- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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: How Free Trade Took Down the American Middle Class
Posted on 3/23/25 at 8:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 3/23/25 at 8:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
Well we will see if your ilk in Congress slow plays Trump's initiatives. If they do, God help you in 2028.
You have all the money, but none of the people on your side.
You have all the money, but none of the people on your side.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:00 pm to FlyDownTheField83
quote:
It is odd that you criticize me for making a sweeping generalization and then say the middle class Americans that are making less money,…”do so out of their failure to adapt.” Do you even think about applying your own criticisms to your arguments?
This was our standard discussion prior to MAGA when discussing black people and their economic troubles (in the face of the left wanting redistributive policies against institutional arguments like the ones MAGA relies on now).
And you're mischaracterizing what I said. I said
quote:
You're making a sweeping generalization that isn't necessarily true in the aggregate, and a good portion of those "making less money" do so out of their failure to adapt.
In response to this:
quote:
Lower and middle class Americans make less money,
The "middle class" makes more money now than ever, in the aggregate. But that depends on how you define "the middle class" (which has been a recurring meme for almost 20 years on here).
You also didn't note these specifics:
quote:
As has been shown ITT, there are still tons of opportunities nationwide for these people in trades. They just refuse the jobs (or are disqualified due to prior bad decision-making).
Middle class jobs are there for the taking. Industry is begging people to take them. They're just a little harder and more labor intensive than lower-level manufacturing, so these people you reference won't take them. These are good, union jobs with benefits, the type of jobs leftists (and leftist arguments) dream of).
quote:
However, the relationship between the US and China is not a free market with fair trade, it has been perverted and “regulated “ to transfer wealth and value from middle class Americans to China and unscrupulous business leaders and investors.
Read the Sowell and Friedman I've posted ITT.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:01 pm to BCreed1
quote:
3-bedroom house in 1950 was $7,400. In today's money, that's roughly $90,000.
You can't ignore the fact that the average home in 1950 was smaller than 1000 sq ft, no garage, no AC, etc.
You can find all sorts of quirky data points where housing and incomes are concerned. One of the best times to purchase a home was just fifteen years ago, and today it's one of the most difficult (though not unprecedented).
What does it tell us that home ownership rates are higher today than they were in 1950?
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:01 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:
Well we will see if your ilk in Congress slow plays Trump's initiatives. If they do, God help you in 2028.
Update: libertarians aren't getting elected much in 2028, either.
We've all seen how MAGA has turned on Massie and Paul, too.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:05 pm to RiverCityTider
I'm sure there's a lot of good discussion here to dig in to but I just can't let a couple of things pass.
Median home size was 1500 not 2000 sf.
Only 36% of homes in 1970 had air conditioning.
I mean. Ya know. If you want to start a discussion on this subject which is certainly worth having. How about not starting with a bullshite premise? It undercuts the frick out of your credibility.
quote:bullshite. "Big" is a streeeeetch...
buys a big house
quote:In 1970,, 47% of households had 1 car. 17% had NO cars. And, the average age of the cars owned was just shy of 6 years.
two shiny cars in the driveway,
Median home size was 1500 not 2000 sf.
Only 36% of homes in 1970 had air conditioning.
I mean. Ya know. If you want to start a discussion on this subject which is certainly worth having. How about not starting with a bullshite premise? It undercuts the frick out of your credibility.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
I do not believe I am mischaracterizing anything, you want to say it is a failure of middle class Americans to work harder and learn more to get a good manufacturing job and own a home. I disagree, there are leaders that are enriching themselves through policies and actions that damage these peoples chances of owning a home, and a chief example of this is the “business” relationship between China and the US.
You keep trying to say everything is better, …”The middle class makes more money than ever” but the reality of our everyday middle class lives is NOT better, not at the grocery store, not at the gas pump, not at the school board, not at the bank trying to get a mortgage, not on payday, and people are angry. This genuine anger led to the election of Trump and many people are very happy he is seeking to address these things,…we will see if he is successful.
Also, people like you that talk down to these concerns only serve to enrage people more. It really does not seem to me that you want to be convincing anyone of your point of view, you just want to try to talk down to people and then Pat yourself on the back because you see yourself as “smart”.
