Economy Study: Middle Class Is Over

[milkmandanl]

The “Middle Class” may officially be a thing of the past.

According to a study from the urban institute, in any given month, “4 in 10 American households now struggle to pay for housing, food, utilities, or healthcare.” 18% of Americans elected not to get medical treatment— such as getting prescriptions filled— because of costs. Perhaps most shocking, one in four American adults experienced food insecurity at some point in 2017.

The study surprised reasearchers who expected to find high levels of struggle among the poor— but found that, in 2018 America, many Americans in the “middle class” income bracket are experiencing “material hardships.”

This is despite the economy being near “full employment.”

The spike in “material hardship” among the American population is blamed on costs of living— particularly healthcare and housing— increasing at a far greater rate than wages for many years.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/almost-half-of-americans-cant-pay-for-basic-needs/

https://www.scarymommy.com/americans-afford-basic-needs/

It’s not working guys... the system just really isn’t fucking working anymore.

They surveyed 7500 people...nothing in the article suggested how they identified income level to do their analysis...nothing in the article suggested how they determined what a hardship is...we have ZERO insight into income to expense ratio...aka are the over extended due to keeping up with the joneses...always question authority and sources as sometimes they have an ulterior motive...7500 people in a country of 100’s of millions...come on son

 

[luckyshot]

They surveyed 7500 people...nothing in the article suggested how they identified income level to do their analysis...nothing in the article suggested how they determined what a hardship is...we have ZERO insight into income to expense ratio...aka are the over extended due to keeping up with the joneses...always question authority and sources as sometimes they have an ulterior motive...7500 people in a country of 100’s of millions...come on son

7500 people is a significant sample... surveys, polls, statistics... how do they work?

They found that 40% of households struggled to make timely payments in one of the four basic expenses-- housing, healthcare, food, utilities-- mentioned at least once during 2017.

You can speculate as to why that is, but that is the basic fact of the matter. And if you have data to suggest "keeping up with the Jonses" is the main factor, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, you are just talking.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

They surveyed 7500 people...nothing in the article suggested how they identified income level to do their analysis...nothing in the article suggested how they determined what a hardship is...we have ZERO insight into income to expense ratio...aka are the over extended due to keeping up with the joneses...always question authority and sources as sometimes they have an ulterior motive...7500 people in a country of 100’s of millions...come on son

plus it is pretty easy to make parameters that lend to the result the people performing the study would like to find in their research.

What even is "food insecurity", it isn't starving, that is for sure. The term itself is only like 20 years old, so what data are they comparing it to?

Obviously not the data that Time Magazine uses, since they report that food insecurity is down.

http://time.com/4477157/hunger-america-history/

Just look at the article in the OP, the search is done by the "Ubran Institue", of course they have an agenda. Of course the USDA doesn't have their 2017 statistics, but 2016 numbers are HALF of what the Urban Institute has, furthering the downward trend that TIME magazine reported.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/foo...curity-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics.aspx

Seems like a bunch of conflicting research is going on, wasting money that could be used to feed people experiencing food insecurity.

 

[cincymma79]

7500 people is a significant sample... surveys, polls, statistics... how do they work?

They found that 40% of households struggled to make timely payments in one of the four basic expenses-- housing, healthcare, food, utilities-- mentioned at least once during 2017.

You can speculate as to why that is, but that is the basic fact of the matter. And if you have data to suggest "keeping up with the Jonses" is the main factor, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, you are just talking.

I make a 130000 and have no problem. When I was making 60000 I had less stuff but lived just fine. When I was making 30000 I had a two bedroom apartment I shared and never went without anything. Wtf are you guys doing

 

[Squarechoke]

We are spoiled brats if we think we have it bad. We've got a cars, a roof over our head, food, iphones, itunes, air jordans, flat screens, we take vacations, spend money on alcohol, cigarettes, rent movies etc... And people around the world are trying to get into our country to have an easier life.

Count your blessings, you've got more than you think you have.

If that's your description of the people that struggle with paying for basic things, what's your description of the rich that keep saying that they need tax breaks and lower minimum wage because they have only increased their wages 100 times as much as the average in the bottom 90%?

