The bottom end of the middle class? Isn't that now considered poor? The spread between rich and poor has become so pronounced and is getting worse. The more the spread broadens, the more people who thought they were middle class are becoming perceived as the poor class.
Step right up an get your label!
Middle class used to be a family with 2-3 kids with a home, car, and the mom stayed home with the kids.
IMO in order to do this these days you need to make about $70,000 a year. And I think that's a bit conservative. But the government looks at this from a tax standpoint as upper middle class. To me this is a family barely making it. Can this family save for college? Go on vacation? Doubt it. To live comfortably, being able to afford a home, vacations, college, this and that, I think this family needs to be making about 100,000 a year. Well, from a tax point of view the government considers this to be upper middle class-semi-wealthy, when in reality it's just a half decent living.
New homes where I live start at $400,000, and I've got some $650,000 places right around the corner from me. That's because builders aren't building modest homes anymore, they're all 3,000+ sq ft. Yikes.
Brian, et al, Middle class cannot be defined by income alone. Where a person lives has much to do with how good or badly one lives on $70,000. Cost of housing, state taxes, and car(s) will make a big difference. c.i.
cicerone imposter wrote:Scrat, I can see by your last post that you are a dreamer and idealist. "Minimum necessary" is and never will be in our government's vocabulary. How else are they going to feel important by spending billions of dollars during each budget? Where else in life will they have that opportunity? c.i.
So I guess we should just accept that. ???
It seems the majority of us are accepting what our government does - even when they lie about what they justify to go to war. My single vote doesn't have any impact on our government, but I keep voting. I thought Algore was too wishy-washy, but with 20/20 vision, I would have given my vote to him instead of Ralph. c.i.
c.i. -- demographics certainly have a lot to do with one's social status if your considering money as a measure. $70,000.00 in Orange County is a less than average salary considering housing is really expensive. In Silicon Vally, it would be lower class (unless one is perhaps prepared for a two hour commute to work!) However, the wages somewhat match the cost of living in many areas. In Orange County, less than $30,000.00 a year could be considered poor, depending on who is determining what is defined as poor. There is little objectivity in the interpretation of economics of a society that I can find. It boils down to what wool the politicians and the super wealthy want to pull over one's eyes.
cav sits back and waits for the real estate market to bottom out in Toronto so we can finally get a house...and it will bottom out, looks like sooner than later, especially in the light of SARS....
I'm going to make a sweeping statement that I would be surprised if refuted:
Most a2k posters are well above poverty-level in income and assets.
Therefore, as one who is living on less than $500 a month and receiving no "aid" from the government or indigent relief, I think I can speak of a point that is not often evident.
There are many "poor" in the US through catastrophic illness and devastating personal situations for a family member. Remember that anyone may have a child born with severe disabilities, and anyone may have a family member who is brain-damaged if not more in a traffic accident. Anyone may have a parent go into Alzheimer's or perhaps MS. Any of a number of things like this occur daily, hourly in people's lives. Suddenly, no matter where you "were", life changes. Many entitlement programs and funds are tied first to the specific type of health situation and then immediately to the present economic situation of the family. Many find that they cannot receive assistance until they have "spent-down" to the poverty level!
Once one is at that level to obtain needed assistance, it is mighty hard to come "up" again. A stereotypical example is the elderly person who must sell their home to be accepted into a nursing home at $30,000+ per year. My own son is receiving care services from a home care agency to the tune of $140 a day paid by the county since he is not overed by a "waiver" funding from his state of residence. Since he is not retarded or considered under a physical disability LABEL (that one requires the physical disability commence after age 18) he was not qualified for common funds funneled from the federal government to the state and in this case, the county.
In my case, we as parents were required by a hard choice to NOT work at our expected careers because to do so would exclude my son from Medicaid and Social Security Income he had to have to live. He is uninsurable. Even when we maintained the poverty level income to meet this, it meant that the 5 other family members could not get insurance for we had a family member who was uninsurable. Now, start picturing the years of medical expense we incurred just to meet common illness and dental needs. Picture 18 years of this until this son could be considered "a family unto himself" the age at which OUR income did not factor into his funding.
In the recent 6 years since he turned 18, his father and I have struggled and struggled to get a grip on financial necessity and now were in middle age years. Think now of how one gets that step UP to middle income.
I am only citing this one example to bring this discussion to REAL life as many live it and not merely speculate about it. As more children are born prematurely and saved, as more severe medical conditions are treatable due to advances in medicine, and as our life span continues to increase, more and more and more of the population continues to have these situations! No amount of "character", "good-decision-making" and "hard work" will pull one out of such dire poverty. And let me tell you, when you reach age 50 and beyond, it is damn hard to "start over"!
Colbalt - I understand.....
We all should have considered the source, Neal Bores (sic), 'cause venturing onto his site should required fishing boots to trudge through all the brown stuff.
cobalt, Trying to "start over" at age fifty and beyond is for all intent and purposes, impossible. That's the reality for most in that age group, they just quit looking for jobs after years of searching, or they end up driving a cab. c.i.
Sorry, folks, but I have a hard time imagining people earning $60,000 or even $30,000 per year as poor.
I know some poor people.
They don't come close to that.
$60,000 a year where I live in New Jersey doesn't get you very far -- not very far at all. But people earning that kind of money are FAR from poor.
I know people without savings who exist on less than $8,000 per year.
That's poor.
Cobalt - My heart goes out to you and your situation.
I don't dispute that their are those who are in need through no fault of their own. I think one problem with which we all wrestle is that the government tends to make no distinction between those who need help through circumstances beyond their control and those who consistently make choices and take actions that perpetuate their state of need.
This is one excellent reason for private and religious charities being preferable to government assistance, because private and religious charities do make these distinctions and thereby help those who need it both by assisting those "innocent" impoverished among us and by not enabling those who need to learn the hard lessons of the choices they make.
Scrat- Couldn't have said it better myself. Great post!
Who decides who is innocent and who is undeserving? How does that person/ entity decide who is innocent and who is undeserving? What happens to those who are undeserving?
They get there just desserts!
sozobe wrote:Who decides who is innocent and who is undeserving? How does that person/ entity decide who is innocent and who is undeserving? What happens to those who are undeserving?
In the case of private and religious charities, I assume they have individuals or groups of individuals who consider the merits of each application for assistance and make that determination.
In the case of the government, no one decides; they simply look at need without consideration of the circumstances that led to that need, and in ignoring this very important datum they perpetuate that need in every case in which it is being caused by choices the applicant is making regarding how to live his or her life.
