Stagnating middle class? Really? How does that jive with all of these facts?

[Loren Pechtel]

I take it, based on the OP, that only the middle class has enjoyed these improvements in technology, safety, and education. Rich people still die in car accidents just as much as they did in the 50's. Otherwise, what would be the point of citing a bunch of statistics that have affected every socioeconomic class in a thread about how the middle class is not stagnating relative to the rich?

I don't think anyone will disagree that we are seeing an increasing spread between top and bottom. That's a basically inevitable result of the computer revolution--people are less saddled with nonsense and thus the productivity gap between the top and bottom is wider.

 

[Toni]

I take it, based on the OP, that only the middle class has enjoyed these improvements in technology, safety, and education. Rich people still die in car accidents just as much as they did in the 50's. Otherwise, what would be the point of citing a bunch of statistics that have affected every socioeconomic class in a thread about how the middle class is not stagnating relative to the rich?

I don't think anyone will disagree that we are seeing an increasing spread between top and bottom. That's a basically inevitable result of the computer revolution--people are less saddled with nonsense and thus the productivity gap between the top and bottom is wider.

You are partially right: the gap between the top and the bottom is much, much larger. However, the US labor force is very much more productive coated with 30 or 50 years ago, thanks to a large extent to technological changes. I am not at all convinced that the upper level managerial class is at all more productive or efficient. There seem to be many more high level management positions relative to production workers.

 

[jonatha]

I take it, based on the OP, that only the middle class has enjoyed these improvements in technology, safety, and education. Rich people still die in car accidents just as much as they did in the 50's. Otherwise, what would be the point of citing a bunch of statistics that have affected every socioeconomic class in a thread about how the middle class is not stagnating relative to the rich?

I don't think anyone will disagree that we are seeing an increasing spread between top and bottom. That's a basically inevitable result of the computer revolution--people are less saddled with nonsense and thus the productivity gap between the top and bottom is wider.

This in turn explains why Axulus's focus on median without examination of the standard deviation (or even whether the curve is normal at all) is disingenuous.

As is, of course, his failure to include any *income* statistics in hist list....

 

[Axulus]

Houses might be bigger (they're getting smaller here) but you need to look at debt to equity ratios. If people are less able than their parents to actually afford any square foot, it's debatable whether their lot has improved.

And yet whatever those debt ratios might tell you, every metric I found showed improvement. They are able to afford larger living areas _and_ more of just about everything else, based on the actual data.

And, given 40 years of productivity gains, the IT revolution and millions of mothers joining the workforce part-time, half an hour off the work week averaged among all workers is truly shit. The median household now needing two breadwinners would also explain the median household now needing two cars.

Can you post the data on median hours worked per household? Household sizes have gone down substantially, there are far more single adult households these days. There are far more retired persons these days. Please demonstrate that hours worked per household has increased since 1980s, because right now you are just guessing without any data to back it up.

The rest is either incidental or down to the forward motion of technology. Like saying nicer weather or faster trains means improved conditions for lesbians. Not strictly false but hardly relevant.

66% fewer car deaths and 70% fewer murders is in improved condition for lesbians, unless you have some bizarre notion that lesbians don't drive or it doesn't matter if they are killed in car crashes.

 

[Axulus]

Your big fail is that you are confusing random stats which are gathered and presented as pertaining to the AVERAGE American with the socioeconomic progress and status of middle class Americans.

There is nothing random about them. They are comprehensive and cover just about everything I could find that is relevant: how often we are killed, our living spaces, our transportation, our health, our education, etc.

The data is AVERAGED across the entire US population, not specifically gathered about middle class Americans. It's like putting someone on public assistance and say, Donald Trump in a group and averaging their stats and saying that they represent me. They may. They may not. Actually, if you have just the one poor person and Donald Trump, then that average is significantly higher than my income. Where's the rest of what should be in my bank account??

Most of it is not averaged. It all shows the same general trend of improvement.

Furthermore, are you up to the challenge to post your own data that demonstrates/supports the stagnation hypothesis, that you believe represents the middle?

I'm not claiming my data is perfect. I don't have a full time career to do comprehensive research and release a 100 page report. I posted comprehensive data on things I think are relevant. Where is your data to challenge my contention?

 

[Axulus]

Reading comprehension fail is fail

The second quote is not mine.

