Yesterday, I argued the middle class is partially (but certainly not totally) to blame for its own woes.
Here’s a more in-depth look, based on Liz Pulliam’s smackdown of financial whiners and an analysis stating today’s middle class has less disposable income after essentials, to which I give a contrarian take.
I’ll buy the argument that college costs have unnecessarily, and pretty uncontrollably for the average middle-class parent, risen beyond inflation, as the second article states. But, housing costs? People have brought this on themselves by buying ever-bigger houses even as average family size continues to shrink.
Nobody put a gun to any family’s head and told them to buy a 2,600-square foot house, let alone a 3,500-square foot one, when an 1,750-square foot house would be adequate to their needs and a 2,200-square foot one would be more than adequate.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
October 16, 2007
Is the middle class partly to blame for its own woes, part two?
Labels:
middle class
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment