America's Middle Class Can't Take Much More Punishment

In the early 80's, I was making $10/hr for UNSKILLED labor while still in HIGH SCHOOL. The 1500 sq ft house my parents and I lived in went for around $30,000. A nice used car could easily be found for $400. Gas and milk was around $1 per gallon, and a pack of cigs was less than $1.

Today, that same house will cost you at least $150,000. That nice used car is about $2000, gas is $4/gal along with milk, and cigs are $4 a pack. The problem is trying to find that $40/hr job to balance out the cost of living increases.

I used to have a great job/life before THE U.S. GOV'T perpetrated the many hoaxes of 9/11, which DIRECTLY resulted in my company folding. I drive for a living now and I'm being bitchslapped hard at the pump. My wife is a damn good beautician and her business dwindles more every passing week as people prioritize. We CANNOT afford college for our 3.8 GPA 17 year old daughter.

The utter lack of compassion for our fellow citizens that some have shown in this thread is simply appalling. To say that times were tougher during the Carter administration is just insane.

Some people have it in their heads that we are living in prosperous times. IMHO, these people need their collective heads examined.

reply to post by HaveSeen4Myself
The numbers were higher in the Carter administration. That doesn't mean the times were harder. The inflation index has since been changed to not reflect food and fuel, so it no longer reflects the real impact of inflation on the average household. The GDP is not showing a major recession because food and fuel is still being bought, and since it costs more, the GDP reflects this higher cost in more optimistic numbers.

I still say this can be managed, if you learn to do without the niceties and concentrate on the important things in life. No promises it will stay that way, but for now we can at least hope.

TheRedneck

Blaine, you keep saying people with lower incomes than yours are unskilled and uneducated. I have a Ph.D. and 20+ years college teaching experience. I don't own my own home, although I do have a car that's only a few years old. I can't complain I'm struggling, though according to some of the estimates I've seen on this thread I'm lower middle class or working class at 40k per year. I know many Ph.D.'s who are working as adjunct professors at $25 per classroom hour, class preparation and grading time not included--they make about $18k a year. That's a direct consequence of the "WalMartization" of university teaching--hiring people only part time so the salaries are low and you don't need to pay benefits. The teachers do it because they love teaching. A few people on here apparently look down their noses at teachers because their earnings are often not high

As soon as people get money they seem to feel superior to others and that's just the thing that the privileged class wants, to get people fighting over who's what class and who deserves more or less, and ignoring the real problems.

We live at a time and in a country where the profits are privatized but the risks are socialized--i.e. the rich get richer but the government (the taxpayers)pays when the society fails. The current bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by the government is a prime example .

I'm a liberal, not a socialist, but some of the things Marx said about class warfare are true.



[edit on 23-7-2008 by Sestias]

John McCain and many other conservatives say they would solve our current economic problems by expanding George Bush's tax cuts for the rich. For example, McCain has called for making the Bush cuts permanent and for cutting the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent. This is a recipe for economic disaster. Tax cuts for the rich have not and will not help middle-income Americans.

Bush promised that his tax cuts would create jobs, but they didn't. A conservative-dominated Congress enacted two sets of Bush tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003. Job creation was a major Bush selling point, especially in 2003, when the administration asserted that the tax cuts would create 5.5 million jobs from July 2003 through the end of 2004. Instead, only 2.4 million jobs were added during that period—1.7 million fewer jobs than the economy was expected to produce without any tax cuts. [Center for American Progress] Today, the impact of the Bush tax program is clear: 8.5 million Americans are unemployed—2.5 million more than when Bush took office. REREAD THAT LAST SENTENCE AND VOTE REPUBLICAN NEXT TIME - YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU GET THEN.