Still, what you've posted is random. Fire deaths? really.

Let's start with your opening:

The general leftist talking point is that the middle class has stagnated in the United States. Income is stagnant. Wages are stagnant. People are struggling.

Funny, because these things are being brought up by republican candidates.

And then you go on to make a false statement like this:

Life for the median or average person is not much improved today compared to the so called "golden era" of the middle class which peaked in the late 70's and was crushed by the evil Ray Gun.

If so, how do you explain all of this? Improvement on almost every economic metric you can think of, as well as many non-economic ones, that has any value to life.

How is fire deaths an economic metric? Let alone air-conditioner ownership?

That quote was my quote (I failed to specify). Are you up to the challenge? Please post your data that supports the stagnation hypothesis since the 1980s and challenges my data.

Where is your non-random data?

 

[laughing dog]

There is nothing random about them. They are comprehensive and cover just about everything I could find that is relevant: how often we are killed, our living spaces, our transportation, our health, our education, etc.

But little to none of it had anything specific to the middle class. In fact, you fail to even define what "middle class" means. Hence the reasonable skepticism to their relevance to an argument against a stagnating middle class and the reasonable conclusion about their randomness.

Most of it is not averaged. It all shows the same general trend of improvement.

Furthermore, are you up to the challenge to post your own data that demonstrates/supports the stagnation hypothesis, that you believe represents the middle?

I'm not claiming my data is perfect. I don't have a full time career to do comprehensive research and release a 100 page report. I posted comprehensive data on things I think are relevant. Where is your data to challenge my contention?

Since the argument of a stagnating middle class is based on its position relative to the upper and lower classes not to some general trend (at least the argument that I am familiar with), your belief in their relevance is touching but illogical. Since you have not presented anything close to a logical and empirically based rebuttal to the thesis of a stagnating middle class, there is no need for anyone to present any evidence to challenge your failed claim.

As an aside, appealing to a general trend of economic growth as some sort of sidways Panglossian proof that things are better now is not terribly effective. In general, people are better off now than they were in the Middle Ages or even in the 1940s or 1960s or maybe even the 1980s or 2000s. While an increase in the general standard of well-being is an admirable and achievable goal for most societies, so is a more "equitable" distribution of well-being. The stagnation of the middle class is more about the perceived inequity of the distribution of well-being than the median or mean over time. Your statistics do not come close to dealing with that dimension of the issue.

 

[arkirk]

Reading comprehension fail is fail

If you can think of anything relevant that I have missed, please post it

I posted stats on health, education, housing, air quality, crime victimization, workplace safety, home safety, vehicle safety, travel and the most important household technology improvements of the last 30 years. None of which support "stagnation" and in fact support nothing of the sort.

Care to post what I missed that you believe to be relevant to support the stagnation hypothesis?

Your attitude...if this good shit you think has helped mankind so much, why do you have such a brutal attitude toward the rest of the human race. You posts are never in gratitude for all the marvels you say we have at our disposal. No...they are about the crude quality of the rest of mankind. We have nuclear pollution, we have carbon pollution, and we have propaganda pollution. BFD!

 

[Axulus]

The median size of homes is up. But what about it? Don't you remember the 2008 crash? People were buying these homes on bad credit, and banks were trading their mortgages like baseball cards. The size of one's home doesn't necessarily reflect wealth. In fact, I noticed two key statistics missing from your list, median income and median wealth. Those are what you need to be looking at.

New homes have only gotten larger.

Median income and median wealth are subject to all sorts of confounding variables (changes in household size, immigration, work patterns, inflation assumptions). In the end, they are all just numbers on a piece of paper. How do those numbers actually translate into the effect on people's actual lives and quality of life? This data was an attempt to demonstrate there is no stagnation seen anywhere in the actual _relevant_ data. If you think otherwise, please post the most relevant data on people's actual quality of life/lifestyles that you believes challenges this.

People are living longer because the vast majority of pharmaceutical research goes to longevity enhancing products.

And? Is that not a relevant improvement in the live's of the middle class?

Education is not always an economic advantage. Kids are accumulating insane amounts of student debt today, and the jobs they trained for don't necessarily exist. Again, you are missing the statistic on average amount of debt.

