacontour]

But you'll need a big war to knock out production in Europe and Asia.

One of the primary reasons we did so well in the generation after WW2 was the rest of the world was rebuilding.

It's not hard to have a booming economy when there is little or no competition.

Today, there is global competition.

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: dishdude
That was right as we started letting foreign companies dump their cheap goods on our shores for less than they cost to manufacture, allowed foreign entities to poach great American companies, made it easy for companies to ship jobs to other countries. If we had cracked down on these things starting back then, we'd be an entirely different economy right now.


Yet people on here swoon over it.


Yes, OF COURSE, their answer to EVERYTHING is "free trade/open markets/global economy", etc.

Unlike most on here, I WISH we could go back to the late '50s-early '60s economy/U.S. manufacturing base (NO MATTER WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS "FALSE" OR REAL!!), just without all of the; sexism, rascism, Mc Carthyism, and theocratic leanings of that era.

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted By: dhise
middle class and unions disappeared at the same time, get over that [censored]...


Some unions are good, some are terrible. Unions are not always the answer to problems in the workplace.

 

[fdcg27]

We also did very well in the nineties, when the war was but a distant memory with no impact on the era.
WW II helped America in the first couple of decades after it ended.
After that, it was not a factor.
WW II was of significance in explaining American prosperity from its end through the mid sixties.
It was of no significance during the golden nineties, an era in which there was plenty of competition from the EU and Asia.

 

[javacontour]

A couple of things happened in the 90s. First, we had a tech bubble. Second, we had just the right division in federal government where we came close to a balanced budget. I think we also had a major market correction in 1987 and we were recovering from that.

But I don't think anything we had in the 1990s was sustainable.


Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We also did very well in the nineties, when the war was but a distant memory with no impact on the era.
WW II helped America in the first couple of decades after it ended.
After that, it was not a factor.
WW II was of significance in explaining American prosperity from its end through the mid sixties.
It was of no significance during the golden nineties, an era in which there was plenty of competition from the EU and Asia.

 

[fdcg27]

We actually had a budget surplus briefly during the nineties.
This was a product of the robust economy, not restrained spending.
The tech bubble was no more than a blip that passed and did not hinder continued strong economic performance into the early two thousands.
What began in the early eighties with a robust recovery from a sharp recession and continued with only a couple of minor recessions into the mid two thousands was clearly sustainable, if more than twenty years of relative prosperity can be called that.

 

[eljefino]

The 90's had an optimism. This internet thing was going to make life more awesome. New frontiers and whatnot.

There was also cheap gas, relative peace, cool stuff on TV, reliable (fuel injected) cars, cell phones for rich guys.

There's been a funk since then. Noone wants to blink and invest time/ money/ education in stuff that will then be perceived to be a target to undercut.

 

[javacontour]

Close, we never had a year where the national debt remained the same or dropped, so the balanced budget was smoke and mirrors.

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
We actually had a budget surplus briefly during the nineties.
This was a product of the robust economy, not restrained spending.
The tech bubble was no more than a blip that passed and did not hinder continued strong economic performance into the early two thousands.
What began in the early eighties with a robust recovery from a sharp recession and continued with only a couple of minor recessions into the mid two thousands was clearly sustainable, if more than twenty years of relative prosperity can be called that.