You keep trying to say everything is better, …”The middle class makes more money than ever” but the reality of our everyday middle class lives is NOT better, not at the grocery store, not at the gas pump, not at the school board, not at the bank trying to get a mortgage, not on payday, and people are angry. This genuine anger led to the election of Trump and many people are very happy he is seeking to address these things,…we will see if he is successful.
Also, people like you that talk down to these concerns only serve to enrage people more. It really does not seem to me that you want to be convincing anyone of your point of view, you just want to try to talk down to people and then Pat yourself on the back because you see yourself as “smart”.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:21 pm to Grumpy Nemesis
quote:
In 1970,, 47% of households had 1 car. 17% had NO cars. And, the average age of the cars owned was just shy of 6 years.
Median home size was 1500 not 2000 sf.
Only 36% of homes in 1970 had air conditioning.
I mean. Ya know. If you want to start a discussion on this subject which is certainly worth having. How about not starting with a bullshite premise? It undercuts the frick out of your credibility.
Hey, I get it—numbers matter, and you’ve got some stats to throw around. But let’s not miss the point here. When I said “big house” and “two shiny cars,” I’m painting a picture of what the middle class felt like in 1970: secure, hopeful, thriving. Not every family had two cars or a 2,000-square-foot palace—sure, median home size was closer to 1,500 square feet, and only 36% had AC, per Census data. And yeah, 47% had one car, with an average age of six years, not showroom fresh. Point taken.
But this isn’t a blueprint—it’s a story. That paycheck Dad brought home bought a lifestyle most families today can only dream of: affordable homes (2.5 times annual income, not today’s six), reliable wheels (one or two, new or used), and a shot at vacations and pensions. Free trade gutted that by shipping 5 million factory jobs overseas—Bureau of Labor Statistics backs that up. The critic’s nitpicking details when the real “bullshite” is pretending that loss doesn’t matter. My premise isn’t about square footage; it’s about a world we traded away. Credibility’s intact—check the bigger picture
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:25 pm to FlyDownTheField83
quote:
You keep trying to say everything is better, …”The middle class makes more money than ever” but the reality of our everyday middle class lives is NOT better, not at the grocery store, not at the gas pump, not at the school board, not at the bank trying to get a mortgage, not on payday, and people are angry.
Most of these are very recent events and, again, due to government intervention, not the free market. Printing trillions for other economic redistribution efforts has consequences.
It has little, if anything, to do with China.
quote:
people like you that talk down to these concerns only serve to enrage people more.
Yes, I agree their emotions have overtaken their logic. Trust me, if anyone knows on this board, I do.
People have daily absolute fricking meltdowns for me simply maintaining the same principles that were celebrated on this board 2005-2016.
quote:
It really does not seem to me that you want to be convincing anyone of your point of view
When people reject capitalism for leftism/help from the state, and rely on emotions instead, it definitely becomes harder to explain the value of freedom/capitalism.
quote:
you just want to try to talk down to people
The only people I have done that are ones either melting into insanity or just attacking me due to the aforementioned emotions.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:29 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:
Hey, I get it—numbers matter, and you’ve got some stats to throw around. But let’s not miss the point here
quote:
My premise isn’t about square footage; it’s about a world we traded away. Credibility’s intact—check the bigger picture
Time to bust out a classic picture used to respond to leftists on here historically (it was once posted when it was new, to give you an idea of how long this has been posted).
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:30 pm to David_DJS
quote:
ou can't ignore the fact that the average home in 1950 was smaller than 1000 sq ft, no garage, no AC, etc.
I didn't ignore that, but we can spell it out. If the average was 1000 sqft that comes to $7.40 per sqft. In today's inflated times, that's roughly $98.86 today. So $9900 would be the same today.
The median price per square foot in the US is around $233. That's $233,000 for the 1000 sqft home.
quote:
What does it tell us that home ownership rates are higher today than they were in 1950?
44% in 1940
55% in 1950
65% in 2024
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:38 pm to BCreed1
The price-to-income ratio has risen from ~2.2 in 1950 to 4-5 today, suggesting ownership reflects borrowing capacity more than economic ease.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:38 pm to BCreed1
quote:
I didn't ignore that, but we can spell it out. If the average was 1000 sqft that comes to $7.40 per sqft. In today's inflated times, that's roughly $98.86 today. So $9900 would be the same today.
