Reaganism has killed the middle class, still going. Great job!

Reaganism should have ended years ago....now all are paying 20-30% in ALL taxes and fees, all the new wealth stays with the rich, and the country's in frastruction is getting third world...


The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Zh1bveXc8rA/SuddUhLWUaI/AAAAAAAAA7M/iU2gefk317M/s1600-h/Clipboard01.jpg
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...able=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010
4 = http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/household-sector-debt-of-gdp
4 = http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/
5/6 = http://www.businessinsider.com/15-c...lity-in-america-2010-4?slop=1#slideshow-start

Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts

 

Look at #3 and #4. Middle class wrecked. And the the big orange idiot wants to cut taxes on the rich and himself AGAIN. Unbelievable...

 

Facts kinda quiet conservatives.

 

Gee...they really do!!!

 

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Companies produce more by finding ways to increase productivity by modernization and improvement of production techniques. Workers haven't suddenly started working harder. This is what happened in the mid-200's when we had 52 months of full employment and average to high labor participation rates. You couldn't find people to hire because everyone was working. So companies had to find ways to increase productivity and some of that came from robotics and better utilization of resources and improved machines to manufacture goods. And because everyone was working middle class incomes rose and people were doing quite well. And increasing productivity usually increases profits and EVERYONE can benefit when our companies increase profits, it does wonders for your 401k you know.

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

So what, the make the largest investments but that has increased under Democrat policies with the income equality growing at historic proportions. The way to lower it is to put people at the bottom to work and make their labor more competetive so that they earn more and to not be so hung up on income inequality that is not the issue.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

Well what are your savings for? They are to get you through times when your income drops or between jobs. There should be no guaranty of your income because you lose your job, why should someone else have to work to support you. But how about we not have so many WHO NEED TO BE COMPENSATED in the first place? Isn't THAT the answer?

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Then let's decrease the cost of EMPLOYING them and get them back to work!!!

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

At it's worst under Obama and the Democrats. And again it is the nature of our modern global fast paced economy that there going to be a few people who can get REAL rich in a short time, but it has little to do with people in the middle and at the bottom, you can't legislate that away nor tax it away. We have seen results of the left trying to do that and it has decimated the middle class because that is where good high paying jobs are created. Government need to get out of the way and allow more of it.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

It;s there if you want to go out and get it but it's the government that is making it go away with it's obstruction and policies. Government cannot supply you your American dream nor can it force someone else to do so. It needs to get out of the way and let business and labor together do it.

 

So what you're saying is that you don't dispute the OP...you just don't care...

 

Stow the union label chop charts, cherrypicks and out of context nonsense. It's been debunked here over and over. Save it for the bobbleheads at the union hall.

1. We have whole industries, casual dining at $10-20 a meal or more, shopping malls teeming with middle class people spending middle class wealth, specialty retail from Nordstroms selling middle class women $50 face cream to Bass Pro Shops selling $100 fishing rods to middle class men. None of these existed in any meaningful way when I was a kid, proving handily that the lot of the middle class has improved drastically in the US over the last 50 years... or maybe those industries run on magic fairy dust and not middle class $$?

2. Our CHILDREN have more purchasing power than 80% of the world's countries have GDP, and the Xbox and Pixar video aisles in the Toys R Us (we had Sears and that's about it) prove that. Half of our movie industry is devoted to children's entertainment. When I was a kid, a phone was a thing on a wall that you better not be on more than ten minutes at a time, and not at all after 8PM. Today middle class kids have Cray supercomputer equivalents in their hands and earphones playing a whole industry worth of music on their heads. When I was a kid, sneakers were $20 and you got a pair every six months when you outgrew the moldy holey old ones. Kids had patches on their clothes. I had patches on my knees. I haven't seen ANY of that at ANY income level lately.

3. Our celebrities are paid based on the ad revenue they generate, and that ad revenue comes directly from sales to the middle class. Vanna White sure didn't make $8 million a year for flipping letters, nor Ellen DeGeneres make $70mill a year in the 80s-90s. Football stars didn't make $20mill a year... all dependent on SALES of PRODUCTS to MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE.

4. We have had a decline in unskilled labor pay due to globalization... thank your greedy union bosses for that. We have also had a vast increase in wealth due to people creating miracles like the forum tech and cheap computer you cut paste union drivel with. Those people get stinking rich as people line up to buy their wares... VOLUNTARILY. The guy who invented Email can have ten thousand solid gold yachts to haul around mountains of cocaine for all I care, he earned it. Then, when they do get rich, they give money away hand over fist, a majority of it to leftist causes. Microsoft, a single company, created at least 10,000 millionaires, and they are involved in every kind of charity imaginable. YOU just don't like it because the government man and the union man don't get enough of a cut at the end of a gun barrel. Sorry bout that.

