Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#31

Post by refurb »

dragonwriter wrote: post #13
will_pseudonym wrote: post #2

This is a misleading take on the data. A much better analysis would look at the size of the population who was middle class or upper class. If there is an equal increase in upper class population for every loss of middle class population, that just means that our incomes as a population are increasing. All things equal, both the mean and median would increase in that circumstance. And that's what the data looks like…

> If there is an equal increase in upper class population for every loss of middle class population, that just means that our incomes as a population are increasing If they were defining boundaries by inflation-adjusted income, that would be correct. They are defining them by ratio to the median income, so more upper "class" at the expense of the middle "class" by the standards used just means increased income inequa…

But if the upper class got bigger (in terms of numbers), they must have come from the middle class based on this data. That's a good thing, no?

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#32

Post by refurb »

irishcoffee wrote: post #11
will_pseudonym wrote: post #2

This is a misleading take on the data. A much better analysis would look at the size of the population who was middle class or upper class. If there is an equal increase in upper class population for every loss of middle class population, that just means that our incomes as a population are increasing. All things equal, both the mean and median would increase in that circumstance. And that's what the data looks like…

> If there is an equal increase in upper class population for every loss of middle class population, that just means that our incomes as a population are increasing. > Yes, that is a decrease in the middle class-or-better bucket Huh? Wat? Ignoring your contradiction completely, 1.5-2 million people dropped. 2% of ~100million working people is ~2 million people. 2 million people dropped out of the middle class to the…

Why are you assuming they came from the middle class and not the upper class? Populations in each class are not static. Over that time period, folks moved from the lower class to the middle and upper.

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#33

Post by refurb »

tmuir wrote: post #23

Where do the 42k and 126k numbers come from? Why do they define the middle class. Maybe it varies from page view to page view, but my very first recommended link at the bottom of the story had a breakdown of middle class bounds in 30 different cities, and as one would expect, middle class incomes vary widely across those cities. This article is a perfect example of the meaninglessness of averages in many cases.

They just took 1/2 of the median and 2x the median as cutoffs. You can argue that's it's arbitrary, but it seems like as good an estimate as any.

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#35

Post by deciplex »

petergatsby wrote: post #28
tryitnow wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is just stating the middle class is shrinking - and inequality is therefore increasing. And increasing inequality is a problem. The problem with increasing inequality is not necessarily decreasing mean incomes. Inequality is a problem because of the increasing class-based polarization of society, the power differential between different families, and a host of other factors. All of which can be present an…

I'm not sure that class-based polarization is inherently problematic. Surely some degree of inequality is an inviolable consequence of a society that values both freedom and private ownership. Imagine an America in which the poorest families had two cars and a four-bedroom house, in a safe neighborhood with good schools. Would it then be considered problematic if Gates and Buffet became trillionaires? The problem is…

> Imagine an America in which the poorest families had two cars and a four-bedroom house, in a safe neighborhood with good schools. Would it then be considered problematic if Gates and Buffet became trillionaires?

Yes, it would be very problematic, but not out of any sense of fairness. Unless you can find a way to decouple wealth and power, such an outsized accumulation of wealth (and therefore, of power) would be a threat to democracy. Your hypothetical, even if achievable, is not a stable one because the ruling and capitalist classes would own our government to a degree that would make even our present situation look like a sort of egalitarian paradise. It would quickly become hopelessly corrupt, and without robust representation in government, it would only be a matter of time before the rest of us were remade into serfs.

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#36

Post by will_pseudonym »

refurb wrote: post #30
tryitnow wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is just stating the middle class is shrinking - and inequality is therefore increasing. And increasing inequality is a problem. The problem with increasing inequality is not necessarily decreasing mean incomes. Inequality is a problem because of the increasing class-based polarization of society, the power differential between different families, and a host of other factors. All of which can be present an…

Yes, but if a chunk of the middle class moved to the upper class, is that in and of itself a bad thing? Is it really preferable that no middle class move to the upper class?

Exactly! If we the entirety of the middle class disappeared and reappeared in the upper class, how would that be damaging to the country? If every member had no change or an increase to their income, it seems insane that that could have anything but a positive effect for the economy.

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#38

Post by massysett »

dragonwriter wrote: post #12

Measuring "class" by income distribution measures like this kind of misses the point; more accurately this is "Most Americans no longer fit a particular definition of 'middle income'". Class distinctions are about significant qualitative distinctions, not points on a simple quantitative distribution. A reasonable upper/middle/lower class distinction could be made where the upper class has capital assets that they can…

Pew was quite precise with its language and used the phrase "middle income"; it was the press that was sloppy and said "middle class".

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#39

Post by ryandrake »

dragonwriter wrote: post #29
chrisseaton wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think class is only a little bit about money and assets. You can be very poor, but have middle class education, culture and tastes, and you can be very rich, but have working class culture and tastes. If you mean wealth, then say wealth. If you're talking about 'class' instead, then you must mean something more than that, otherwise you wouldn't have used the word.

What I was referring to are economic classes -- which are about ones relation to the economy and manner of interaction, and closely related to (though not identical to) wealth -- you seem to be talking about subcultures which have a loose correlation with economic classes.

I think chrisseaton is making the distinction between "social class" and "economic class", which is pronounced in many countries, but in other countries (USA for instance), there's little distinction.

Re: The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class

#40

Post by dragonwriter »

refurb wrote: post #31
dragonwriter wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there is an equal increase in upper class population for every loss of middle class population, that just means that our incomes as a population are increasing If they were defining boundaries by inflation-adjusted income, that would be correct. They are defining them by ratio to the median income, so more upper "class" at the expense of the middle "class" by the standards used just means increased income inequa…

But if the upper class got bigger (in terms of numbers), they must have come from the middle class based on this data. That's a good thing, no?

For them individually, sure, being farther above the median is better.

Beyond that, I don't see how it's better in some general sense.

Post reply on HN