OBAMA: Makes all-time high stocks, but what about the middle-class?

[s0me0nesmind1]

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/just...a-middle-class-recovering-202502943.html?vp=1

America’s middle class is shrinking.

Thirty-two percent of Americans actually consider themselves lower class… that’s up from twenty-five percent in 2008. With less job security, less disposable income and less opportunity, the definition of middle class isn’t what it used to be.

Here are some facts:
-Only half of American households are middle-income…down from sixty-one percent in the 1970s.
-Median middle-class income decreased five percent in the last decade.
-And, rising college costs have put more pressure on middle class families. Students will graduate this year with an average of $35,000 in total loan debt.

Meanwhile, the income inequality gap is growing. The wealthiest one percent of the U-S population is now 288 times richer than the average middle class American family.

All that said, it does look like the economy may be starting to look up a bit, and many are optimistic their circumstances will improve.
Which brings us to today’s Just Explain It. Is the middle class set for recovery?

First, how much money do you have to make to be considered middle class? Well, It depends upon whom you ask.

Recently the income range has been described as between $32,000 and $64,000 a year, between $50,000 and $122,000, and between $20,000 and $102,000.

To make the definition more complicated, it also depends upon where you live. For example, middle class in New York City isn’t the same as middle class in Phoenix. Your money just buys you more in Arizona.
So what are the signs that show a middle class recovery may be around the corner?

For one… Stocks. Both the Dow and S&P 500 are at all-time highs. That’s good news for small investors and people who have 401(k) or IRA accounts.
Two… Housing. Average home prices in various cities around the nation have been increasing. Last year they rose by almost seven percent. The increase will make it affordable for some homeowners underwater on their mortgages to finally sell.

And recently the unemployment rate dropped in 43 out of 50 states in April from a year before. 165,000 new jobs were added, and the unemployment rate fell to 7.5 percent – down from 8.1 percent a year earlier. Newly employed workers will have money to do things they’ve postponed like, buy a home or a car -- or even get married.

When asked about their financial situation, middle class Americans have mixed feelings. Their opinions are negative over the short term. But compared to ten years ago, 44 percent say they are more financially secure than they had been, while 42 percent say less.

What do you think? Did you learn something? Do you have a topic you’d like explained? Give us your feedback in the comments below or on Twitter using #JustExplainIt.

Simple Question for all the dem's who swear by Obama's recovery. How do you explain the current situation?

We are in a state of record breaking stocks - I guess you can say this helps some people that around retirement with their 401k.... however, that is hardly an important factor. An important factor is preparing the next generations for their retirement... if they can make it given today's economic factors. In all honesty, it's what every Obama freak in the world will cite the moment they have to defend him "OH YEAH! WELL WHAT ABOUT THE RECORDS ON WALL STREET?"

Do we need to remind the mentally retarded that Wall Street does not apply to the average middle class worker? In fact, aside from a recovery in their 401k, it does practically nothing other than contribute to jobs due to slightly higher demand.

But is that bringing down the price of consumer goods? No.
Is that lowering the cost of fuel? No.
Is that bringing up the middle class paycheck to coincide with the huge inflation that has taken place? Hell. No.
Has it stopped home foreclosures? Nope.

Oh - and as if it not going up was bad enough, the average paycheck has gone down.


So where is the explanation from your amazing gem president that is hell-bent on spying on the average american rather than taking care of their lives? Please give a reasonable explanation as to how your president is going to make a middle class instead of a upper-lower class.

 

[nageov3t]

it's the new America.

it felt like the same thing happened during the Bush "recovery" -- stock market surged, but waged remained flat and lost middle class jobs were replaced by jobs at Walmart and McDonalds.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

it's the new America.

it felt like the same thing happened during the Bush "recovery" -- stock market surged, but waged remained flat and lost middle class jobs were replaced by jobs at Walmart and McDonalds.

Jobs aren't replaced with retail. If anything those jobs are going down a la' self check-out, reduction in overhead.

Unemployment hasn't been this large since 1979, so I don't know what you're smoking other than the liberal drug known as "Percent Unemployment*



*Excludes: People not looking for a job, which is over 40%

 

[ivwshane]

You do realize that Obama is not a dictator nor a king and that his agenda has been, for the most part, blocked by republicans, right?

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

You do realize that Obama is not a dictator nor a king and that his agenda has been, for the most part, blocked by republicans, right?

154 Executive Orders

Super Majority first 2 years.

 

[Matt1970]

It's not really any President's fault. You can trace the decline of the midddle class right back to around 1970 when we started running trade deficits. Corporations and unions alike warned everyone not to buy imported crap or we would see job losses and the decline of the middle class. Sure technology and automations was bound to kill a lot of jobs sooner or later but when you run a nearly $1 Trillion trade deficit you're going to have problems.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

154 Executive Orders

Super Majority first 2 years.

