31–40 of 94 posts
Great for these people, but will there be such opportunities for their children? I thought I did well for myself, finding myself among the middle class, the end is on the horizon.
The headline is a remarkably rosy spin on it when the subheading is "Research shows that ranks of higher earners have grown markedly over last 50 years, while lower rungs of middle class have shrunk". The article is behind a paywall but it makes it sound like inequality is increasing.
My son graduates college next month. Although he has an ok job lined up, he and most of his cohorts are incredibly pessimistic about the future and I'm not sure I can say that I blame them.
the thing that doesn't compute for me is that the definition of upper middle class here is 5-15x the federal poverty line, ok, but in 1970 the federal poverty line was like ~$3k (and ~$22k today) 10x in 1970 (~33k/year) in nyc you could buy a 2,000 sqft apt for like 2.75x your salary [1] today, that same apartment is like >10x - so while perhaps more people are earning "upper middle class" incomes, what that gets you…
Driven by NIMBYism and some other things, those areas stopped building anything like enough housing, with the obvious result that demand outstripped supply and prices rose, putting them out of reach of many.
That's kind of the origin story of the YIMBY movement, which started forming to fight that trend.
the thing that doesn't compute for me is that the definition of upper middle class here is 5-15x the federal poverty line, ok, but in 1970 the federal poverty line was like ~$3k (and ~$22k today) 10x in 1970 (~33k/year) in nyc you could buy a 2,000 sqft apt for like 2.75x your salary [1] today, that same apartment is like >10x - so while perhaps more people are earning "upper middle class" incomes, what that gets you…
Comparing NYC in the 1970s to today isn't a "big apple to big apple" comparison.
NYC in 1970s was on the verge of bankruptcy [0] and federal receivership, saw 1,000 industrial firms leave annually leading to 500K jobs lost from 1969-76 [1], and saw around 880K residents [2] leave for suburbs or other states. NYC didn't recover until the 2000s [3].
For your discussion, a better comparison should be cities+towns that were rich in the 1970s that remained rich in the 2020s, and cities+towns that were poor in the 1970s and remained poor in the 2020s. Similarly, a better contemporary comparison for NYC in the 1970s would be Detroit or potentially even Los Angeles.
[0] - https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article...
[1] - https://www.polyarchives.hosting.nyu.edu/exhibits/show/strug...
[2] - https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/blackou...
[3] - https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/local-government/publications/p...
The headline is a remarkably rosy spin on it when the subheading is "Research shows that ranks of higher earners have grown markedly over last 50 years, while lower rungs of middle class have shrunk". The article is behind a paywall but it makes it sound like inequality is increasing.
[flagged]
If the size of the pie is growing then it might be ok for the 'poor'. They get a smaller share of the bigger pie that is still bigger than what they had before.
However if the pie hasn't grown as fast as the inequality has grown, then their share has been on a continuous decline.
The US is not a high pie growth economy.
Rich getting richer can very much better a serious problem when the pie does not grow to keep up.
The headline is a remarkably rosy spin on it when the subheading is "Research shows that ranks of higher earners have grown markedly over last 50 years, while lower rungs of middle class have shrunk". The article is behind a paywall but it makes it sound like inequality is increasing.
[flagged]
Asset inflation disagrees with you. You end up in a situation where you make more money, and you can buy more stuff, except stuff in a few particular but important categories. For example physical properties.
Also, more Americans are living in poverty. But don’t look over there.
Doesn't look like it. What's your source? https://www.statista.com/statistics/200463/us-poverty-rate-s...
the thing that doesn't compute for me is that the definition of upper middle class here is 5-15x the federal poverty line, ok, but in 1970 the federal poverty line was like ~$3k (and ~$22k today) 10x in 1970 (~33k/year) in nyc you could buy a 2,000 sqft apt for like 2.75x your salary [1] today, that same apartment is like >10x - so while perhaps more people are earning "upper middle class" incomes, what that gets you…
That sounds specifically like the housing shortage that is afflicting some of the most dynamic, productive parts of the country, like NYC and the California Bay Area. Driven by NIMBYism and some other things, those areas stopped building anything like enough housing, with the obvious result that demand outstripped supply and prices rose, putting them out of reach of many. That's kind of the origin story of the YIMBY…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Not necessarily. If the size of the pie is growing then it might be ok for the 'poor'. They get a smaller share of the bigger pie that is still bigger than what they had before. However if the pie hasn't grown as fast as the inequality has grown, then their share has been on a continuous decline. The US is not a high pie growth economy. Rich getting richer can very much better a serious problem when the pie does not…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
>Inequality doesn't materially harm anyone as long as it's caused by the rich Asset inflation disagrees with you. You end up in a situation where you make more money, and you can buy more stuff, except stuff in a few particular but important categories. For example physical properties.
I think I liked it better when the elites mainly conspired while playing mega golf - having that as the social attractor made for a naturally limiting effect on the imaginations of the people poised to do damage. If you would have gone to most coaches of distance-pissing teams (eg Gold Mansacks) in the 90's and asked for trillions of dollars to buy up all the RAM chips, you would have gotten answers on the order of "Kernel who?!". Now they're like "this guy looks like a serious nerd, we better not get left behind!"