"Requiem for the American Dream"
- Thread starter Morpheus
- Start date
Be my guest. :e4e:
Tinark
Active member
Define "failing".
Become? We've been one since the end of WWII. It's what happens when a country becomes prosperous like the US and the citizens have plenty of disposable income.
Why did they write it to produce this outcome?
.jpg)
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...axes-really-are-unusually-progressive/252917/
Refuted with facts and data above. This is a factually false claim that you should not repeat until these facts change in the future, lest be labeled a blind ideologue.
Tinark
Active member
Might the xenophobia and anti-immigrant stance of the 1950's-1970's be playing a part in the stagnating median income/wages/net-worth?
We have far more 1st generation immigrants overall and as a percent of the population today than we did in the 1970's, the so called "golden era" that leftists like to point to:
The median foreign born immigrant earns less than the native population, about 20% less in fact. However, they earn far more than what they receive from where they come from.
It gives them an opportunity at a better life that was denied to them in their native countries. Might that not be playing a part in the data here given that a full 7% more of the total population is foreign born compared to the 60's and 70's?
Furthermore, they make up an even greater proportion of the total labor force:
They are also more likely to be employed than the native born:
Very interesting how the slanted documentary in the OP completely failed to discuss this factor.
Another trend over the last 40 years is the decrease in household size and the decrease in the average number of income earners per household:
In other words, the share of households having two earners has declined by 5% since 1980. This is going to affect data on median household income when you compare across time.
Also, beware another tactic of the leftists, focusing strictly on wages/income and not overall compensation that includes fringe benefits, the largest being health insurance. Benefits as a percent of overall compensation has increased over the past 35 years:
It doesn't make a huge difference, but is something to keep into account when determining how much employers are paying their workers.
Let's also not forget that average weekly hours for employed persons has been trending downward:
There's been a decline in average hours worked of about 7% from the mid 70's, from ~36 hours to ~33.5 hours. Fewer hours is also going to have an impact on median income and wealth, but this is in exchange for additional leisure time. Something unaccounted for in any of this data.
Another thing to consider:
Retirees increased from 15% to 17% of the population. Incomes decline in retirement, but there are also fewer expenses (often the house is paid off/paid down substantially, no longer supporting dependents, etc.). More retirees will contribute to holding the income data down over time.
The failure to at least discuss these facts demonstrates the bias/agenda of the video in the OP.
We have far more 1st generation immigrants overall and as a percent of the population today than we did in the 1970's, the so called "golden era" that leftists like to point to:
The median foreign born immigrant earns less than the native population, about 20% less in fact. However, they earn far more than what they receive from where they come from.
It gives them an opportunity at a better life that was denied to them in their native countries. Might that not be playing a part in the data here given that a full 7% more of the total population is foreign born compared to the 60's and 70's?
Furthermore, they make up an even greater proportion of the total labor force:
They are also more likely to be employed than the native born:
Very interesting how the slanted documentary in the OP completely failed to discuss this factor.
Another trend over the last 40 years is the decrease in household size and the decrease in the average number of income earners per household:
In other words, the share of households having two earners has declined by 5% since 1980. This is going to affect data on median household income when you compare across time.
Also, beware another tactic of the leftists, focusing strictly on wages/income and not overall compensation that includes fringe benefits, the largest being health insurance. Benefits as a percent of overall compensation has increased over the past 35 years:
It doesn't make a huge difference, but is something to keep into account when determining how much employers are paying their workers.
Let's also not forget that average weekly hours for employed persons has been trending downward:
There's been a decline in average hours worked of about 7% from the mid 70's, from ~36 hours to ~33.5 hours. Fewer hours is also going to have an impact on median income and wealth, but this is in exchange for additional leisure time. Something unaccounted for in any of this data.
Another thing to consider:
Retirees increased from 15% to 17% of the population. Incomes decline in retirement, but there are also fewer expenses (often the house is paid off/paid down substantially, no longer supporting dependents, etc.). More retirees will contribute to holding the income data down over time.
The failure to at least discuss these facts demonstrates the bias/agenda of the video in the OP.
Tinark
Active member
Another factor to consider: there has also been a marked rise in "assortative mating" over the past several decades.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/27/upshot/marriages-of-power-couples-reinforce-income-inequality.html
And also:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w19829
Another factor the slanted video in the OP utterly failed to discuss, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the wealthy rigging the system in their favor.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/27/upshot/marriages-of-power-couples-reinforce-income-inequality.html
And also:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w19829
Another factor the slanted video in the OP utterly failed to discuss, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the wealthy rigging the system in their favor.
Sorry, changed the sig again. Fame is fleeting, no?
:sigh:
Graduating despite not knowing anything about anything.