Bush promised that his tax cuts would pay for themselves, but they didn't. Conservatives persistently repeat the myth that, as Bush put it, "You cut taxes, and the tax revenues increase," or as John McCain declared in March, "tax cuts…as we all know, increase revenues." But as Time magazine reported, "Virtually every economics Ph.D. who has worked in a prominent role in the Bush Administration acknowledges that the tax cuts enacted during the past six years have not paid for themselves—and were never intended to." In fact, Bush took office with a $236 billion surplus and will leave with a 2008 deficit of more than $400 billion. [The New York Times] The Bush tax cuts, which cost $300 billion last year alone, are primarily responsible for that deficit. [Center for Budget and Policy Priorities]

Bush promised that his tax cuts would help the middle class, but they didn't. During the 2000 campaign, Bush said his tax cuts focus "on low- and moderate-income families," and would provide the "greatest help for those most in need." [The New York Times] But in fact, the Bush tax cuts gave an average tax break of $118,000 to those who make over $1 million per year and only $740 per year to middle-income households. The bottom 20 percent of households received an average tax break of only $20. [CBPP]

The current tax system is unfair. Middle-class families pay too much while the very richest individuals and corporations pay too little. Now, McCain and other conservatives are pushing proposals that would make taxes even more unfair.

Conservative tax cuts for the rich hurt America's economy. The Bush program, which McCain has vowed to continue, caused our economy to be more sluggish than during any comparable period over the past 60 years. Unemployment has increased, basic costs have skyrocketed, incomes have stagnated, poverty has risen, the number of uninsured has increased and mortgage foreclosures are at record levels. Bush's conservative economics has been a spectacular failure, so why would anyone want more of the same?

By getting rid of giveaways and loopholes for the rich, we can lower taxes and increase benefits for the middle class. It's time to adjust our tax system so that everyone pays their fair share. At the same time, we urgently need to divert some of those wasted revenues toward projects that will make America stronger and more secure.

Balance the tax code. We need to shut down loopholes and roll back tax breaks for the rich. The Bush tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations should be eliminated.

Reward companies that create jobs in America. Our current tax system gives incentives for companies to move jobs offshore. We need a tax code that rewards companies for investing in American workers.

Reinvest tax cuts into the economy. After rolling back the top-end tax cuts and closing tax shelters, we need to invest in areas vital to our future—fixing bridges and roads, becoming energy independent, developing new "green" technologies, and providing every child with a high quality education. That way, we will create more jobs, incur less debt and build a stronger future for our nation.

reply to post by ofhumandescent
This is a bit off-topic, but I have to answer some of your allegations. I admit that I admire your desire to help those who are lower on the economic scale, but reality is reality:



Actually, it is unfair, but I do favor the unfairness. This page gives a pretty good breakdown. In 2006, the top 10% of taxpayers paid 70.79% of all taxes collected. the bottom 50% paid 2.99% of all revenues. Are you sure you want to make this 'fair'?



Here I will agree. The only problem is that you don't mention any specific loopholes.

I won't respond to anything else in your post here, because as I said, it is somewhat off-topic (perhaps in the politics forum?). I will, however, suggest that you do some more research into the subject, as it will no doubt enlighten you quite a bit as to where the money really comes from and goes to. The situation is much more complex than you realize.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Sestias

---

I was waiting for this. Things like this can be misleading - someone with a PhD and "20 years of teaching" that has it hard.

I don't mean to prod, but I think since you offered up this information you don't mind being asked - A PhD in what? From what University? You don't have to say specifically, but is it a liberal art and is it from a ivy league or other top ranked (>5%) school? You and I both know that makes all the difference in the world. A PhD in English Literature or any other liberal art from anything less than an ivy league school is a life of poverty unless you literally get lucky.

Also, you and I both know "teaching" means little. You could teach for 50 years at a university and be an adjunct. Its the research you do that gets you the money and promotions. Research which should have started while you were getting the degree.

I can't think of any PhD with a degree from a respected school outside of the liberal arts that can't find a good university or research based job. I know lots of PhDs in the humanities who are stuck as adjuncts - but thats the chance you take when you go into a field that produces far more PhDs than are needed.

