Quality of Life Continues to Improve: Minorities and Poor Hardest Hit
July 16th, 2004 | by Craig |Arnold Kling’s column in Tech Central Station makes the assertion that even though some people are arguing that the lower wage earners are worse off than they were thirty years ago, the opposite is true.
Much is made about a widening gap between rich and poor, but it seems that instead of the middle class disappearing, it is actually the lower class.
Kling outlines his assertion by pointing to items that were considered to be luxuries in 1970, and comparing the number of people all across the spectrum who owned those items then, and the percentage of poor people who own them now.
Some of the differences are striking. Some can be attributed to the fact that they weren’t even invented yet (cell phone), but for the most part, these items were hugely expensive in 1970, but are common place today. VCR’s, big screen TV’s, microwave ovens, and so forth are all included in the list.
One of the most common misconceptions is that the lower class is largely solid and immovable.
The important point to bear in mind is that “the bottom fifth of the wage distribution” does not represent some permanent group of people. Instead, it signifies the earnings of workers who at that time have the lowest levels of skills and experience. (Emphasis in original.)
Kling concludes:
The reality is that neither the rise in health care expenditures nor the standard of living of working Americans represents a problem. The false portrayal of these issues by the Left is more likely to provoke a crisis than to solve one.
(Also, make sure that you check out his blog.)
4 Responses to “Quality of Life Continues to Improve: Minorities and Poor Hardest Hit”
By Gman on Jul 16, 2004 | Reply
Several articles on capitalism and poverty…
http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=5201
http://www.fee.org/vnews.php?nid=4641
Wish I had time to comment myself….
By Ghost Dog on Jul 16, 2004 | Reply
The usual sophomoric analysis which doesn’t account for many factors including inflation, credit, the cost of medical, the prices of prescription drugs….
By Craig on Jul 16, 2004 | Reply
Ah, yes. Criticism with no solutions or counter-argument. That’s OK, that’s pretty much what we’ve come to expect from you.
Plus, calling a guy with a PhD in economics from MIT sophomoric could only come from you. What are your econ credentials, hmm?
But I’m game today, so let’s start with the low-hanging fruit: prescription drugs and medical costs. Dale Franks just tackled that here. (Dale is an author who just wrote an introductory economics text. Another “sophomore.”) In case you need more, here’s another article from one of those sophomoric econ PhD’s. Oh, wait, and just one more from another sophomoric PhD.
Inflation? There’s always been inflation, and there always will be. Right now it’s at a measly .3 percent, which is a long ways from what it was in ‘79 and ‘80 (11.3, and 13.5 percent respectively.) What of it? Although it’s been steadily climbing, it hasn’t been out of control in ages, and wages are largely keeping up.
Nice try, though!
By Ghost Dog on Jul 16, 2004 | Reply
I’m too much of a dolt to make my own argument, so I will resort to a personal insult.
Damn, but I’m an ass.
I mean, I could make logical arguments, countering each of your supporting points, but that would require thought and effort, and I am far too lazy to do something like that.
But, it’s far easier to make personal insults than to argue my case.
That’s just the kind of guy I am!