undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnytesky1y ago0 comments

I think the perception of the middle class shrinking is that it is

1) true there are more people in lower middle class than before and less in the middle

2) even for those who moved “up” to upper middle class, the buying power has been stripped by rapidly rising housing prices, medical, and education costs. So even with a high income, disposable income has likely decreased. Those items have far exceeded inflation for years

3) much of the ability of families to move to UMC has been on the backs of two working parents. Which itself entails expensive childcare (often more than the mortgage), and a huge decrease in family leisure time and sleep. But with those rising expenses in 2), a single earner is not feasible.

In general, be wary of Newsweek articles, this is not the magazine we grew up with: https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-newsweek-has-gone-down-the...

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

SideQuark1y ago

> true there are more people in lower middle class than before and less in the middle

Yes, because as I pointed out more people stay in college longer ( poor now but not for long), more people retire early due to good stock markets (simply read BLS/Census data).

Here's a simple way to check the rough argument: Suppose on avg it takes 5 years to post HS education. A working career is about 50 years. So 10% of a college student is spent poor with near certainty.

25% of people went in 1970. That accounts for (1/4)*(1/10) = 2.5% of the population being in poverty, yet they will mostly do quite well over a lifetime.

Now about 50% go to college. That's a 2.5% increase in the poverty rate, yet in reality people over a lifetime are going to be richer.

Do the same thing to retirees, to early retirement due to stock growth, early retirement from COVID where many people also decided to retire early since they could afford it, and your increase in the poor evaporates.

Also, US poverty rate puts one in the top 15% of world incomes, so our poverty rate is a pretty nice income. And poverty is measured pre-govt transfers, which provides a lot more income.

I just gave you the stats, and you can check them. Stop repeating things for which I pointed out solid and provably correct reasons your interpretation is wrong. If you want to refute there are more people in college, or that people aging into retirement or retiring early are not increasing then do so.

Simply do the math, or read Census or BLS data.

> the buying power has been stripped by

Inflation adjusted median wages has risen significantly [1]. So no, buying power has not been stripped. When you pick only a few items but ignore the overall purchasing power of an income you are making reasoning errors. This is also true of you break it down by decile or quintile - BLS/FRED/Census again has all the data you need. You continually cherry pick the extreme edges of things and ignore the actual data for the entire thing.

> much of the ability of families to move to UMC has been on the backs of two working parents

Individual income, as shown above, has greatly increased relative to inflation. The reason people use two incomes is they have more than twice as much stuff as 1970: median house sizes have more than doubled, more cars per family, more TVs, massively more entertainment expenses, more of everything. If a family wanted to live like 1970 then one income now is more than enough (provably so, since again, inflation adjusted wages since 1970 have increased significantly).

>In general, be wary of Newsweek articles

Nothing in that article is different than you can source yourself from the root data sources for all this knowledge: Census, BLS, FRED, and a few other stats gathering agencies. If you dispute the stats in the article, present your stats and sources. Stop pretending cherry picked anecdotes replaces analysis of the entire dataset.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse