4 ms·

"The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it." - George Carlin Social Mobility, aka "The American Dream" has been

"The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it." - George Carlin Social Mobility, aka "The American Dream" has been flat since the decoupling of productivity and Labor in 1971. [1] [2] [1]https://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/reports/economic_mobility/PursuingAmericanDreampdf.pdf https://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/wwwpe... [2]https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-working-paper/2011/trends-in-us-family-income-mobility-1969-2006.aspx https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-w...

sokoloff 6y ago
From the first link, there are two critically important, overwhelmingly positive notes IMO: ■ Eighty-four percent of Americans have higher family incomes than their parents had at the same age, and across all levels of the income distribution, this generation is doing better than the one that came before it. ■ Ninety-three percent of Americans whose parents were in the bottom fifth of the income ladder and 88 percent of those whose parents were in the middle quintile exceed their parents’ family income as adults. Not only are the vast majority of people doing better than their parents, this effect is even stronger at the bottom of the distribution. That seems pretty damn good to me. End notes in the study confirm sensible treatment of the comparisons: Measures of family income are adjusted for family size and inflation. Measures of earnings are adjusted for inflation. Measures of wealth are adjusted for inflation and age.
- cammikebrown 6y ago
  If you look at it by generation, however, millennials are significantly worse off than Boomers: https://www.newamerica.org/millennials/reports/emerging-millennial-wealth-gap/ https://www.newamerica.org/millennials/reports/emerging-mill... Millennials typically are worth twenty percent less than their parents at the same point in life. My parents owned a house, two cars, and had two babies at my age. My dad was a public water maintenance worker with no college degree and my mom was in nursing school. The only people I know right now with a house, two cars and two kids are both accountants.
  - war1025 6y ago
    For reference, what age are you?
    - cammikebrown 6y ago
      I’m 31.
      - war1025 6y ago
        I am also 31. I live in the Midwest. I have a house, two cars, and three kids. I'm a software engineer making good but not great money, and my wife stays home with the kids. I don't feel that this situation is uncommon around here. I make more than the majority of my friends individually, but we're probably on the lower side of the spectrum when it comes to household income, at least among my friend group. That said, I completely agree that it used to be much easier to get a good paying job with a high school diploma or less. I went to university. My dad graduated high school. His dad went to school through 8th grade. There has been a significant trend towards delaying adulthood. Part of that seems to also mean delaying the ability to earn a living wage and support a family.
        mydongle 6y ago
        You're doing great and I think you should keep doing what you're doing. A non-insigificant number of young people like me are likely going to die at much earlier ages due to financial insecurity and all the problems that come with poverty. Depressed since you can't get a job. Then eventually not being able to afford a roof over your head due to increasing rent and cost of living. Suicide starts to become a serious consideration. No other options. Girls rightfully want guys who can give them financial security, so guys like me are doomed as genetic deadends due to not being born with the right conditions or with the luck to get ahead in life. Back then, they would've sent us to fight some rich fuck's war. Some of us might think that was preferable since they won't hire us to do anything else worthwhile for a living wage.
  - mywittyname 6y ago
- thoughtstheseus 6y ago
  Note the use of "family income".
  - p1necone 6y ago
    Yes - not surprised family income is higher - that's what happens when all members of the household have to work full time in order to afford rent.
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      The top quintile of earning households vastly exceed the bottom quintile both in terms of working household members and hours that each member works.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  Family size or family hours worked? I don't know how family size is directly relevant (assuming we're talking about nuclear families), but hours worked certainly has to be a denominator for an income measure being used as a proxy for quality of life. If my family works twice as many hours as my parents did, but makes $1 more, they come out on the good side of this measurement.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    Family size is relevant to control for changing demographics. If households used to average 1.6 adults and now average 1.7 adults (or whatever the actual figures are), you need to control for that when judging economic outcomes based on household incomes. When a couple moves in together, their finances generally improve a small amount (due to reduced overheads), but by less than the doubling that a simplistic spreadsheet might show, hence economic papers considering household income should make some account for household size.
- vkou 6y ago
  The average family has more workers, doing more work hours in it now than it did a generation ago. I'd hope the average income is higher. Also, how many years of the average family income does it take to buy a small family home these days? How many years of income did it take a generation ago? The median US family income in 2019 was $75,500. The median US single-family home price in 2019 was $327,000. [1] The median US family income in 1990 was ~30,000. The median single-family home price in 1990 was $79,100. [2] Somehow, I look at these numbers, and can't interpret them as being 'good news'. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=206085&rid=97 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=206085&rid=97 [2] https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/values.html https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/valu...
  - mrep 6y ago
    As long as you avoid the west coast, you should be fine as inflation adjusted price per square foot hasn't really changed [0]. [0]: https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/ https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/
    - mywittyname 6y ago
      But houses across the board are much larger than before. I live in a mostly 1950s era neighborhood and the houses are tiny by America standards. Almost all of them are <1,000 sq ft, two bedroom with a one-car driveway and no garage. A modern house in much of middle America is going to be at least 2,000 sq ft, but 3,500 is certainly common, as the average size currently stands at around 2,800.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - vkou 6y ago
        > But houses across the board are much larger than before. The problem, of course, is that in any given neighbourhood, the price of a smaller home is nearly the same as that of a larger one.

