Well put. I agree that we should be educating people about finances. Heck, I'm a doctor and I got zero personal financial education. I happen to enjoy investing and managing my portfolio so I have educated myself over the years.

My point in the whole thread is simply that saying the economy isn't good because some people can't make ends meet doesn't make any sense. Yes, some people are having a hard time. Some people always have a hard time. Unemployment will never be zero. Not everyone will have a two story house with a picket fence and a big screen TV. That's just life. Yes, I know I make more money than most (but less than the average on PPOT I bet) but I worked for that money. I went to school for years and years. I take on huge responsibility every day when I treat patients. I think I earn my money. I don't feel bad that I make good money and I don't feel bad that someone else is working at Burger King. I am happy to help them help themselves through education, job retraining, whatever. Just don't say that because they work at Burger King the economy sucks. Heck if Pelosi has her way they will magically all make $7.50 an hour. Then people can ***** because the price of bread, milk, eggs, gas, clothes, cars, food, movies, etc, etc, etc goes up and the liberals will all sit around and blame whichever conservative happens to be in power at the time.

Rick

We were on the same page until you took the partisan approach.

Respectfully...Why not ease up on the "blame game" rhetoric?

It seems so easy to assume the "other guy" is the cause of all the ills of the world.

Ain't so.....

Bob

If you are living on Long Island you are paying too much for housing, too much property tax, too much commuting, too high of an electric bill, too much sales tax, too much car insurance and too much on gas. If their is anything left over - they have figured a way to take it from you. That is one place you cannot get ahead.

RallyJon has hit the nail on the head - most of it is about unrealistic expectations..

Otherwise - compare the '60s and '70s to today. Look at that cable bill, look at that cell phone bill. Look at the giant gas grill in the back yard. (Remember Dad's little hibachi thing??), look at the garden tractor, snow blower, VCR, Home Computer, DVD and kids IPODS and sneaker collection. Think about it.

The reason I brought up the blame game is because the folks talking about how horrible the economy is despite data to the contrary during the weeks before an election are of a particular political group. I'll leave you to decide who that might be. Wouldn't want to blame anyone...

Hint: It's the same group promising to throw out the opiate of the masses, a huge minimum wage hike. Wonder what that will do to the cost of goods and services in the good old US of A? Maybe the corporations will just absorb the cost this time out of the goodness of their hearts.

Rick, you are not considered middle class and have no idea what it means. It is so easy for someone with your means to lose touch with the less fortunate. You cannot relate to 99% of the country.

Can't afford to live in CA - just move! It's that easy! Can't afford real food - eat dog food, it's cheaper and good for you!

I have two brother-in-laws who are doctors, they marvel when I tell them I my salary, "How do you survive?" they ask. And I make a good salary compared to so many others - it just shows how out of touch people can become.

vbaron I never said I was middle class. Better read the thread next time.

And yes, it is that easy. If you cannot afford to live in California, there are 49 other states out there. California doesn't have a monopoly on middle class jobs. This might shock you, but we have restaurants and auto repair shops and banks and everything in the rest of the country!! It's called supply and demand. If enough people leave California due to high cost of living, the cost of living will decrease. Eventually you find a happy medium.

So what are you talkin' 'bout, Rick, maybe a buck or so an hour? How much has your hourly salary increased over the past half a dozen years? How much has Congress'?

Let's see $5.15/hour x 2,080 hours/year = $10, 712 gross per year. Yeah, that'll buy a plasma TV and a nice vacation, as long as you don't need to eat or keep a roof over your head. Oh, no money for electricity to run your fancy TV, bummer, dude.

Of course, since there's actually 8,760 hours per year (24/7/365), you could become middle class at $45,114/year gross. What are you waiting for...get to work! :mad:

But, hey, let's not pass on the cost of a min. wage hike to the consumers. Let's bring in more illegals and offshore more skilled/salaried jobs. That'll make it all better...:p :p :p

PS: Rick, if your dirt poor, how you gonna move? I figure the great depression migration to CA in reverse, huh? The reverse-Beverly Hillbillies. :D

Jim, I am talking about the proposal of the Democrats. They say that within the first 100 hours of taking office (if they win majorities in Congress) they will increase the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour. That is a 40% pay increase! Do you really think the businesses in America will just suck that cost up? Of course not. They will pass it on to the consumers. Guess who some of the consumers are? You got it!! Minimum wage earners!! So, the guy who works at McDonalds and takes his family to Pizza Hut on the weekend now has to pay $20 for a pizza instead of $15 because the guy behind the counter got a 40% pay raise too. Soon, he is right back where he started. The difference is everything costs more again. Then people up in Washington will throw out another minimum wage increase to appease the masses and buy votes, knowing it is a never ending cycle and they really aren't helping anyone get anywhere.

I'm not saying the poor shouldn't be helped. I'm simply saying that a hike in the minimum wage is simply a shell game.

gaijindabe:

Since when is a phone is a luxury item? Internet access and PCs are required by today's society and schools - and why can't the Middle Class survive on Long Island? Back to the original point of the post - the Middle Class is being ground down. There is no more middle class. My dad was a union printer and could afford a house on LI without my mother working - not a possibility in today's society. For many families it is not because of the desire to have more "stuff". It is a desire to just survive. But I guess that is just another "unrealistic" expectation.

Times change man. Get over it. The US once bought Manhatten for some beads too. Can't buy Manhatten for beads anymore...damn government.

Two desparate points of view that will never understand each other...the "haves" and the "have nots".

Like George Carlin said: "The Rich have all the money, the middle class have all the debt. What do the poor do? Scare the crap out of the middle class."

Once again, the old Indian prayer....

"Lord, let me not criticize my brother until I walk a mile in his moccasins".