Holy shit if you think counting executive orders can demonstrate dictatorship you really shouldn't be entering into the conversation. I don't mean that to be insulting. I mean you clearly are desperate but lack any basic understanding of what you're talking about.

 

[ivwshane]

154 Executive Orders

Super Majority first 2 years.

Yes thanks for demonstrating your ignorance. And yes in his first two years Obama was able to accomplish a lot, after that however, not so much.

So thanks again for demonstrating what the problem is

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Yes thanks for demonstrating your ignorance. And yes in his first two years Obama was able to accomplish a lot, after that however, not so much.

So thanks again for demonstrating what the problem is

Really? What was accomplished in the first 2 years, please do tell!

And if you say anything related to healthcare please don't make me laugh so hard to something not yet implemented and judging it as a good thing

 

[Matt1970]

Yes thanks for demonstrating your ignorance. And yes in his first two years Obama was able to accomplish a lot, after that however, not so much.

So thanks again for demonstrating what the problem is

There was a reason why Republicans took over the house. People weren't exactly happy with the way things were going.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I'm still waiting for some kind of argument, conversation, debate topic, etc...

What did Obama do to help the middle class? or since you're already blaming Bush and The Republicans - what are they preventing him from doing that he adamently wants to do? Funny, the only thing I see him adamantly speaking about that the Republicans refuse is related to guns. Better go find some more child victims in an effort to try and guilt people to vote a certain way

 

[Anarchist420]

The stock market bubble is going to burst eventually.

 

[Balt]

I haven't seen many people use the stock market as a justification for Obama's economic policies. Stocks are currently riding high because people can't even keep up with low inflation with the current bond and savings interest rates.

Even if people don't understand this, I think they realize that the stock market is not a good indicator of the economy. In fact, many have realized that it's VULNERABLE to GOOD economic news because there are fears the Fed will begin tapering its massive bond-buying program if the jobs/economic numbers are too good.

 

[thraashman]

154 Executive Orders

Super Majority first 2 years.

You're right, he has issued far fewer Executive Orders than the last several Republican Presidents did in the same time frame. He should issue more to get around Republican obstructionism. Also, super majority for about 3 months. It takes 60 votes to break a filibuster and Kennedy fell ill in May of Obama's first term and didn't vote again.

 

[BlueWolf47]

The stock market is the only place you can guarantee a return on investment right now. The market may be a little too high right now but its around where it should be. More and more companies are switching to paying out dividends which guarantee's a 5% or high return on your investment. And if you learn how to sell covered calls and puts you can easily achieve above a 15% return. With interests rates at 1% its really the only place to invest. And bernacky's stimulation has been helping but he wouldn't have to do this if congress was a functional part of our government.

 

[Fern]

The stock market so international and its market level determined by so many other things I don't it serves as any real barometer of the economy, especially during such an economically odd period as we are now seeing (e.g., global problems, the PIGS, QE III and ultra low interest rates etc.).

Fern

 

[Attic]

I haven't seen many people use the stock market as a justification for Obama's economic policies. Stocks are currently riding high because people can't even keep up with low inflation with the current bond and savings interest rates.

Even if people don't understand this, I think they realize that the stock market is not a good indicator of the economy. In fact, many have realized that it's VULNERABLE to GOOD economic news because there are fears the Fed will begin tapering its massive bond-buying program if the jobs/economic numbers are too good.

The stock market is suppose to be forward looking and an example of an efficient market. A number of folks in the mainstream media routinely claim this is the case... with a straight face.

If your done laughing, or crying, of course it's clear today the market is reacting to money printing. Growing into a beast that reacts to possible changes to money printing.

Financial institutions have been given opportunity to name their own price on toxic assets they hold and then get Bennie bucks for the effort. With the massive asset (debt instruments like mortgage back securities and treasuries) purchases the fed has been doing they've manipulated interest rates and banks (foreign and domestic) balance sheets.

If you think QE was to benefit the little people, you are either a masochist or gullible. Nearly all the wealth creation (printing) has gone to the 1% and much of it at the expense of the little people.

Question is do our votes actually count for anything. Obama was the one to curb the corruption in The country. He has failed so far.

 

[Jhhnn]

There was a reason why Republicans took over the house. People weren't exactly happy with the way things were going.

Yeh, they wanted a miracle to overcome the results of 30 years of wealth concentrating Reaganomics. It's not like Repubs delivered anything other than disaster when they controlled both congress & the executive during the Bush years, either.

 

[Patranus]

Stocks are up because companies are using their cash hoards to buy back stock.