In other words, this is the sort of thing that makes for a good sob story on the surface, but may not be indicative of any issue at all other than personal choice.

Finally, this whole "benefits are privatized and costs socialized" is a line directly out of the Democrat playbook. And I mean that literally. They started issuing it on their daily talking points list a few weeks ago.

While this is a good line, its not really true. The cost of letting Fannie and Freddie go down would still be socialized - it would just be worse than it is now. It would cause massive hysteria and panic without government reassurance, and that means everyone invested in the economy loses, and that ripples to those who don't even have money in the markets in the long run. The benefits are also not privatized. Fannie and Freddie offer services that make it easy for everyone to get a loan because lenders know they can package them up and sell them as securities. That is not something which would occur in the free market if it was not a government sponsored enterprise. The costs AND benefits of Fannie and Freddie are socialized.

[edit on 23-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by ofhumandescent

---

Exactly where do you get any of this from? I just looked up the statistics and total new jobs has grown since the tax cuts, and inflation adjusted revenues for the federal government has risen in tandem. I thought about pasting all of it here but I highly suspect your just stating things that you have no backup for. Its like your reading off the DNC talking points too - there are no "tax cuts for the rich" - the IRS data just released shows that the percentage of income tax paid by top earners increased AGAIN. How exactly are these rich people getting so many tax cuts if they keep paying a higher share of taxes year after year again?

Every single claim you made is completely wrong as far as what can be backed up by statistics. Over time, all indicators you've mentioned have gone in a favorable direction when looking at the start of Bush's presidency until now. Of course, the President has little direct control over any of this - but I wouldn't expect you to note that.

[edit on 23-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Let's pretend, for the sake of discussion, that the average American spends 90% of his income on his expenses (housing, food, utilities, groceries, transportation, etc.) and has 10% disposable income. Now let's also guesstimate that the average American's weekly fuel costs have gone from $20 a week to $40 a week. $20 increase x 4 = $80 a month increase.

For a person whose monthly income is $1,600 a month, that's 5% of monthly income - half of their 10% disposable income. Food costs and utilities have also gone up significantly, and the low-income American is getting perilously close to breaking even, having zero disposable income, and/or going "in the hole." If, on the other hand, a person makes $8,000 a month, that same $80 is only 1% of their income. In other words, they'll hardly notice the difference. Most of us probably fall somewhere in between and are being affected, although not all to the same degree.

We are all seeing higher prices, but the less money one makes, the more they are being hurt. This non-recession is hitting the lower 'classes' a lot harder than it's hitting the upper classes. That's simple math, and a simple truth. If you're lucky enough to have the higher income and not be feeling the pinch so much, be grateful. But please don't minimize the impact of this on people who aren't so lucky. Even if they don't complain and say that they're doing fine, they aren't doing nearly as fine as they were a few months ago.

But really, the point is, why is this happening at all? Why are we having to pay so much more for fuel, food, and utilities? Who is getting the money?

Is the US government withholding a source of clean, FREE energy from the public?
Are the powerful elite and large corporations artificially raising fuel costs through speculation?
Is this a plot by oil-producing nations to 'break the back' of America?
There are many more questions we could ask, and some of them might even lead to a course of action or a solution if we pursue them far enough.

But our fellow working Americans, whether they wear blue collars or white, are not the enemy here. We are all victims of the sharply rising cost of living to a greater or lesser degree. I think we should be concerned not about who's whining or isn't, who's worried and who isn't, or who's feeling the pinch already and who's not, but about the fact that, overall, Americans are being affected negatively and it needs to stop.

Every job needs to be done or it wouldn't be a job. If you happen to have an upper management position or be a professional, don't forget that you depend on the working stiffs to pick up your garbage, provide your utilities, raise, prepare and distribute the food you eat, make your clothes, repair and maintain your car, etc. We are all connected and if this problem affects some of us, it should be of concern to all of us.