The median price per square foot in the US is around $233. That's $233,000 for the 1000 sqft home.
You're still missing a lot of a credible comparison.
quote:
44% in 1940
55% in 1950
65% in 2024
Exactly. What does that tell you in terms of economics?
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:42 pm to David_DJS
Available credit. Certainly not wellbeing.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:42 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:
But this isn’t a blueprint—it’s a story. That paycheck Dad brought home bought a lifestyle most families today can only dream of:
Did it?
Less than half of Americans had a clothes dryer.
That house? Had vinyl flooring or cheap carpet. No granite counters ANYWHERE.
There was no computer in the house.
No cell phones
The cars? SUBSTANTIALLY less safe with basically NONE of the current safety features.
Almost zero microwave ovens.
I could go on and on.
The FACT...........and this is a FACT...........is..............if I took your typical person in the 25th percentile today...............moved them with a time machine to 1970 and placed them in the 75th percentile................then came back 6 months later and offerred them to return...............they'd fricking stampede me to death in their rush to get back.
Look, there were some great things about the 70s but you can have a 70s lifestyle TODAY VERY frickING CHEAP.
NOBODY WANTS THAT!.................NOBODY!
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:45 pm to Grumpy Nemesis
These are all technological developments.
You forgot only 3 or 4 tv channels.
So now we get gadgets and no retirement. Mindless entertainment while trading food for medicine.
You forgot only 3 or 4 tv channels.
So now we get gadgets and no retirement. Mindless entertainment while trading food for medicine.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:46 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:
Available credit. Certainly not wellbeing.
You seriously believe the general well-being (or economic well-being) of the average American was better in 1950 than it is today? JFC - did the breathtaking technological developments of the last 75 years just pass today's population by?
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:48 pm to David_DJS
quote:
You seriously believe the general well-being (or economic well-being) of the average American was better in 1950 than it is today? JFC - did the breathtaking technological developments of the last 75 years just pass today's population by?
They're adapting their arguments to the same theme you see from Leftists who move to Europe and promote it over living in the US.
"life is too abundant in the US"
"You learn to live more with less in Europe"
"having fewer choices is so much better"
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:49 pm to RiverCityTider
The fundamental problem in this discussion is always the same.
It's the use of a common word to describe things in different eras as if they're the same thing.
The reality is, even 2 homes of exactly the same square footage..........one built in 1970, one built today are about as similar as a fricking land line versus a cell phone. You can't compare their prices because THEY ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING THE SAME PRODUCT!
The same goes for cars. I mean, I'm guessing Ford could STILL produce one cheap mother fricking car if it didn't have airbags, anti-lock breaks, seat belts, crumple zone, breakaway engines, modern paint, modern rusk protection, low emissions and on and on. I'll bet a perfect production model of a 1972 Ford would be the cheapest car on the market BY FAR!
You can't compare prices/costs of things where the only similarity is the name.
It's the use of a common word to describe things in different eras as if they're the same thing.
The reality is, even 2 homes of exactly the same square footage..........one built in 1970, one built today are about as similar as a fricking land line versus a cell phone. You can't compare their prices because THEY ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING THE SAME PRODUCT!
The same goes for cars. I mean, I'm guessing Ford could STILL produce one cheap mother fricking car if it didn't have airbags, anti-lock breaks, seat belts, crumple zone, breakaway engines, modern paint, modern rusk protection, low emissions and on and on. I'll bet a perfect production model of a 1972 Ford would be the cheapest car on the market BY FAR!
You can't compare prices/costs of things where the only similarity is the name.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:49 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They're adapting their arguments to the same theme you see from Leftists who move to Europe and promote it over living in the US.
"life is too abundant in the US"
"You learn to live more with less in Europe"
"having fewer choices is so much better"
And apparently technology has only improved gadgets and entertainment.
Posted on 3/23/25 at 9:51 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:Correct. The list is fricking endless.
These are all technological developments.
You forgot only 3 or 4 tv channels.
quote:And yet you know I'm correct. If I took people from 2025 and moved them 1970 and improved their economic status by 50%, those frickers would still commit freaking murder for the opportunity to get back to 2025.
So now we get gadgets and no retirement. Mindless entertainment while trading food for medicine.
That ain't no accident.
Popular
Back to top


1