 

[werepossum]

It's not really any President's fault. You can trace the decline of the midddle class right back to around 1970 when we started running trade deficits. Corporations and unions alike warned everyone not to buy imported crap or we would see job losses and the decline of the middle class. Sure technology and automations was bound to kill a lot of jobs sooner or later but when you run a nearly $1 Trillion trade deficit you're going to have problems.

Agreed. There are systemic factors which are against the middle class and which would afflict Presidents Obama, Romney or McCain. Both parties are in favor of keeping these factors, although each party has some it likes and some it merely tolerates and would change were it able to do so at a reasonable cost in political capital. Congress really has more to do with the economy than does the President, through the laws it crafts. This is good; a President who had more influence on the economy than Congress would become a dictator given his strength in other areas. Obama COULD adopt more business-friendly policies among the executive branch agencies he controls, but even that probably wouldn't have much effect on wages until our historically high unemployment is brought down to Bush-era levels, whereas the trade-offs (e.g. dirtier environment, fewer safety regulations) would begin immediately and tend to last. Not a good trade-off in my estimation.

Plus, Obama's being doing all he can to grow the middle class by taxing the upper class and gifting the lower class. Thankfully he's been stymied.

The stock market so international and its market level determined by so many other things I don't it serves as any real barometer of the economy, especially during such an economically odd period as we are now seeing (e.g., global problems, the PIGS, QE III and ultra low interest rates etc.).

Fern

I'd say the stock market has become an anti-indicator. A company can lay off a substantial portion of its workforce and almost always receive a nice stock price boost, even though that generally indicates a company in decline.

The stock market is suppose to be forward looking and an example of an efficient market. A number of folks in the mainstream media routinely claim this is the case... with a straight face.

If your done laughing, or crying, of course it's clear today the market is reacting to money printing. Growing into a beast that reacts to possible changes to money printing.

Financial institutions have been given opportunity to name their own price on toxic assets they hold and then get Bennie bucks for the effort. With the massive asset (debt instruments like mortgage back securities and treasuries) purchases the fed has been doing they've manipulated interest rates and banks (foreign and domestic) balance sheets.

If you think QE was to benefit the little people, you are either a masochist or gullible. Nearly all the wealth creation (printing) has gone to the 1% and much of it at the expense of the little people.

Question is do our votes actually count for anything. Obama was the one to curb the corruption in The country. He has failed so far.

Agreed. Bush's idea was for government to help ease the pain of liquidating the toxic assets. I'm not fully sure why Obama changed that - perhaps the cost was more than even government could spend - but instead we've made a system where the toxic assets aren't liquidated, but rather are traded at their vastly inflated value so that government now holds or guarantees most of them. We've fixed virtually nothing that caused our collapse, just poured money into it.

 

[BlueWolf47]

The good news is we aren't heading for i financial collapse in the immediate future. However, many of the systems that were in place that helped facilitate the collapse in 2007 are still in place. Im most worried about china's housing bubble.

 

[Jhhnn]

You're right, he has issued far fewer Executive Orders than the last several Republican Presidents did in the same time frame. He should issue more to get around Republican obstructionism. Also, super majority for about 3 months. It takes 60 votes to break a filibuster and Kennedy fell ill in May of Obama's first term and didn't vote again.

Don't try to confuse them with facts. They Believe! & that's that. They'll utter the same bullshit tomorrow, next week and for the foreseeable future. They have to- otherwise their worldview would show imperfection, and Truthiness demands perfection in all things.

 

[Jhhnn]

It's not really any President's fault. You can trace the decline of the midddle class right back to around 1970 when we started running trade deficits. Corporations and unions alike warned everyone not to buy imported crap or we would see job losses and the decline of the middle class. Sure technology and automations was bound to kill a lot of jobs sooner or later but when you run a nearly $1 Trillion trade deficit you're going to have problems.

So, uhh, how did our financial elite fare during that time period, particularly from 1979 forward?

Oh, wait... they got richer, much much richer at the expense of everybody else.

 

[Matt1970]

So, uhh, how did our financial elite fare during that time period, particularly from 1979 forward?

Oh, wait... they got richer, much much richer at the expense of everybody else.

I have debunked your statements way too many times. You just bore me now.

 

[herm0016]

So, uhh, how did our financial elite fare during that time period, particularly from 1979 forward?

Oh, wait... they got richer, much much richer at the expense of everybody else.

amount of wealth is not static. i would prefer we increse the size of the pie, than change how we cut it up.

People do not always get richer because of the plight of others. Me, for example, I work my ass off and make lots of money by providing value in an industry. I increase the size of the pie, and inturn spend more. my pie gets bigger,and each slice (spending) gets larger as well.