I'm not the problem. You're not the problem. I venture to guess that not one person reading or posting to this thread is the problem. But there is a problem, and we need to be thinking about possible solutions - or at the very least, how we can help each other to survive until the problem is solved.

reply to post by Heike

---

The problem is that that is not a problem. Somewhere at some time, someone is hurting. That is the way life is. Its not fair, and if we go around trying to placate and give everyone money when they are down then be prepared to be taxed at 60-70%, and see the permanent end of placing the tax burden on the rich.

There are very few people who truly are spending 90% of their income on needs (not wants). Most people spend a huge chunk of their money on things they claim are need. Prices go up, prices go down - this is the market - not a problem.

No one seems to understand the "substitution effect" because they don't want to have to do anything to get out of their financial problems, they want a hand out. Food prices have not sky rocketed if you substitute other foods - only certain foods have gone up. Anyone who has no access to public transportation and spends so much on gas that its causing financial difficulty should not have made the decision to work so far from home on the bet that gas prices were fixed when everyone knows they are not.

We're not really paying that much more for food or gas, in fact inflation adjusted this is cake compared to the early 1970s. Supply and demand. It happens. It is not the government's job to protect us from price increases unless and until there is price gouging involved (paying a high price you don't like is not price gouging). Having the nanny state interfere costs EVERYONE more in the long run.

I do agree though - no one is the problem. Because there is no problem. Prices go up, prices go down. Thats life. Life has lots of issues, none of them are usually the type of problems that the welfare state can "fix" without costing me more in the long run.

You ain't see nothing yet. The police state is there for a reason. To rape you and beat you up so you can't say a goddamn thing after.

It will be quite easy to install if you:

- Hire felons (already doing it)
- Hire foreigners (already doing it)
- Pay them well even in fiat money (doing it)
- Send them oversee and make them crazy with PTSD (already doing it)
- Do a false-flag and blame it on terrorists/militias/911 truthers...
- The economy collapse will be blame on the terrorist attack... of course it was already going to collapse.
- Put a charimatic goon in office and blame everything on the last president (in plan to do it)

Yep, the american people are gonna be raped. You better leave, fight or enjoy it.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness

---

I agree with a lot of what you say when it comes to hard work and there always being opportunity if you look hard enough, etc.... but I get this sort of feeling through your posts that you have a sort of "disconnect" with the reality experienced by most people.

Also, I notice you always go on about some Democrat/Liberal talking point bull# and it just makes you reek of Mr. Republican/Conservative Bush-ass kisser... and it does reek.I say this because I see and hear the same thing from my peers that are Republican/Conservative Bush-ass kissers (my father, namely), and it's frustrating.

You're smart, and you make plenty of good points (you're a skeptic as well, so that's another thing we have in common), but god damn man... you seem blinded by your very own political bias. I see on both sides on here, but you're definitely the minority around here so it sticks out more.

reply to post by Heike

---

Bless you!!



This gave me a new thought. Businesses both big and small have been encouraged for many years to partner with public. Now, however, the company may not even be an American company. I know the world has been flattened, but that doesn't mean America has to get steamrolled!



Yes. Since Americans have been made scared that their students can't compete worldwide, the push has been to send every student to college, to supply the US with more scientists and engineers. "Dirty work" has been demeaned, not worth Americans to do. One result, Boeing couldn't find enough American fabricators.

reply to post by ALightinDarkness

---

I don't actually disagree with anything you said. The percentages are moot, the point that people who make less money are affected to a greater extent than people who make more money remains a mathematical fact regardless of what percentages are used.

IF what we're seeing are normal inflation and normal price fluctuations, then I agree with you. We'll just have to tough it out. And you're right, it's my own dadgummed fault and no one else's that last year I finally bought my dream house on 10 acres out in the country - but 25 miles from work and no public transportation in the area.

But if the current recession that isn't a recession is not normal, but orchestrated and created to benefit some group of people that already have too much power and money, then I don't think we should just stand by and let it happen. In other words (stopping to check and make sure I'm on ATS; yup I am) if it has something to do with a conspiracy, then it's not normal, fair, or right and it is a problem.

