[URL="http://www.economicmobility.org/newsroom/"]http://www.economicmobility.org/newsroom/[/URL]
They aren't taking into account so many things. First of all, it takes TWO incomes to get by these days, so this 12% really isn't inflation adjusted or even adjusted for everyday life. Secondly, they aren't taking into account the things that have grown faster then inflation....health care, higher education, energy prices, etc.
IMHO - the picture would be a lot bleaker if this was taken into account. Anyway, this alone is alarming. What does this say about the viability of the American Dream?
Your thoughts?
According to the report, men who were in their thirties in 1974 had median incomes of about $40,000, while men of the same age in 2004 had median incomes of about $35,000 (adjusted for inflation). Thus, as a group, income for this generation of men is, on average, 12 percent lower than those of their fathers’ generation. While factors other than cash income also contribute to economic mobility, these data challenge the two-century-old presumption that each successive generation will be better off than the one that came before. The findings rely on new analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.
They aren't taking into account so many things. First of all, it takes TWO incomes to get by these days, so this 12% really isn't inflation adjusted or even adjusted for everyday life. Secondly, they aren't taking into account the things that have grown faster then inflation....health care, higher education, energy prices, etc.
IMHO - the picture would be a lot bleaker if this was taken into account. Anyway, this alone is alarming. What does this say about the viability of the American Dream?
Your thoughts?