General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
This PBS: Frontline episode "Two Families" shows the true face of the Clinton "Recovery"
Factory jobs continued to bleed and were replaced with service jobs paying minimum wage, usually with no benefits.
That is where we are now. So take all the BS about how the US is "essentially full income" with a pinch of salt and a handful of Zoloft.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/two-american-families/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I didn't think Frontline would have the guts to take on this very real problem when the Clintons are running and still think Welfare Reform was such a great idea. It wasn't, and created what may be a permanent underclass of single moms in lousy jobs which they MUST take.
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)most successful admonitions in history: Bush and GOP crash everything with
tax cut and deregulation at they always do when power. The
Clinton's have not been in power for 16years.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)
:rofl
Opening act for Lewis Black?
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)When you start looking at millions of families, the real economic miracle becomes more clear.
See the chart of median income on page 2. Up, greatly, in real terms, at all levels and demographics
https://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/p60-213.pdf
This is logically impossible if high paying jobs were replaced by lower paying ones, as medians take a midpoint and are not skewed by high earners.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)"One factor that can complicate the picture is marital status. When a couple gets married, they are now counted as one household making the total income of two individuals rather than two poorer households making lower incomes. (This same problem exists when using all tax returns data because when a married couple files a joint tax return, the couple is counted as one taxpayer, not two.) If every dual-income married couple got divorced, even if their individual incomes stayed the same, the country’s median household income would plummet because the newly-single earners’ incomes would be lower than their previous jointly reported incomes."
"To make this phenomenon clear, let’s look at a hypothetical example. Suppose we have 5 people in an economy: Homer, Ned, Edna, Marge, and Maude, all of whom work and are unmarried. Homer earns $20,000; Ned earns $30,000; Edna earns $40,000; Marge earns $50,000, and Maude earns $60,000. The median household income would be $40,000 (Edna is the middle value).
But now suppose Homer and Marge get married and Ned and Maude get married. We now have only three households: (1) Edna by herself at $40,000, (2) Homer and Marge making $70,000 in household income, and (3) Ned and Maude making $90,000. Now the median household income is $70,000. No individual person’s income has changed, but we have a higher median income. We would never say that the economy is improving in this situation although median household income is rising."
http://taxfoundation.org/blog/what-does-median-household-income-really-mean
Z
whatthehey
(3,660 posts)
&w=1484
So....next absurd claims to throw doubt on a proven boom time...?
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)Because I'm a one person household, my income is less than the median household income even in my state, which is relatively poor. But because it's only me, and I'm retired, I don't have child-rearing expenses, or going to work costs. My car is paid for. It's not hard for me to live relatively modestly, although I'm not deprived in any way and still make several trips by car each year.
The largest change in our society since about 1964 has been the incredible influx of married women with children into the workplace.
When I was growing up in the 50s and 60s, my mother worked -- she was a nurse, there were six kids, and we needed the money -- and the only other moms of the kids I knew who worked were teachers. Very different now.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Gaslighting people about the economy won't work, ultimately, and plays into Trump's game.
People make more money, at every income level, today than they did 25 years ago, even after the 2008 crash. The income gains were higher in those 25 years than in the 25 years before them.
TheBlackAdder
(28,183 posts).
They still make around $8.00 - $8.25 after 3-4 years.
So, yes, there is only 4% who make exactly the minimum wage.
.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Can you provide proof that 1) your basic statement is correct and 2) that the increase in all income groups can buy at the same rate as 25 years ago. In other words, what is today's effective buying power for all income levels as compared to 25 years ago?
lewebley3
(3,412 posts)
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Thank you for posting it; it was well worth watching.
On the one hand, it is impossible to watch this and not feel for these two families. They both worked so hard to try to stay above water, and they did their best to stay optimistic and just keep moving.
On the other hand, this is a story about the decline of manufacturing jobs that has happened everywhere, all over the world, not just in the US. Here in the UK, they struggled with the same story. The show portrayed that those who were able to invest in college/retraining in a different skill were able to get ahead. (I didn't understand why the Stanley family didn't get student loans to pay for Keith's college tuition instead of putting it on credit cards - with their income, they certainly would have been eligible for loans.)
The daughter of the other family who said straight out, "I looked at my parents and thought, I don't want to have to worry about where the money is coming from all the time" and looked around and got herself a job at a hospital with decent pay and good benefits - I related to that so much, because that's exactly what I did before I could afford university. I worked 12 hour shifts in administration at a hospital so that I would have good Blue Cross insurance and a decent living wage.