And NO I don't want government interference. Haven't they loused everything up enough already? I ran out of hay last week and my husband just had surgery, so a friend brought me some hay that she had extra. I have a small flock of chickens who lay more eggs than we can eat, so I give people eggs. My tomatoes are going crazy so I share them with people who don't have gardens. Another friend's husband knows how to do farrier work so she asked him to trim my horses' hooves instead of me having to pay my regular farrier. THAT'S what I'm talking about. People helping each other. Not government assistance.

reply to post by Blaine91555

---

Blane, you make a very good point, that not ALL middle class are deeply in trouble. I do believe that more and more middle class people are in deep with the credit cards and their house. I believe the middle class is suffering. However, I'm glad that you realize how others, the "working poor," are severely impacted. But, let me point out that not all working poor are unskilled workers. I think some working poor may take offence to that stereotype. Low wage does not always equal low skill. I am one of the working poor. I have two college degrees. I have been working two part-time jobs for years, making half the amount that they pay my peers, (peers with that same job but are full timers). And yes, I do apply for full-time work, but there is nothing out there. I just want to make sure people understand that the category of working poor encompasses more than burger flipper.

Agreed. The high inflation of the '70s was the result of the government printing money to pay for the debts of the Vietnam War, not Jimmy Carter. Anyway you didn't see homeless people back then, and most everybody had a car.

I take it you don't do your own shopping?

Praytell, please inform the people here what foods HAVEN'T skyrocketed in the last 1 or 2 years. Milk has gone up about 40%. Steaks have doubled. Chicken approximately 30%-50%, and pork about 25%-40%.

Two years ago, a shopping cart of what we usually bought cost anywhere from $275-$350. The last time I bought the same stuff, it cost $500. But food costs haven't gone up?

The only thing that HASN'T gone up is junk food. So, are you suggesting I exchange meat, eggs, cheese, and fresh vegetables for junk food?

[edit on 23-7-2008 by sir_chancealot]

reply to post by operatorc

---

You are right that I don't join in the whining that the mass media programs people to do. I am disconnected from the media spin and know sewage when I smell it, so I don't go along with the ATS doom crowd because they are being directed by the mass media.

Perhaps you should do some more reading, my partisan friend. I have often bemoaned the lack of right-wing propagandists on ATS are either hiding very well or do not exist. If you can find one for me, I'll join you in pointing them out. Also, as someone who has criticized Bush on every point that a LIBERTARIAN WOULD, I'm about as far from the conservative party on fiscal policy as you can possibly get, and completely opposite from them on a majority of social issues. The fact that ATS is largely populated by the left-wing fringe and its pointed out does not mean the messenger is of the opposite party. In fact, people who think that way are usually members of the party being illuminated.

I have an overt libertarian bias, your desire to make me a conservative just amuses me and suggests you are just about as unbiased as a typical partisan. As I dislike both parties, I pick up slack on whatever side isn't receiving the bashing. As ATS is primarily controlled by DNC propagandists, this means I am more often debunking them. Find me an RNC propagandist I'd be more than happy to debunk them as well.

reply to post by sir_chancealot

---

I take it you enjoy making stuff up? I go shopping every 2 weeks, and my bill has increased MAYBE 10%, and I rarely eat junk food. Of course, when I saw the price of something went up, I selected a cheaper brand. GASP. THE HORRORS! HELP US BIG GOVERNMENT! Save me from the absolute horrors of generic brands!

[edit on 23-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

reply to post by Heike

---

Then I agree with you, I just didn't understand what you are saying. We certainly don't want government interference, and people should be helping themselves. This is the sort of time when charity shines.

And to the doom and gloom post gang whom I see has arrived...

I'm off for now. The doom and gloom brigade has arrived and will begin their normal lynching of everyone not in line with the media spin about doom. Have fun guys, I won't be reading it