 

[luckyshot]

I make a 130000 and have no problem. When I was making 60000 I had less stuff but lived just fine. When I was making 30000 I had a two bedroom apartment I shared and never went without anything. Wtf are you guys doing

Good for you but sorry that your good situation is not shared my most:

"The median household income in 2014 was $53,719, which means that half of American households make less than this amount, and half make more. Since the median is significantly below the average, it tells us that there are more households with below-average household income than above-average, and that the average is distorted by a small percentage of high-income households. And this median is based on total income, not AGI, which accounts for a few deductions, so the difference is even bigger than this implies. In fact, if you look at the percentile chart earlier, you'll notice that the median AGI lies somewhere between $30,000 and $40,000. If you've heard anyone complain about "income inequality," this huge difference between the average and the median shows that it's a real issue."
https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...4/average-american-household-income/93002252/

 

[cottagecheesefan]

7500 people is a significant sample... surveys, polls, statistics... how do they work?

They found that 40% of households struggled to make timely payments in one of the four basic expenses-- housing, healthcare, food, utilities-- mentioned at least once during 2017.

You can speculate as to why that is, but that is the basic fact of the matter. And if you have data to suggest "keeping up with the Jonses" is the main factor, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, you are just talking.

see the post I just posted. This Urban Institutes statistics are double that what the USDA is reporting. Something is obviously off.

What even is food insecurity and these statistical measures they are using? They are relatively new terms that replaced other terms such as "living pay check to pay check", "struggling to make ends meat", etc. But now so many people have degrees with no real world value, that they have to create new statistics to give validity to their degrees.

There are several, more long term measures that show this is nothing new.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/03/news/economy/wealth-gap-america/index.html

Funny they dont mention it, but these are the years Obama was in office (it is CNN, so of course they wouldnt). Despite "change", the only change that happened was further momentum of the wealth gap furthering. M I rite?

Despite 2 2-term democrat presidents, the middle class has lost quite a bit since 1990ish

Regardless of the part of the president, the rich and only continued to get richer, after the initial boom created by the post ww2 era. Also of note the increase in rate of increase between '92-'00 and '08 through the end.

 

[panamaican]

I swear that every time I see these graphs, especially the first one, I cannot fathom how people can continue to struggle with understanding what is happening with our economy. It's as if some people simply want to believe that the problem is anything and everything except an economic system that no longer rewards the average American.

We're left with a lot of people who don't want to help put out a fire just because their home isn't burning yet.

 

[panamaican]

I make a 130000 and have no problem. When I was making 60000 I had less stuff but lived just fine. When I was making 30000 I had a two bedroom apartment I shared and never went without anything. Wtf are you guys doing

With a family or solo?

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

You're a ruthless capitalist War Lord Palis. Empathizer* though. I've been at the bottom before, the safety net must exist.

There's levels to the "leftist" thing. ID politics without a class critique can suck my pink dong, don't care for multikulti at all (multiethnic yes), illegal immigration is illegal (you still treat people with human dignity), and I'm down with Trump's trade war and tech protectionism (in regards to China, not Allies). That isn't a crazed leftist, it's someone who cares about America and its future.

That includes the socioeconomic well-being of our citizens, if not first and foremost. There's far too much upward predistribution of wealth, the depth of inequality has approached 1929 levels, it isn't sustainable and it's going to cause serious societal discontent if it isn't corrected and that's going to be bad for everyone.

I've been at the bottom. It's called work 2 jobs, apply everywhere, treat people good and don't expect handouts because i never got any, not from mommy or daddy.

Life is never going to be fair and welFARE in it's current form a lot of times is fraudulent and a scam on the American people.

 

[Lord_Impaler]

I don’t believe that 1 in 4 American adults experience “food insecurity”, the government will pay for your groceries.....

 

[EndlessCritic]

You can thank the Federal Reserve for devaluing the dollar and corporate bailouts that favored the already rich.

Welfare, whether it's social welfare or corporate welfare, its immoral, because theft is wrong.

You realize you need to pay taxes to have police officers who will protect you from poor people, right?

 

[jx820]

We are spoiled brats if we think we have it bad. We've got a cars, a roof over our head, food, iphones, itunes, air jordans, flat screens, we take vacations, spend money on alcohol, cigarettes, rent movies etc... And people around the world are trying to get into our country to have an easier life.

Count your blessings, you've got more than you think you have.

Yes and no. Having some things is nice, but anecdotally saying people have iphones, doesn't make the research inaccurate. The middle class are suffering food insecurity. That's not melodrama, that's a scientific conclusion of a study.

The ratio of housing costs have gone from 3x income on average 20 years ago to 4.6x income today (source). That's a 50% increase as a ratio not a number. That's an extra year and a half of salary. We are at pre-crash housing prices. Buying a 6 pack and having a cell phone doesn't offset that. Saying that if people didn't spend $240 a year leasing a premium phone they could be well fed and secure in their homes is delusional.

