Shrinking Middle Class

[/dev/null]

Completely out of context.

 

Like that never happens around these parts

[Jauronimo]

And what will solve the problem of a shrinking middle class, assuming it's not a self induced problem?

Good question. People like our esteemed colleague in Norfolk see an article like this and immediately assume that the wealth gap must be evidence of Republican malfeasance. If you can withhold judgement for five seconds and read a little deeper you will find that the wealth gap has widened due to our spending habits.

 

Much of the middle and lower class has a majority of their net worth tied up in the value of their home. When the housing market collapsed, the inventory of newly built-unsold homes and rising foreclosures, saturated the market. The value of all houses took a significant dive, as supply far outweighed demand. Many leveraged middle and lower class families lost their houses (net worth) further compounding the problem and skewing the statistics.

 

Here comes the standard counter argument: If its all about home value, then why weren't the upper class dragged down by the housing market collapse?

 

They were, just not as much. The upper class has significant savings and investment which were more sheltered than the troubled housing market. They do not have their entire net worth riding on their home equity. What Norfolk does not want to understand is that the rich did not get richer as much they got less poor, than the lower class. When the fit hits the shan, those with large amounts of cash come out on top. When the middle and lower class start saving and putting away money rather than living beyond their means these trends may change. The American way is all about going into debt in the pursuit of material goods, so its pretty unlikely.

 

There's no need for class warfare. However there's ample need for financial education.

[IDBillzFan]

The only thing shrinking are the brains of idiots who think "middle class" means having a big house, 2 late model cars, big screen TVs, every cool gadget they want, etc., etc.

 

This country has basically redefined "poor" to be what "middle class" was 50 years ago.

I got a kick out of someone commenting the other day about Michelle Obama at a soup kitchen serving homeless people while the homeless people were taking photos of her with their cellphones. It's probably an inaccurate story, but I think most people would agree the concept is not even remotely far-fetched.

[Gary M]

I saw a lot of you right wing a lings trying to laugh away the shrinking MC idea, like Global Warming, but this is true, too. The Wall Street Journal article on this is great, but this video is ok.

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/america-middle-class-shrinks-p-g-adopts-hourglass-145429009.html

 

 

 

WSJ article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904836104576558861943984924.html?mod=WSJ_qtnews_wsjlatest

 

If you look at a map that shows where the middle class is shrinking, and the numbers of poor are growing, I would bet you would see that it is mostly where democrat/liberal policies have been entrenched for years.

 

Increasing the number of people receiving support from the government has NEVER reduced poverty.

[KD in CA]

Increasing the number of people receiving support from the government has NEVER reduced poverty.

Of course, government support isn't designed to reduce poverty. It's designed to increase loyalty from ignorant voters.

[Magox]

The idea of continuous unbridled entitlement "help" through wealth distribution policies in the name of closing the gap is about the most absurd ass backwards idea out there. Entitlements were created to help support our citizens through bad times and retirement. That's it! And I support that purpose because I believe safety nets is what a responsible nation should do, but creating entitlements to help sustain continuous "support" is not only detrimental to the overall job market, economy and future prospects, but it also creates a cycle of repressive dependency. You don't close the income gap by taking money away from one person to support lax behavior to another. That's just plain stupid.

 

What business have you ever worked for that placed the parameters for sales associates, to penalize them further for increased sales and rewarded those with fewer sales? It goes against common logic and makes no sense whatsoever.

 

Safety nets is one thing, but creating a cycle of dependency is another. There has to be a better way to differentiate the two.

Edited September 21, 2011 by Magox