So keep wearing the sackcloth and ashes over the "declining middle class" that somehow always needs more of the gov-edu-union-contractor-grantee-MSM Complex to fix. We give it billions and billions already, half our paychecks in taxes at all levels, and somehow it's never enough, they continue to spend our grandchildren's money in service of their expedient, filthy greed. But let's do just open our wallets more and give them more and more tax revenue, they will surely change their ways and become competent and graft free of a sudden. That's the ticket!

 

Oh, almost forgot the idiotic "Reaganism" part. Ronald Reagan was the President for 8 years in the NINETEEN EIGHTIES. There have been several administrations since including 16 years of Democrat Administrations. Contrary to your misconception, the President does not set most of the tune of federal spending, Congress does, and Congress was Democratic while Reagan was in office, making the "Reaganism" claim doubly moronic. But I get it, most of the constituency that buys the kind of snakeoil OP is peddling has no conception of history before the 1990s, so if whatever our problems are can be blamed on something they have little awareness of, that snakeoil will go down real smooth. That about sum it up?

Finally, main link of OP's blog post is "404 not found." Why does that not surprise me?

 

Liberal policies contribute to favoring the wealthy as well. So, its not just Reaganomics. Obamanomics have had a role, the government has a role, and so does the capitalists.

 

The democratic party is the party of the rich, so I am sure they are behind it. Hillary Clinton has more support from billionaires than any other candidate. So, I am pretty sure your not a democrat because you are complaining about the rich hoarding all the wealth, which is due to a lot of policies that favor them.

 

It's the Reaganist policy that the GOP defends to the death...not Obama duh....

- - - Updated - - -

It's Reaganist tax rates and policy, still killing the middle class.

 

Trying to blame Obamacare for the 35 year (documented) decline of the middle class is beyond dishonest

 

Balogna...what Obamanomics? Nothing passes the GOP obstructed congress. Reaganomics drones on, defended to the death by the bought off, lying, thieving, selfish, greedy New BS GOP.

 

Once again, patently ignorant. The Reagan tax reforms were revenue positive, closed more common tax shelters than brackets were lowered and streamlined. The IRC was a mess before 1986, and after decades since, is a mess again, 15,000 pages in annotated versions. 4 Presidential administrations and numerous Congresses have continued the Reagan tax reforms, discontinued some parts of it, changed others, in the THIRTY YEARS since they were created, so calling our current tax code "Reaganist" is just plain stupid, transparent union hall trolling.

 

Oh really?
Obama bailed out the U.S. auto industry, his stimulus package made it through. Both democrats and republicans are capitalists, so the top 1% will continue to crush the middle class. They both have got their ways many times.

 

Top rate is under 40% and full of GOP loopholes- that's New BS GOP stuff, defended to the death for their god Raygun, who would probably vote Dem now lol...

- - - Updated - - -

Revenue positive by doubling the payroll tax on workers...still Reaganist duh...

 

Now you are just making things up, stick a fork in the union label dungpile in the OP.

 

The middle class is being destroyed by globalization. Progressives dream of a world without borders and a "brotherhood of man, sharing all the world" as John Lennon said. Congratulations, that means that rich countries like the US will be normalized with dirt poor 3rd world nations. Isn't this what you guys wanted? A worldwide redistribution of wealth?

 

What a crock. The GOP is far more in favor of "globalization" than progressives ...

Welcome to backwards world

 

Who do you think is more willing to support open borders and a worldwide redistribution of wealth? Your average Democrat or your average Republican?

 

I just told you. The GOP.

Who wrote,sponsored,and passed NAFTA?

The GOP.

Where did Fast Track For China come from? The Bush Administration.

All over Democratic nay votes.

 

Sorry, that's the wrong answer. Democrats are much more likely to support open borders than Republicans.

 

So you just ignore the facts you don't like?

What does any of that have to do with NAFTA ad Free Trade with China?

Ohhhh...you'd rather not talk about things that actually matter...

Newsflash...your boogeyman "illegal immigrants" deal is NOT what globalization is about

 

You can't handle facts that show the GOP wrecks the middle class and the country? BTW, wth are you talking about lol?

 

Wall? Most overstay their visas duh...
Only a good SS ID card with a chip will work. Blocked by hypocrite GOP of course...