OT: September 2012 Jobs Report “Very Suspicious”

[Anonymous]

I think tiny houses are a kinda fad right now. I saw a mention of a TV show about them recently.

Come to think of it, TV was probably better in 1973 than it is today. It could not have been worse.

[The-Shoveler]

[quote=scaredyclassic]not sure if this is an example but my kid is aspiring to be an engineer in a major city and live in a “microapartment” of about 200 sq ft. I thoughtt his was awesome.

does seem to indicate some scaled down expectations…back in the 70s i think he could have easily gotten a 400 sq footer[/quote]

The scalded down expectations (tiny home) thing is way over hyped, just as much as it was in the 70’s.

I don’t no how many time I heard, (you won’t have as much as your parents) back in the 70’s early 80’s, but it was a lot.

What they really want is a big house out of the city just as like the boomer did IMO.

[all]

From Harvey’s link:

Prices have also increased fairly rapidly, according to the Labor Department, for funeral services, sports tickets, day care, legal advice and tax preparation.

Here is another link: http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-fees-room-board-time-1974-75-2014-15-selected-years

In the public four-year sector, the increase in published tuition and fees from $2,810 (in 2014 dollars) in 1984-85 to $9,139 in 2014-15 is an increase of 225%, or 4.0% per year over 30 years. The increase over the most recent five years, from 2009-10 to 2014-15, was 17%, or 3.2% per year.

EDIT:

One more link
Average total tuition, fees, room and board rates charged for full-time undergraduate students in degree-granting institutions, public 4-year institution, in 2011 dollars.
1981-1982: $6,942
2011-2012: $16,789

[CA renter]

[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]There is too much information in her video to type in just a few lines here.[/quote]

I asked for a examples, a few sentences, far less than you actually typed.

Healthcare is not simply more expensive today, it is very different today. By the most basic metric, life expectancy, healthcare is significantly better.

If healthcare is worse for the middle class, then why is everybody living longer?

Real estate costs more because there are more people and the same amount of land. Why is it so hard to understand that?

I’m aware of the “wealth gap” statistics, but don’t see how that translates into the claim that the middle class is worse off than they were forty years ago.

If the middle class is really so much worse off, there should be an abundance of examples of things that are no longer accessible to them. And yet you cannot provide even a few examples to support your claim.[/quote]

Stop being lazy and watch the video.

FYI, the biggest improvements in life expectancy happened at the younger end of the age range over 50 years ago with improvements in sanitation, hygiene, medically supervised pregnancy and childbirth (including more births in hospitals), vaccines, antibiotics, and safer workplaces (thanks to unions and govt regulations). Over the past ~40-65 years, we have only gained a few years of life expectancy for people at age 65 (somewhere between approximately 2 and 7.5 years, depending on which research you look at, the timeframe, and gender differences). Contrary to popular myth, we are not living that much longer than we were 40-65 years ago.

—–

[bold is mine -CAR]

Gains
since the 1980s were 6 years in Japan and 5 years in France
and Italy, as opposed to 3 years in the Netherlands and 2
years in the United States and Denmark.

TodaysResearchAging22-pdf

———-

[OECD countries, not just the U.S. -CAR]

There are no population-based data to allow a direct estimate of the contributions of medical care to life extension or to the quality of life. In the absence of such data, my colleagues and I have created inventories of the outcome benefits of the preventive or curative care for individual conditions. Based on such an inventory of established life extending outcomes of preventive and curative services for individual conditions, I estimate that about half of the 7½ years of increased life expectancy since 1950 can be attributed to medical care. I credit an even larger number of years of relief, or partial relief, of poor quality of life to medical care. The data on which the estimates are based are often incomplete, and the estimates are approximations. They are more than speculative and less than precise.

http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/6/1260.long

——————–

[The U.S. is lagging other developed nations. -CAR]

Life expectancy has improved steadily and substantially in most high-income countries over the last century. In recent decades, however, the United States, Denmark, and the Netherlands have seen gains in life expectancy stagnate (NRC 2010: Glei, Meslé, and Vallin). U.S. life expectancy has been rising at a slower pace than other high-income countries over the last 25 years, particularly for women.
Denmark experienced virtually no growth in life expectancy from 1980 to 1995. The Netherlands experienced stagnation in the rate of growth in life expectancy starting in the early 1980s and continuing until 2002. While increases
in life expectancy in Denmark and the Netherlands have resumed, the growth rate of U.S. life expectancy remains exceptionally slow.

TodaysResearchAging22-pdf

——————-

Again, if you want to compare the quality of medical care today to that of 40+ years ago, you have to look at all aspects of medical care, and that includes the HUGE burden that has been shifted from hospitals and medical professionals to family members and other caretakers.

[flyer]

Personally, I think the “wealth gap” statistics are pretty much self-explanatory–concerning the ever-widening “Gap Between the Middle Class and the Rich.”

Differing levels of wealth directly translate into many “quality of life” differences between classes (for lack of a better term)–such as–less disposable income, lesser funds for housing, lesser funds for retirement, lesser funds for heirs (if you so choose).

I’m sure there are more examples, but those are the most significant, life-changing issues in my opinion, and, most likely, why it is referred to as the “wealth gap.”

