3 ms·
I'm not talking about a category of employment as in "delivery driver," I'm talking about a category of employment as in "jobs accessible to bottome 50% of peop
by rsheridan6 14y ago
I'm not talking about a category of employment as in "delivery driver," I'm talking about a category of employment as in "jobs accessible to bottome 50% of people." If relative wages are declining in that category, it's hard to make a case for increased prosperity, unless you're just talking about the other half, or about increased work hours.
- yummyfajitas 14y agoIf relative wages are declining in that category, it's hard to make a case for increased prosperity... I think you meant to say "if absolute wages are declining". Increased prosperity could easily make relative wages decline - the bottom might increase by 10%, while the top might increase by 20%. But forget the bottom 50%, lets look at people below the poverty line. Even most people below the poverty line today have a house (with 2 rooms per person) and a car. And that house has all sorts of amenities that were uncommon even for the mid to upper classes in the 1970's. http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/h150-07.pdf http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/h150-07.pdf The numbers suggest the lifestyle formerly characterized as "middle class" is now accessible to virtually every American. I.e., we have more now than ever before.
- rsheridan6 14y agoAnyone below the poverty line with a house is probably not paying for it themselves. If they're more likely to have houses now, it's probably because they're getting Section 8 now instead of apartments in the projects.