Life is Harder

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewer12345 But I missed out on all the pot and other stuff.

Yeah, me too...

Quote:

Originally Posted by justin There's always FIRE, right?

Medical marijuana...

[FIREd]

I personally love to go back to Europe some time to time to remind myself of how middle class people in other rich countries live. My mom has high speed internet, 82 TV stations and unlimited phone, all for $39 a month. I pay over $200 for the same (unreliable) services. People live in smaller houses, they drive smaller, energy-efficient cars... I think that in America people now have an unrealistic expectation about what a middle class lifestyle is supposed to be. They all want the house, the 2 cars, the big screen TV... And I think that's why people are getting frustrated.

[MasterBlaster]

Quote:

And I think that's why people are getting frustrated

People see what kind of lifestyle they are supposed to live on TV.

Shows about the problems of rich people are evidently what people want to watch.

That sets the "normal" American lifestyle in everyone's mind

[Nords]

Warren redux ad nauseum. She must have a new book coming out.

She's claimed ever since "The Two-Income Trap" that families have bid up real estate near good schools, and even more so since mortgage money has become so cheap. (Some of you may remember in the 1970s when mortgage companies wouldn't count a married woman's income and held the line at 26% mortgage debt, 38% total debt. No such things as zero-option ARMs!) What used to be a mortgage that could be paid out of one income has become a "requirement" that can barely be handled out of two. And if one of those two is laid off, there's no safety margin.

Let's not forget that the halcyon 1970s were generally applicable to middle-income white families. Blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities shared in this prosperity at a much lower rate.

We also got to that 1970s standard of living by destroying the infrastructure of most of Europe, western Russia, and Japan during WWII and then ramping up the military-industrial complex to support the Korean & Vietnam wars. Jobs were plentiful because we'd essentially wiped out a generation of workers (and perhaps the necessities of daily life) and then had to build it all back up. No wonder we had it "so good" back then...

No nostalgia for me... I'll stick with the tougher 21st century.

[MasterBlaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nords We also got to that 1970s standard of living by destroying the infrastructure of most of Europe, western Russia, and Japan during WWII and then ramping up the military-industrial complex to support the Korean & Vietnam wars. Jobs were plentiful because we'd essentially wiped out a generation of workers (and perhaps the necessities of daily life) and then had to build it all back up. No wonder we had it "so good" back then...

So Are you suggesting that this is a bad thing ?

[dex]

I think these stories are all about when you start the comparison. The late 60s and early 70s were the beginning of the end for the one family wage earner.
BUT HERE IS THE KEY - The one family wage earner lasted only a short period about 35 years from the 1940s to about 1975.
Prior to that there was an extreamly small rich strata and a very small middle class which is not really worth talking about.

The vast number of people were working class - men, women, and children worked when and if they could.
I believe the USA moved from a majority of a agricutural society to a manufactuing society in the 1960s but I could be wrong about that date.

And the women that could stay at home did work - just think about life without the modern conveniences.

So we keep measuring ourselves against a very unique period in history.
Now we are moving towards what was the norm or mean in the past.

[MasterBlaster]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dex Now we are moving towards what was the norm or mean in the past.

You have a point there. However the norm for most of human history is pretty miserable except for those near the top.

If you compare whatever your situation is to someone living in a mud hut then you've really got it pretty good. Count your blessings !

[peorth]

I'd note that it's also a lot easier to relocate to a cheaper place to live today. Unlike the old days when you had to show up to the factory or company for work, today you could telecommute and work remotely for many jobs. If you can save a decent amount of $ in the US, you could retire early in another country easily. Many countries now offer "retirement VISA" programs. As Americans we still have many options to get out of the rat race, but only if we're willing and able.

Also, I think you can't just depend on your job now. You need to invest and find ways to generate additional income on the side.

[Rustic23]

DW and I have driven across the country 9 or 10 times at least. Two things always come to mind as the most amazing things our ancestors did.

1. Take a look at the country they crossed. Some of the 'gullies' are 50 t 100 feet deep. No roads, no water, trees so thick you can't see through them, Indians, scorpion, snakes, (chiggers across Texas). And, we get tired doing it at 70 miles per hour.
2. They did it without a psychologist or counselor for the kids.

How did they survive!

[gettingthere]

Here's what stood out to me in that article:

''So what's the problem? Why do so many middle class Americans with so much stuff say they feel so squeezed?"

I think a lot of money is spent on things that seem essential now, that didn't even exist a few years ago.

all the newer tech stuff -- Computers, cell phones, cable TV, IPods, microwave ovens....

"Back in my day" .... we were lucky to have one car per household, one television in the house (ours picked up 2, sometimes three stations), one phone - and that was rented from the phone company, etc.