[utcsox]

[quote=AN][quote=utcsox]The point to bring this thread back is to look back things that were said in 2012. Was BLS faking the number? Was the tax increase and Obamacare prevent business to hire? Was the “real inflation” rate as high as 10% if you factor in food cost?

I think the answer is pretty obvious. Of course, now we want to talk about something else….[/quote]The answer is obvious in what way? “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”?[/quote]
Hey, whatever make you sleep better at night.

[CA renter]

[quote=flyer]Personally, I think the “wealth gap” statistics are pretty much self-explanatory–concerning the ever-widening “Gap Between the Middle Class and the Rich.”

Differing levels of wealth directly translate into many “quality of life” differences between classes (for lack of a better term)–such as–less disposable income, lesser funds for housing, lesser funds for retirement, lesser funds for heirs (if you so choose).

I’m sure there are more examples, but those are the most significant, life-changing issues in my opinion, and, most likely, why it is referred to as the “wealth gap.”[/quote]

Agreed. And note that the things you’ve listed — housing, retirement, and inheritance — are basically types of investments (more disposable income = more income to invest), and that unearned income is taxed at a lower rate than earned income, particularly for high income earners. In other words, the different tax treatment of earned vs. unearned income makes the wealth gap even greater, and this difference grows over time.

Of course, there are multiple reasons for the wealth gap (greater — and growing — political power of those at the top of the economic pyramid; mechanization; globalization; etc.) , just pointing out that our tax policies make the problem even worse. It’s like pouring fuel on the fire.

[flyer]

Agree with what you added, CAr.

I realize the “wealth gap issues” do not apply to most of us on this forum, but as the documented gap increases over future decades, I believe the negative effects will reach further and further into the populace.

[an]

The problem I see with the “wealth gap issues” is, what can you possibly do to reverse the trend? The only way I can see the trend reversing is if you start taxing wealth dramatically and distribute that tax to everyone else.

As you can see, under both republicans and democrats, the top 5% have been doing extremely well. The 4th and 3rd Quintile did pretty well as well.

The way I see it is, you can try and have an equal playing field, but you can’t guarantee an equal result. There will always be smarter people and dumber people. There will always be lucky people and unlucky people. I can go on and on about different circumstances that will affect the outcome. The point is, there are just too much variables that affect the outcome for you to try and control the outcome. Unless you wait for the outcome to happen and then come in and do a wealth redistribution.

[The-Shoveler]

IMO the biggest contributor to the “wealth gap issues”, is not having minimum wage tied to inflation,
It effects the all the lower rungs a lot more than the upper income rungs.

Minimum wage has fallen further and further behind leaving the lower rung’s further and further behind.

[flyer]

I completely understand the points everyone has made, but, it seems it is still an issue to take note of from a societal viewpoint, since, at one end of the spectrum we are seeing more and more kids living at home longer than ever before–even after college–and, at the other end of the spectrum–fewer and fewer people being able to retire comfortably. IMO, both of these scenarios represent “wealth gap issues,” so it may be effecting more people than we even realize.

In addition, although, technically not defined as the “wealth gap,” but still illustrative of the point–I’ve known people who, in their 30’s and 40’s seemed to have their financial lives all figured out, then, when unexpected things happened at 50+ (job loss, illness, etc.)–generally because they weren’t prepared–their financial status changed immensely, creating a huge “gap” in their wealth.
Because this data doesn’t show up as a statistic, it might be called the “silent wealth gap,” and is happening more than we might care to imagine.

[an]

[quote=The-Shoveler]IMO the biggest contributor to the “wealth gap issues”, is not having minimum wage tied to inflation,
It effects the all the lower rungs a lot more than the upper income rungs.

Minimum wage has fallen further and further behind leaving the lower rung’s further and further behind.[/quote]I’m not so sure that will affecct the wealth gap. If you increase minimum wage, those people will turn around and probably spend every extra dollar they make. Which will only make the wealthy people even richer.

[an]

flyer, I understand your concern regarding wealth gap with regards to societal viewpoint. However, I think we’re far from the breaking point, where it would start to result in revolution. I think as long as the middle 3 quintile are employed and have a decent life, things will continue to chug along.

With that said, what would be your proposal to close the gap (meaningfully)? The only solution that I think would work is a wealth tax. I don’t think raising the minimum wage will do it, since it will just put more money into the system and the rich will also benefit from additional money in the system as well. It might end up negatively affect the 2nd & 3rd quintile more than the top 5% and the 4th quintile.

[The-Shoveler]

Most of the wealth Gap is being caused by wages not keeping up with inflation at the lower end of the wage spectrum.

Of course the ultra rich will still be ultra rich, just that the just that the lower would stop falling behind.

[flyer]

AN, I, of course, truly don’t have the answer to the ultimate solution–wish I did.

That said, some of the friends I mentioned who were literally “at the top,” have now fallen into the “silent wealth gap,” and I increasingly hear stories like that everyday. The fact is, they could have done something about it before it got away from them, via more conservative planning, etc. (i.e. keep the million+ rather than spend it all.)

I think the real point I’m making is that, virtually anyone of us can fall into the “wealth gap” regardless of which quintile in which we may currently abide.

[Author]

Posts