- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bloomberg: The American Middle Class Is Shrinking, and That’s OK
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:59 am to NC_Tigah
Posted on 11/21/25 at 8:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
In 1967, a little more than 5% of Americans earned or received more than $150,000 (in 2024 dollars). Now more than 30% do.
I find that almost impossible to believe.
My guess here is that the author means households.
And even that seems off a little.
maybe a little more than 25% of households earn $150,000 or more.
I guess it does not detract from her overall point, but it is shite like this creates confusion in people's heads and furthers ideas of bias or outright lying.
2
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:09 am to JimEverett
If it is households, they also fail to mention that in 1967, the wife typically did not have a job. So now it takes TWO people to earn the same amount of money people did in 1967.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:10 am to tide06
quote:
When you consider that I’m a millennial it’s pretty apparent that all this happened really recently so bottom line is we all (older millennial / gen x / boomer) need to have some understanding for what these kids coming up are going through and how it flat out isn’t how it was anymore.
The problem is that when you talk about frugality you get labeled as out of touch and a stupid Boomer (and I am not even a Boomer).
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:14 am to JimEverett
quote:
The problem is that when you talk about frugality you get labeled as out of touch and a stupid Boomer (and I am not even a Boomer).
What does frugality mean to you?
Because to me having a $5 coffee a few times a week isn’t the story when your education, housing and vehicle costs have doubled in 10 years resulting in thousands of additional dollars spent monthly.
If someone is blowing cash flying to Vegas light em up, if this is a Starbucks discussion that’s a cop out and can’t stand up when you start looking at the numbers.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:17 am to 10thyrsr
quote:
If it is households, they also fail to mention that in 1967, the wife typically did not have a job. So now it takes TWO people to earn the same amount of money people did in 1967.
AND parents now have to pay for insanely expensive childcare, which wasn't a common expense in 1967 when mom stayed home with the kids.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:18 am to 10thyrsr
quote:
they also fail to mention that in 1967, the wife typically did not have a job.
That is not exactly true either.
There were definitely more stay at home mothers in 1967 than there are today, but i do not think it was most. This article claims it was 44%
LINK
household size has also dropped - in the 1960s there was, on average, something like 1.5 more people per household.
They lived a far more frugal life than even poor people do today.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:22 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
more politicians want higher taxes on super-high earners but don’t ask the upper middle class to pay any more.
As someone in the upper-middle class, I am compelled to openly disagree.
The only President in my lifetime that has enacted policies that actually alleviated the tax burden of the middle class from top to bottom, is Donald J. Trump.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:25 am to Locoguan0
quote:
The middle class is shrinking because the upper class is growing.
I don’t think the middle class is shrinking, the goal posts showing who is middle class have just been moved.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:29 am to JimEverett
quote:Absolutely.
My guess here is that the author means households.
.... but it is shite like this creates confusion in people's heads and furthers ideas of bias or outright lying.
HHI and personal income get conflated constantly. Part of that is due to unspecified "taxpayer" categorization by the IRS. Taxpayer can refer to individuals or joint filers.
But it's an important observation you make.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:30 am to Locoguan0
quote:
The middle class is shrinking because the upper class is growing. What is also growing is the expectations of Americans as to what they are entitled to have. The typical lower middle class household is filled with luxuries that the same family couldn't dream of 40 years ago (and I'm not talking about just tech).
$126,038k household income is not upper class, that is less than what two teachers make
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:36 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The idea that the economy is rigged and zero-sum is leading to a rise in populism in both parties
This is why perception is every single but as important as "reality"
If people are gonna vote like they are getting screwed over, you're gonna end up with socialists candidates.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:36 am to JimEverett
quote:
There were definitely more stay at home mothers in 1967 than there are today, but i do not think it was most. This article claims it was 44%
That article is not what I'm interested in dissecting on a Friday morning
(Although it's interesting that the percentage of Hispanic SAHMs had significantly increased at the time of publication)
Google said the number was 49% - still fewer than half of households but pretty close.
This chart doesn't go all the way back to 1967, but I think it adds more context to the discussion around childcare expenses, specifically.
quote:
They lived a far more frugal life than even poor people do today.
I imagine people at all income levels across the globe lived more frugally (by today's standards) 60 years ago.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:42 am to JimEverett
quote:
The problem is that when you talk about frugality you get labeled as out of touch and a stupid Boomer (and I am not even a Boomer).
People are underwater because of the cost of education, insurance, and housing along with declining wages.
It's fine to talk about frugality but it seems like it inevitably leads to unserious people derailing the thread with arguments about how the path to economic security is buying Walmart brand coffee and cancelling Netflix. That's like a 400 pound person taking the stairs instead of the elevator and changing nothing else and expecting to lose 250 pounds in a year. Not only does the math not add up, it's so far off it almost doesn't even matter.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:55 am to Locoguan0
quote:
What is also growing is the expectations of Americans as to what they are entitled to have. The typical lower middle class household is filled with luxuries that the same family couldn't dream of 40 years ago
This is the correct answer.
Populists don't want to hear it, though.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 9:56 am to tide06
quote:
So my ask is *IF* you run into some Gen Z kid who is clearly struggling offer to mentor them a bit. I’ve been on campus for various reasons over the last couple years and had a chance to talk with some of these guys and there is a whole lot of struggle going on where they feel lost and abandoned.
I’ve been doing this for a couple of years now. I still keep in touch with 2-3 of the guys I was mentoring back in 2021.
They still text me to this day asking financial questions. It’s great to see them learning. The guy that has prospered the most is a black dude out of Katy. He got his Accounting degree from UH this past summer. Couldn’t be happier for him.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:02 am to Nobelium
quote:
The good news is that Americans have never been richer. The bad news is that most of them don’t feel like it.
There has been tremendous growth in income and wealth in the US in the last half century, even for poorer and middle-class households.
quote:As pointed out in the OP article, the good news is you're wrong. The bad news is you don’t feel like it.
People are underwater because of ... declining wages.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:05 am to NC_Tigah
Of course a billionaire would be ok with it.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:07 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Of course a billionaire would be ok with it.
I don't think Allison Schrager is a billionaire, FWIW.Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:19 am to jizzle6609
quote:
I’ve been doing this for a couple of years now. I still keep in touch with 2-3 of the guys I was mentoring back in 2021.
Love to hear that.
We can’t fix the issues, but just giving people information and letting them know there are people who give a F when the entire world seems geared towards helping women and other groups and blaming guys for problems they have nothing to do with matters.
Posted on 11/21/25 at 10:50 am to tide06
quote:
Love to hear that. We can’t fix the issues, but just giving people information and letting them know there are people who give a F when the entire world seems geared towards helping women and other groups and blaming guys for problems they have nothing to do with matters.
Come to think of it, none of these guys ever mention women. I know they like women but they clearly don’t have any short term plans of getting married.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News