And how does this debt actually impact their actual lives and lifestyle, as demonstrated by the data, compared to those in the 1980's? Is it forcing them to by cheaper, less safe cars? Live in smaller housing? Take fewer vacations? Eat out less? Skip out on newest healthcare treatments? Please show me the impact, because all I see is improvement in all of these areas.

Violence rates are extremely complex issues. Linking them one-to-one with economic wealth is a mistake.

I'm not linking it to economic wealth. I'm linking it to a relevant example of the improvement in the lives of the middle class since the 80's. Living in a society with almost 50% less crime is a significant improvement in the quality of lives of people, regardless of what the cause might be.

So people have cars to drive to work, and since more families have multiple income earners, more families have multiple cars. Question: how much debt did they accumulate buying those cars?

Prove your contention that more families have multiple income earners since 1980, since far more households also contain single adults.

Also, how does that debt actually impact their quality of life and lifestyle, as revealed in the relevant data? How is it reducing their other consumption patterns compared to 1980?

That doesn't tell me anything. The increase in miles is probably due to greater traveling for business purposes.

All of it? That seems highly unlikely. Regardless, I had trouble finding more relevant data on median air miles traveled or median number of air trips taken for leisure, by year. If you have something you believe is more relevant and supports the stagnation hypothesis, I'd be very interested to see it.

Yea! Car manufacturers are making cars safer!

And how is that not a significant improvement in the lives of the middle class since 1980?

Wait, you think the small drop in work hours is an indication of greater waelth? It's just an indication that more people have part time jobs. That's not a good thing.

It shoots down the notion that all the gains listed in this post are due to working significantly more hours. In fact, it comes with a slight reduction in hours worked.

 

[Axulus]

In summary (reasonable approximation) the typical/median/average person in the United States, from 1980 to today

Lives 5 years longer
Has 15% more living space
Is 33% more likely to own a vehicle
Is 26% more likely to have graduated from high school
Is 94% more likely to have a bachler's degree or higher
Is 60% less likely to be murdered annually
Is 39% less likely to be a victim of a violent crime annually
Is 48% less likely to be the victim of any crime annually
Travels 120% more miles by air
Works .5 hours less per week
Is 54% less likely to die in a residential fire
Is 70% less likely to die from a fatal workplace injury
Is 66% less likely to die in a vehicle accident per vehicle mile traveled
Suffers from 43% less workplace injuries and time-loss illness annually while employed
Has air conditioning, a computer, internet access, dishwasher, and cell phone today, whereas the typical person in 1980 was lacking all of these
Has much cleaner air with 62% less pollutants of the 6 most common air pollutants that can harm health
Dines out much more frequently
If a minority, suffers much less from bigotry, sexism, racism, homophobia, etc.

Stagnating middle class? REALLY?

What's the control group?

The two groups being compared, to the best of my ability given the data available, is the typical or median adult in 1980 vs ~2010-2015.

I don't see how this data supports the middle class stagnation hypothesis. In fact, I see some pretty significant gains in quality of life for the typical person over the last 35 years.

- - - Updated - - -

All these middle class ingrates just are too stupid to know how good they have it.

Most of the ingrates are upper middle class or upper class privileged leftists who "feel the pain" of the middle class and demand something be done about it.

 

[laughing dog]

Most of the ingrates are upper middle class or upper class privileged leftists who "feel the pain" of the middle class and demand something be done about it.

Do you have any non-random relevant data to support your claim?

BTW, I didn't realize Patrick Buchanan was a leftist:

Since 1990, some 30 to 40 million immigrants, legal and illegal, have entered the country.

This huge increase in the labor force, at the same time the U.S. was shipping factories abroad, brought massive downward pressure on wages. The real wages of Middle Americans have stagnated for decades.

(http://buchanan.org/blog/gop-lost-middle-america-6210)

 

[Axulus]

I take it, based on the OP, that only the middle class has enjoyed these improvements in technology, safety, and education. Rich people still die in car accidents just as much as they did in the 50's. Otherwise, what would be the point of citing a bunch of statistics that have affected every socioeconomic class in a thread about how the middle class is not stagnating relative to the rich?

Are the middle class not a socioeconomic class? Do they not benefit from the significant reduction in crime, improvements to workplace and vehicle safety, longer life spans, more living space, more and better cars, much cleaner air, and ubiquitous new technology such as smart phones and the internet?

What, exactly, is stagnating from a lifestyle and quality of life standpoint since 1980? Can you please post the data you consider relevant and challenges the data I posted?

