recently The Rogan Interview with Burney SandersThe Senator of the Vermont made a simple and sympathetic argument: people are angry today because, decades ago, families had money and did not have to constantly worry about emergency situations.
Things have changed, they argued. Good old days have gone. The balloon has come in the costs and the wages are stabilized. The middle class is shrinking.
It is a common claim, and is an easy to believe. We know those who are struggling financially, or we are struggling ourselves. There are many prices that they used to do. Many more houses have dual income in the 1950s.
It is easy to believe. This is also wrong.
Many people pay obeisance for Pachek, but it shrinks – does not grow – percentage of people. Let’s do boring work to review the figures, will we do?
In1990The middle house spent $ 67,750 for $ 2023. By 2023, the middle house was spending $ 77,280. This is an increase of about $ 10,000 in expenditure in 35 years. This is a total domestic expenditure, and it involves everything: healthcare, housing, education, food, clothes, gas, electronics, a house spends money in a year. So the expenditure has increased, but has wages increased?
Yes.
Real (inflation-reflected) average domestic income left $63,830 From $ 80,610 in 2023 in 1990. Hence real wages, after accounting for inflation, is about $ 17,000 and the expenditure is only up to $ 10,000.
This is to say that wages have increased rapidly than expenses.
In 1979,13.4 percentAmong the workers with or less income during federal minimum wages, while today only 1.1 percent of the workers earn federal minimum or below.
Between 1963 and 2022, the percentage of people living in excessive poverty has been almost stable, in between0.25 percent and 1.25 percent,
And the normal poverty rate has fallen. in 1990,13.5 percentAmerican was living in poverty; In 2023, the number fell to 11.1 percent.
Even domestic-loan-to-GDP ratio has steadily declinedsince 2011,
You do not have to see nap-upperization figures to know that we are rich compared to our parents. We have much more than them – high quality food, a large selection of advanced technology, far more access to entertainment. More people travel, have gym membership, go to college, alternative medical intervention (plastic surgery, body fat scan, testosterone replacement therapy). More people own pets and spend more money on them. The houses are big today and are more likely to have central wind and pool. The average lifetime has increased.
It is not to say that Sanders is wrong about everything. Some costs are increasing – education and healthcare and housing are more expensive than today. It is also true that the gap between rich and middle class has increased. But the thing here is that overall, wages are higher than speeds with rising costs. The middle class today is rich in compared to the middle class.
A more charitable approach to the Senator’s message is that, even earning more money in even the entire houses, they are only able to do so because both parents are working, while the more houses were the first single-yes. Physical wealth, in itself, does not fulfill people; Although wages could have increased, many people are less happy.
But the message of Sanders has not happened for several decades that people should focus more on traditional family values (a relationship with children, deep friendships, God), nor is it about avoiding toxic behavior such as substance addiction or passion with social media and video games. Sanders’ message is not that we should think less about physical wealth and more about spiritual wealth or lively communities. Their message has been that the middle class is getting poor, so Amir needs to give up his money so that the poor and middle class are more.
But if we explain ourselves, based on a lie, to redistribute more money, we can find that not only we solve the real issues due to social anger, then the progress we have already made, to ensure that more people have been erased to meet their needs.
Gabriel Makkini is a former teacher.