 

[Deleted member 159002]

With pensions now a rarity, it's time for the government to ensure people can retire with dignity. It's time to get rid of the cap on income that gets taxed for SS, and increase benefits.

 

[franklinstower]

I would vote for Bernie over Trump any day.

However, the main article highlights that the cost of healthcare is one of the main issues. Funny that with the Affordable Health Care Act, people are being pushed into food insecurity.

Kind of fucked up, considering the curve on the graphs for a company like Humana insurance, since the passing of Obama care.

From 1993 until 2004, it went up 10 dollars. Then it spiked to 80 during the height of the bubble that lead to the 2008 crash.

Then it crashed to 24 dollars. Since Obama care passed, it has risen to 334 dollars, a gain of almost 1400% lol.

Meanwhile, the Dow Jones went from about 6600 at the crash to now almost 26000, a growth of about 400%.

Why are healthcare companies growing at a rate 1000% more than the rest of the stock market?


edit: What I am getting at, is unless he can come out with an actual, tangible plan... Universal Health Care is not going to sell anyone that matters (Moderate voters).

There are plenty of studies showing UHC is cheaper than our current system. If corporate owned media covered it fairly we would be there.

Also the majority of Dems and Rep already want it. We dont have it because of lying liars.

 

[Ripskater]

If that's your description of the people that struggle with paying for basic things, what's your description of the rich that keep saying that they need tax breaks and lower minimum wage because they have only increased their wages 100 times as much as the average in the bottom 90%?

The rich are rich cause they're good at making money. If they appeal for tax breaks and get lower taxes, maybe that's why the rich are hiring more people today. And there are more jobs available.

 

[luckyshot]

see the post I just posted. This Urban Institutes statistics are double that what the USDA is reporting. Something is obviously off.

What even is food insecurity and these statistical measures they are using? They are relatively new terms that replaced other terms such as "living pay check to pay check", "struggling to make ends meat", etc. But now so many people have degrees with no real world value, that they have to create new statistics to give validity to their degrees.

There are several, more long term measures that show this is nothing new.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/03/news/economy/wealth-gap-america/index.html

Funny they dont mention it, but these are the years Obama was in office (it is CNN, so of course they wouldnt). Despite "change", the only change that happened was further momentum of the wealth gap furthering. M I rite?

Despite 2 2-term democrat presidents, the middle class has lost quite a bit since 1990ish

Regardless of the part of the president, the rich and only continued to get richer, after the initial boom created by the post ww2 era. Also of note the increase in rate of increase between '92-'00 and '08 through the end.

How can you post those graphs and fail to see the correlation to the OP-- and even "like" @panamaican s 's post which quoted yours?

Yes. The trends have been going on for a long time.

Yes. They have happened regardless of which party held presidency (it always makes me laugh how people cite presidency but never congressional control, but that's getting off topic).

You know what else has changed? Relative cost of housing and healthcare. Add steep increases in those to the long term trends in your graphs, and guess what?

You get the situation described in the OP.

The rich are rich cause they're good at making money. If they appeal for tax breaks and get lower taxes, maybe that's why the rich are hiring more people today. And there are more jobs available.

And those jobs pay the same or shittier while basic living costs, such as healthcare and housing go up and up and up.

Jobs don't put food on the table-- WAGES do... and only when they keep of with the cost of living.

This is not complicated.

"None is so blind as he who refuses to see."

(or he who is a mod's alt troll account).

 

[therealdope]

Y

The ratio of housing costs have gone from 3x income on average 20 years ago to 4.6x income today (source). That's a 50% increase as a ratio not a number. That's an extra year and a half of salary. We are at pre-crash housing prices.

I really hate this statistic because it in fact shows how well people have it now. If you want 'affordable housing' go back to the 50s where the middle class family of 4 lived in an 800sqft house. you want to know why the city of Detroit has(/had) a lot of abandoned housing? Just go ahead and drive through those areas and you'll see they are small houses -- very small. Don't believe me? Here is more evidence; the softest segment of real estate currently is the starter home segment. People just don't want starter homes that are smaller and in a less desirable area. THey want to jump right into a mid-level home with updated amenities.

The idea of the middle class being over is retarded - what period in time are we talking about when we fantasize what the middle class used to be. Sounds a lot like Trump-ific talk.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

You realize you need to pay taxes to have police officers who will protect you from poor people, right?

No, I don't. Theft is not necessary for any service, security included.

 

[Long Dark Blues]

Our day will come, comrade. Proletarians unite!

Lol, smh.