- - - Updated - - -

Most of the data pertained to a median, not average. If the median citizen is not representative of middle-class, who is?

Generally the middle class is defined as households earning between the 20th to 80th percentiles in income, the middle three quintiles or the 25th to 75th percentiles, the middle two quartiles. The median data for either of these common definitions of the middle class won't be the same as the median data for the population as a whole, except obviously for household income.

The important question for the thread is if Auxlus made the same mistake that you did, in which case we can go on to better conceived threads.

And you are just quibbling that the data isn't perfect. Much of the data I posted shows this pretty well, even if not perfectly.

However, I await your perfect data to demonstrate the stagnation that shows a very different picture from what I posted. I'm not holding my breath.

- - - Updated - - -

The OP looks a lot like a document dump, a practice some lawyers engage in during the discovery portion of court proceedings. Opposing council have to tell each other what they know. A dump happens when one side or both decide not only to share relevant material but any and all material they have that is evenly remotely attached to the case. This is done in hopes that any damaging truths might be hidden beneath tons of irrelevant paperwork. It is about hiding truth not exposing it.

Neither the OP nor the following post makes any connection or explanation of how all these listed things relate to the title of the thread or even to each other.

And because the list is long and appears rather random. pages of analysis would be necessary to make those connections and explanations.

I'll put the kettle on.

I await your own "data dump" that challenges the picture I have presented.

 

[arkirk]

What's the control group?

The two groups being compared, to the best of my ability given the data available, is the typical or median adult in 1980 vs ~2010-2015.

I don't see how this data supports the middle class stagnation hypothesis. In fact, I see some pretty significant gains in quality of life for the typical person over the last 35 years.

- - - Updated - - -

All these middle class ingrates just are too stupid to know how good they have it.

Most of the ingrates are upper middle class or upper class privileged leftists who "feel the pain" of the middle class and demand something be done about it.

In what country, in what neighborhood? We have some gated communities and hillside developments in LA that look like shit we saw in the fifties with large expanses of expensive tiles and granite kitchens, and things that require an army of servants to install and set up. These places are growing. What is not growing so fast...sustainable living facilities. Something a person who only carried a bigness gauge in his back pocket would not understand.

 

[Axulus]

But little to none of it had anything specific to the middle class. In fact, you fail to even define what "middle class" means. Hence the reasonable skepticism to their relevance to an argument against a stagnating middle class and the reasonable conclusion about their randomness.

If you looked at the square footage per person data detail link I posted, there is a clear and unambiguous shift to the right, by about 100 square feet, of a curve plot on square footage per person. Obviously, however you want to define the middle class, it must also include a definition consistent with this data.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that the median household now has 2 instead of 1 vehicles while at the same time, the average household size declined by 10%.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that nearly every SES group lives about 4-5 years longer compared to 1980.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that the air that all people breathe is cleaner by about 62% of the six most common air pollutants.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent the fact that overall crime rates are down 50%, and it would be incredulous to the extreme to believe that such group does not suffer much lower crime victimization rates given this significant reduction in overall crime.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that vehicle deaths are down 66% per vehicle mile traveled, and that the car fleet as a whole has had a significant safety improvement from 35 years ago.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that workplace fatalities and injuries are down significantly.

 

[Axulus]

Do you have any non-random relevant data to support your claim?

Do you have non-random relevant data to support your claim that the middle class are a bunch of ingrates? Your empty claim with nothing to back it up deserves nothing more than a similar empty claim.

- - - Updated - - -

Reading comprehension fail is fail



I posted stats on health, education, housing, air quality, crime victimization, workplace safety, home safety, vehicle safety, travel and the most important household technology improvements of the last 30 years. None of which support "stagnation" and in fact support nothing of the sort.

Care to post what I missed that you believe to be relevant to support the stagnation hypothesis?

Your attitude...if this good shit you think has helped mankind so much, why do you have such a brutal attitude toward the rest of the human race. You posts are never in gratitude for all the marvels you say we have at our disposal. No...they are about the crude quality of the rest of mankind. We have nuclear pollution, we have carbon pollution, and we have propaganda pollution. BFD!

Once again, a bunch of emotional language and empty claims with zero data to back it up.

 

[ZiprHead]

Stagnating Middle Class? Really?