I'm not saying everyone can "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" and I'm certainly not saying any of the people in this show were lazy (because they definitely weren't!) but I am saying that you have to work smart as well as hard. The family who ended up divorcing - they should have been prioritising their children's education every minute of every day - it's the only way they were going to pull themselves out of the poverty they were raised in. The parents should have realised that when they themselves couldn't get the good-paying manufacturing jobs anymore.
I could say a lot more about this show. It was extremely thought-provoking, and you can't help but fall in love with the two families a little. Thanks again for posting it.
Edited to add: I also didn't have children and a big part of that decision was how much it would cost.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)Employment was good. Wages ticked up slightly. FMLA was passed.
Some stuff in retrospect sewed the seeds for the financial crisis and accentuated the decline of the working class, but Clinton had a GOP congress.
He sort of made lemonade with lemons.
Clinton achieved the possible given the circumstances. They country was far more conservative then.
One thing I like about Sanders is he's addressing some of the issues that were left over or were by products of the things Clinton did that hurt the working class. However if we are to truly address what's wrong with the country right now we are gonna have to have more dems in congress, and progressive ones. As we know, some of the conservadems prevented both Clinton and Obama from achieving more even when Dems were the majority.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Response to Bonobo (Original post)
Post removed
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Post hoc meet prompter hoc. The deliciously juicy and absurdly sub literate logical fallacy common among the dogmatic and the hacks.
So this is where we are now, part two.
NoMoreRepugs
(9,413 posts)much as outsourcing and Americans desire for cheaper goods...
leftstreet
(36,106 posts)It's what they can afford
snooper2
(30,151 posts)All the kids!
Why keep having kids! One of the sons had a kid and dropped out in 10th grade...Another has THREE kids at 29 and they all live with their mothers and he has to pay child support-
WEAR CONDOMS UNTIL YOU ARE FINANCIALLY SECURE!
chknltl
(10,558 posts)Financial security was always my main concern. Looking back from 2016 one can see other issues of concern as well. I can not imagine having my kids raising their own kids in these times of Global Climate Change, an oligarchy for a government and wars....always the need by our government for wars.
George II
(67,782 posts)
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I've bookmarked it so I can watch it again.
I likewise was astonished at the having children when not even remotely financially secure.
I've also been telling people for twenty years or more that the community colleges are the very best thing about a generally good secondary education system we have in this country. They offer wonderful programs in specific fields that result in actual jobs. Too many young people have been sold a bill of goods about a four year degree, or worse yet an M.A. or a PhD in something that has very low employment possibilities. I'm all for kids going to school and majoring in what they love, but they need to realize that after school is done, they need to earn a living and support themselves.
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)SheilaT
(23,156 posts)should be snapping up people with liberal arts degrees, because of the more rounded education they have.
Some things are more secure than others, and in any case we can't foresee what cultural or technological changes are ahead of us. I'm old enough to recall quite clearly the shops that repaired televisions. I don't know enough about TVs to know exactly when they disappeared, but it's been decades since I've had a TV that could be repaired. On the up side, modern TVs last a very long time, if you're willing to keep them.
I'm under the impression that HVAC jobs aren't going away, but that's something I don't know a lot about. Right now hospitals still employ live nurses, cleaners, transporters, registration clerks, and various others. Some of those are difficult to outsource, but of course they can employ as few as possible.
There are still real teachers in most classrooms, and in my city there's a shortage of teachers, especially at the elementary level.
And so on.
I'm just glad I'm retired. Every so often I consider a temp or part time job, because I wouldn't mind extra money, but I don't need the money and I truly love not working.
SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)Won't help Sanders but could do wonders for Trump in November.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)The frustrating thing is that blue collar workers bought into Reagan's bullshit, and NEVER gave it up.
Shrug. I don't live in Milwaukee or Wisconsin, so I don't have to deal with moronic voters like that, but I know from people back home that there are PLENTY of low-income workers who continue to spout trickle-down, pro-GOP bullshit.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)What I fear if GFB Trump becomes President,just as I did back with Romney is a National Right to work law,,,But the hell of it is I dont think Hillary will or would defend Union jobs and also allow the NWL to take place.since Hillary is owned lock,stock and soul by the Corporate Mafia.
mckara
(1,708 posts)Artificially created by Alan Greenspan and Federal Reserve