BTW...It was the Dutch that bought Manhattan.......

1. The current wage has not been increased in almost 10 years - I wonder if your fees have remained constant for that long? Of course Congress (both sides of the aisle) have voted themselves raises.
2. The current wage rate is below the mnimum federal poverty level for a family of 3! No big screen TVs on that budget!

And talk about spending beyond means, look at what the current Administration and Republican controlled Congress has saddled us with!

You won't get an argument from me on Congressional spending, I am all for cutting federal spending.

Again, I'm not saying that someone making minimum wage has it easy. I'm just saying that raising the minimum wage does nothing but make everything that that minimum wage earner buys cost more. It is a no win situation in the end. The solution (in my opinion) is to offer that minimum wage earner assistance with retraining or education so that he or she can get a job which pays a whole lot more than minimum wage.

Costs do not necessarilty increase. Efficiencies can kick in and, unfortunately, some marginal employees at the power end may just have to go.

Sadly, members of Congress have received raises, corporate executives have received massive increases, but I do not see increases in positive output in either category.

IF you aren't in the top 1%, you're middle class. Welcome to the club.

The concentration of wealth has increased in the past few decades. It's fact. I'm not bothered with that fact, but I am concerned of the eventual backlash. The latest trend is holding the line on wages and giving the masses easy credit. As long as J6P can fund his lifestyle, the means by which the lifestyle is funded is immaterial.

so if we reduce the minimum wage, they will be even better off ?

perhaps you should reduce your salary by, say 50% - you will be better off - things will cost less,- correct?

w/r to education - are you willing to have your income tax rate increased sustantially to educate the minimium wage earner?

Well, as we all know, facts are liberal.

---------------excerpt-----------------
Economy up, people down
Declining earnings undercut income growth

Although the economy expanded solidly in 2004, the inflation-adjusted income of the median household was unchanged and remains $1,700, or 3.8%, below its most recent peak in 1999, according to yesterday's release by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.

The main factor explaining this significant, ongoing decline in household income appears to be the faltering job market, especially regarding real annual earnings, which fell significantly for both men (-2.3%) and women (-1.0%). The decline for men was the largest one-year drop since 1990; for women, it was the biggest fall since 1995.

EPI's analysis of the Census data shows that increased hours of work actually raised mid-level household annual incomes by 0.5% in 2004, but that real hourly wage decline subtracted that much and more (-1.3%) from income growth.

The 2004 level of median household income—$44,389—was slightly below the 2003 level, but the change was not statistically significant. However, the 1.2% decline in real household income for non-elderly families from 2003 to 2004 was statistically significant, again implicating a weak job market in these results. Since 2000, the median household income of non-elderly households is down $2,572 (or 4.8%) compared to $1,669 (or 3.6%) for all households.

The real income of the typical household has fallen five years in a row, despite the fact that the last three of those years—2002, 2003, and 2004—have been years of economic expansion. Over these years, our workforce has become a great deal more productive, as output per hour is up 15% from 2000 to 2004. Yet, as shown in Figure 1, these productivity gains have failed to reach the typical household.

Figure 1

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1160607432.gif

Link:
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_econindicators_income20050831

No, I never said that. Nice try at a strawman though.

In response to your second statement, why do you assume that we must increase income taxes to educate the lower classes and get them better jobs? Does fiscal responsibility not even enter your head? How about cutting all the BS spending that the government does and use that money to fund education programs? Did you ever even consider reforming the welfare program in order to help educate people and provide avenues to better jobs instead of just giving them a check each month?

Better check yourself, your closedmindedness is showing...

techweenie, got the same chart for 1994-1997? My memory is vague (though not as vague as that of the financial press) but the whole "productivity up, wages stagnant" story seems very ten years ago. And we all know what happened next.

The economy is at its best under these conditions. When wages start to go up and the punk in the cube starts driving a Boxster, look out 'cause it's all about to end.

You're starting to sound like you realize you live in an excessively high cost area for your household income. No shame in that and the answer is a simple one: move.

When you're young and childless you can adventure in areas without the income to support being there. Three years in Manhattan on ~$25k a year were about the most fun of my life!

If we lived in the bay area, we'd be thankful on those days when we could eat as well as dog food. It's all relative and there are a lot of ways to do the math.

"The economy is best" under conditions of decline in real income for the majority of the population?

Are you serious?

Call it what you will, but it's at its best when productivity growth outstrips wage growth. The other way 'round is inflationary and will get the fed to shut down the economy pronto.

I like to think of it as, we sneak up on a boom so the fed won't shut it down too quickly. :)

Dobbs is OK when it comes to issues, but he doesn't criticize the people in power responsible--the Republicans.

Health insurance premiums have been climbing out of sight since 2000, when Bush became President.Those tax cuts which put the country into deep debt were unconscionable. Downright unpatriotic.

How Gore could lose in 2000 running on a record of 8 prosperous years and a balanced budget is a testimony of what a poor campaigner he always was.Couldn't even win his home state. He and Monica were Clinton's biggest mistakes.

Fact is, the Republicans have screwed the middle class, and I hope they pay for it in November.

That's such BS. Damn, I made $9.00/ stocking shelves back in 1990. I started out at min. wage and promptly moved up. If your working for min. wage(other than food server) for longer than 12 months, you aint doing your job right. I've found good workers need to be paid or they will move on to someone who will pay them better, and your left with a bunch of slackers.

Damn the AAA call center here is starting people at $13/hr

On an aside. My sister in law only makes $19/hr. She lives in South Dakota. Just bought a brand new home for $185,000. You can find affordable housing and a job that will give you some discretionary income if your willing to look outside your current situation.

Don't blame the economy, if you won't change with it.