Attempted denial of reality noted.

 

[arkirk]

Do you have non-random relevant data to support your claim that the middle class are a bunch of ingrates? Your empty claim with nothing to back it up deserves nothing more than a similar empty claim.

- - - Updated - - -

Reading comprehension fail is fail



I posted stats on health, education, housing, air quality, crime victimization, workplace safety, home safety, vehicle safety, travel and the most important household technology improvements of the last 30 years. None of which support "stagnation" and in fact support nothing of the sort.

Care to post what I missed that you believe to be relevant to support the stagnation hypothesis?

Your attitude...if this good shit you think has helped mankind so much, why do you have such a brutal attitude toward the rest of the human race. You posts are never in gratitude for all the marvels you say we have at our disposal. No...they are about the crude quality of the rest of mankind. We have nuclear pollution, we have carbon pollution, and we have propaganda pollution. BFD!

Once again, a bunch of emotional language and empty claims with zero data to back it up.

How many square feet there is in a person's kitchen is no measure of how well off that person is. You simply are looking at a select group of people without problems and then imagining that all people are like that... It is true that a car with air bags a backup camera and collision avoidance software is safer than cars without. Look around and you will see how few cars are like that. You simply only have eyes for technological measures of success. These are not universal and are often not necessary. It is how you choose to measure human well being that I find objectionable...and equally misleading.

 

[Axulus]

Stagnating Middle Class? Really?

Attempted denial of reality noted.

Lack of own relevant data and denial of data actually posted duly noted.

Empty baseless claims duly noted.

 

[PyramidHead]

But little to none of it had anything specific to the middle class. In fact, you fail to even define what "middle class" means. Hence the reasonable skepticism to their relevance to an argument against a stagnating middle class and the reasonable conclusion about their randomness.

If you looked at the square footage per person data detail link I posted, there is a clear and unambiguous shift to the right, by about 100 square feet, of a curve plot on square footage per person. Obviously, however you want to define the middle class, it must also include a definition consistent with this data.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that the median household now has 2 instead of 1 vehicles while at the same time, the average household size declined by 10%.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that nearly every SES group lives about 4-5 years longer compared to 1980.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that the air that all people breathe is cleaner by about 62% of the six most common air pollutants.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent the fact that overall crime rates are down 50%, and it would be incredulous to the extreme to believe that such group does not suffer much lower crime victimization rates given this significant reduction in overall crime.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that vehicle deaths are down 66% per vehicle mile traveled, and that the car fleet as a whole has had a significant safety improvement from 35 years ago.

However you want to define the middle class, it would still be consistent with the fact that workplace fatalities and injuries are down significantly.

Everything you list is also an improvement in the quality of life of someone in the top 0.01%--it's just that, in ADDITION to all of these gains, people in this percentile have also enjoyed a huge increase in their real incomes that was not experienced by the middle class during the same time period. That, and only that, is what people mean when they talk about a stagnating middle class. The argument was never that living conditions for people in the middle class (or indeed, everyone in the country) have not improved over time. You have clearly spent a lot of time trying to counter the position that the middle class has the same amount of vehicle deaths as they did in the 1970's, which is not something anybody has ever said or implied.

 

[Axulus]

When looking at median wages and median household income from 1980 to 2015:

How does the inflation data take into account more expensive production methods that lead to far less pollution, giving us all cleaner air, rivers, soil, protection of wildlife, etc.?

How does inflation data take into account more expensive worker safety equipment and safe work practices, leading to far fewer worker fatalities and injuries?

How well does inflation data take into account college cost increases due to student rec centers, better student health facilities, more student services, more student convenience (restaurants on campus), and better student housing?

How does inflation data take into account the effect tax increases have on prices and rents (such as real estate taxes), allowing us to have far more government services, such as more police and better roads, which keeps us all safer (but will be reflected in higher rental prices).

How well does that inflation data take into account brand new technology that never before existed that leads to significant improvements in quality of life?

How well does that inflation data take into account much safer cars, leading to 66% less traffic fatalities per mile traveled?

How well does median household data take into account changing characteristics of households themselves, with far more households containing only a single adult?

These are just a small sample of the things the data doesn't capture well. What matters is people's actual quality of life and the things that are relevant in determining what that quality is. Digits in a bank account are a means to that quality of life, but they are not the quality life in and of itself.