sokoloff 6y ago

From the first link, there are two critically important, overwhelmingly positive notes IMO: ■ Eighty-four percent of Americans have higher family incomes than their parents had at the same age, and across all levels of the income distribution, this generation is doing better than the one that came before it. ■ Ninety-three percent of Americans whose parents were in the bottom fifth of the income ladder and 88 percent of those whose parents were in the middle quintile exceed their parents’ family income as adults. Not only are the vast majority of people doing better than their parents, this effect is even stronger at the bottom of the distribution. That seems pretty damn good to me. End notes in the study confirm sensible treatment of the comparisons: Measures of family income are adjusted for family size and inflation. Measures of earnings are adjusted for inflation. Measures of wealth are adjusted for inflation and age.

cammikebrown 6y ago
If you look at it by generation, however, millennials are significantly worse off than Boomers: https://www.newamerica.org/millennials/reports/emerging-millennial-wealth-gap/ https://www.newamerica.org/millennials/reports/emerging-mill... Millennials typically are worth twenty percent less than their parents at the same point in life. My parents owned a house, two cars, and had two babies at my age. My dad was a public water maintenance worker with no college degree and my mom was in nursing school. The only people I know right now with a house, two cars and two kids are both accountants.
- war1025 6y ago
  For reference, what age are you?
  - cammikebrown 6y ago
    I’m 31.
    - war1025 6y ago
      I am also 31. I live in the Midwest. I have a house, two cars, and three kids. I'm a software engineer making good but not great money, and my wife stays home with the kids. I don't feel that this situation is uncommon around here. I make more than the majority of my friends individually, but we're probably on the lower side of the spectrum when it comes to household income, at least among my friend group. That said, I completely agree that it used to be much easier to get a good paying job with a high school diploma or less. I went to university. My dad graduated high school. His dad went to school through 8th grade. There has been a significant trend towards delaying adulthood. Part of that seems to also mean delaying the ability to earn a living wage and support a family.
      - mydongle 6y ago
        You're doing great and I think you should keep doing what you're doing. A non-insigificant number of young people like me are likely going to die at much earlier ages due to financial insecurity and all the problems that come with poverty. Depressed since you can't get a job. Then eventually not being able to afford a roof over your head due to increasing rent and cost of living. Suicide starts to become a serious consideration. No other options. Girls rightfully want guys who can give them financial security, so guys like me are doomed as genetic deadends due to not being born with the right conditions or with the luck to get ahead in life. Back then, they would've sent us to fight some rich fuck's war. Some of us might think that was preferable since they won't hire us to do anything else worthwhile for a living wage.
- mywittyname 6y ago
thoughtstheseus 6y ago
Note the use of "family income".
- p1necone 6y ago
  Yes - not surprised family income is higher - that's what happens when all members of the household have to work full time in order to afford rent.
  - s1artibartfast 6y ago
    The top quintile of earning households vastly exceed the bottom quintile both in terms of working household members and hours that each member works.
pessimizer 6y ago
Family size or family hours worked? I don't know how family size is directly relevant (assuming we're talking about nuclear families), but hours worked certainly has to be a denominator for an income measure being used as a proxy for quality of life. If my family works twice as many hours as my parents did, but makes $1 more, they come out on the good side of this measurement.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Family size is relevant to control for changing demographics. If households used to average 1.6 adults and now average 1.7 adults (or whatever the actual figures are), you need to control for that when judging economic outcomes based on household incomes. When a couple moves in together, their finances generally improve a small amount (due to reduced overheads), but by less than the doubling that a simplistic spreadsheet might show, hence economic papers considering household income should make some account for household size.
vkou 6y ago
The average family has more workers, doing more work hours in it now than it did a generation ago. I'd hope the average income is higher. Also, how many years of the average family income does it take to buy a small family home these days? How many years of income did it take a generation ago? The median US family income in 2019 was $75,500. The median US single-family home price in 2019 was $327,000. [1] The median US family income in 1990 was ~30,000. The median single-family home price in 1990 was $79,100. [2] Somehow, I look at these numbers, and can't interpret them as being 'good news'. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=206085&rid=97 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/release/tables?eid=206085&rid=97 [2] https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/values.html https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/valu...
- mrep 6y ago
  As long as you avoid the west coast, you should be fine as inflation adjusted price per square foot hasn't really changed [0]. [0]: https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/ https://www.supermoney.com/inflation-adjusted-home-prices/
  - mywittyname 6y ago
    But houses across the board are much larger than before. I live in a mostly 1950s era neighborhood and the houses are tiny by America standards. Almost all of them are <1,000 sq ft, two bedroom with a one-car driveway and no garage. A modern house in much of middle America is going to be at least 2,000 sq ft, but 3,500 is certainly common, as the average size currently stands at around 2,800.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - vkou 6y ago
      > But houses across the board are much larger than before. The problem, of course, is that in any given neighbourhood, the price of a smaller home is nearly the same as that of a larger one.