People consider a middle class lifestyle to include more possessions now than existed in the past. Spending on all that stuff leaves less to spend on the real essentials and less to save.

We are constantly bombarded with ads and images from television and movies that make all the new stuff seem essential - like our lives are somehow incomplete without it all.

Except for my computer and high-speed Internet connection, that is. That stuff really is essential!...

[UncleHoney]

Ah, lets see........

1970
24-36 month auto loans
20% down 20 year mortgages
maybe a gas credit card

2007
up to 84 month auto loans
no money down 30 year mortgages
cell phones
cable tv with the $150 sports package
computers
high speed internet
more credit cards than will fill the average wallet
$1.00+ bottled water from vending machines
$4.00+ cups of coffee

[MasterBlaster]

Those 1970 autos were pretty much only good for 36 months or so.
Mortgage interest rates in 1979 were what 18 percent. What a deal

You can make the case for 7 year car loans now based on improved quality.
Just try to find a no money down mortgage after the sub-prime meltdown
you have a point with cell phones, cable TV, and internet. However that must be contrasted with the steep decline in telephone rates.

Drinking bottled water is perhaps a much better choice than drinking soda.

[Kronk]

Is this type of "stuff" bloat part of the CPI? I did a quick search, but nothing was obvious. For instance, are cell phones in the CPI?

[novaman]

The thing that struck me about the article was that no mention was made of the largest single item increase in the chart comparing 1970 and today....

TAXES!!..it was there in the chart but wasn't brought up in the article. hmmm....

[Bestwifeever]

I seem to remember from filling out early tax returns that interest earned on savings was deductible, as was interest paid on credit cards, car loans, etc., in the mid-70s, too.

[dex]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterBlaster You have a point there. However the norm for most of human history is pretty miserable except for those near the top.

You got my point. If we don't identify the issues we can not address them. (Same with global warming in my view - it is population but that is another thread.)

It really has been a short time (when you take the long view) that there has been a large middle class. It is getting smaller and reverting to the mean.

So how is the trend reversed? I'll be dead before anyone asks the question.

[laurence]

Hmmm, I seem to remember from some class in college that part of what made the Renaissance "The Renaissance" was the birth of a significant middle class. Now putting aside what % of the population constitutes a significant middle class, I think it's safe to say there is a half millennia history of a middle class, and it's an integral part of a stable society. I will say I've seen ample evidence here and elsewhere that the 1950's and 60's were better for the average American due to being the "market of the world", but a significant (there's that word again) portion of Americans have enjoyed what was considered in their time "a good life". And that's really the definition of middle class, right? I mean, basic necessities are met at a pretty low level. If a good bowie knife and a leather saddle are luxuries and you have both, aren't you living the good life? Perhaps we will float down slowly, or standard of living will rise only slightly for the middle class over the coming decades to bring things back to equilibrium. No riots or ruinous societal collapse needed.

In fact, perhaps definitions are in order before we move further. Is middle class measured as anyone living above the poverty level?

[Milton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dex The one family wage earner lasted only a short period about 35 years from the 1940s to about 1975. Prior to that ... [t]he vast number of people were working class - men, women, and children worked when and if they could.

Yes, quite correct.

Personally I think it's silly to suggest that times are tougher now than previously. In the not-too-distant 'good old days' (say, 65+ years ago), things were better for the very rich because they could pay servants next to nothing, and buy goods that were cheap because made by workers earning very little. But the great majority of people were caught in a true poverty trap: they could not afford higher education (for themselves or their children), had minimal savings or possessions, had essentially no retirement prospects, and had no choice but to work long hours in rather dismal and often dangerous conditions.

If we could tell our grandparents how "tough" things are now, they would laugh at us!

[Texas Proud]

One of the things that get me is how many people who are above middle class THINK they are middle class and are struggling... I know some people who make over $120K as a family and don't save anything... and they say it is tough being middle class... when I say they are upper middle class they look at me funny...

But, two kids in private school... two very nice cars.. a large house (but average for today), $500 electric bill (say what).. he golfs all the time which costs say $100 per week.. eat out all the time..

So middle class was not easy street back then and is still not easy street today.. but it is not poor...

[wcv56]

Easy to sum it up, go back to one bathroom in most houses
for a family of 4+ with most working labor intensive factory jobs.
Can't remember any families that did not have a mortgage
and us kids had shared bedrooms. Ward robe was 3 pair of each and a set of play clothes, one pair of sneakers for all sports. An unscheduled day off school was great because it meant a day of shoveling snow to make spending money. My first bicycle took a whole summer of mowing lawns and bailing hay on the weekends. The average 16 year old might of had a ride that week in the family car. Oh how we know how rough it is today for most.
Oh yeas the days before monochrome
Welfare was live with who ever you could and pick up donated food.