Median Male Earns Less Than in 1968

From Zero Hedge:

While the fact that a record number of Americans are living in poverty should not surprise anyone at this point, what should surprise many is that according to Table P-5 of the Census report of (Lack of) Income, the median male is now worse on a gross, inflation adjusted basis, than he was in… 1968! While back then, the median income of male workers was $32,844, it has since risen declined to $32,137 as of 2010. And there is your lesson in inflation 101 (which we assume is driven by the CPI, which likely means that the actual inflation adjusted income decline is far worse than what is even reported). The only winner: women, whose median inflation adjusted income over the same period has increased by 188%. That said, it is still at 65% of what the median male makes. So injustice all around…

Why has this happened?  Because since 1968 we have gone about destroying – via taxation, regulation, lawsuits and “nimbyism” – the ability of Americans to make, mine and grow things.  We can’t all answer phones in call centers, nor can all of us be computer programmers.  We have to make things, mine things and grow things…we have to produce wealth.  If we do, then wages rise…if we don’t, then they stay flat or decline.

It is time to restore the American economy be removing the barriers to wealth creation.  We have to allow people to work for a living – if we do, then wages will start to rise, fewer people will need government assistance and our overall finances – public and private – will improve.  If we don’t, then we die as a nation.  It is as stark as that.

And in order to do all that, we must over turn the current Ruling Class – they are in charge of Big Government and Big Corporation.  They are very well off and don’t care at all about how the average American lives.  They live in a world where struggle is non-existent, the family is unimportant and God is forgotten. As long as they are latched on to us, things cannot improve.  Remember that as we go in to 2012…anyone who is unwilling to shake up the status quo is unworthy of support…and the more revolutionaries  (ie, TEA Partiers) we can elect, the better.

About these ads

68 thoughts on “Median Male Earns Less Than in 1968

  1. Green Mountain Boy

    Make, mine, and grow things? NO NO NO, the solution is higher taxes and more government spending. More regulations are also needed. We need to eliminate all greenhouse gases and ban the using of all carbon based energy sources. We must make union membership mandatory and eliminate the right to work laws many states have.

    Once we have done this utopia is assured.

    1. js

      nope…utopia is not assured until all property and rental payments are sent to the Department of the Treasury….

      1. Green Mountain Boy

        Yupp, sorry js I forgot that one. The elimination of private property must be the paramount priority. Power to the proletariat!!!

      2. RetiredSpook

        OK, OK, ‘splain to me how eliminating private property gives power to the proletariat.

        Oh, you were being sarcastic? Never mind.

      3. Green Mountain Boy

        How dare you mock the will of the people! Comrade Chairman Thomas will not be pleased. The will of the proletariat will not be denied.

        You will embrace the workers paradise. Rsisistance is futile.

      4. Thomasg0102

        collection of lunatics on this thread.

        Mark,

        you do know that income tax rates are lower today than they were in 1968 don’t you? And you do know that corporations pay less in taxes now than they did back then don’t you?

        Maybe you like to live in denial and post half truths. Your followers certainly seem to soak it up, but thank god the sane people in this nation know better.

      5. tiredoflibbs

        tommy-boy is still sticking to his “income tax rates are lower today….” lie.

        After being proven wrong the dozen or so times he said this before, any normal person would realize he was wrong. The scourge of being a drone.

        pathetic.

  2. Cluster

    Off Topic, but just too fun to ignore. This from Paul Krugman, with the comment that don’t liberals realize that this type of rhetoric is irresponsible?? LOL

    Social Security is structured from the point of view of the recipients as if it were an ordinary retirement plan: what you get out depends on what you put in. So it does not look like a redistributionist scheme. In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in (and today’s young may well get less than they put in).

    http://www.bostonreview.net/BR21.6/krugmann.html

    Let’s keep this in mind next time Krugman, or other liberals, want to bash Perry again.

    1. Green Mountain Boy

      Comrade Krugman is a member in good standing of Comintern. Mock him at your own peril. Comrade Minister of State Securuty Watson shall be dispatched immiediately to discuss these counter-revolutionary thoughts.

      1. watsonredux

        You know, it’s hilarious how you guys reacted yesterday when asked the question of what government services you are willing to pay for. I listed a bunch of services you might want to consider, and none of you could identify any specific services that I listed that you would not be willing to pay for.

        Mark said he’s willing to pay 25% of his income in taxes. Cluster said he’s willing to pay 35%. The average across all income groups ranges from about 13% for the lowest earners to about 35% for the highest earners. You all are right in line with today’s reality.

        So your juvenile response is to refer to me as a communist. You’re just hypocrites.

      2. Thomasg0102

        watson,

        unless you’re a mennonite who thinks, looks, acts, and believes just like Green…he will call you a communist.

        His childish attempts at humor are a way for him to mask his lack of understanding on any topic. Notice how he always makes fun of everything he doesn’t agree with, and wishes to see people on the battlefield.

        I’ve got a feeling little mennonite man is really just a war monger.

      3. watsonredux

        The amusing thing is that, based on the way Green has described his closed society in the past, it seems that there is a lot of collectivism involved.

      4. Cluster

        Cluster said he’s willing to pay 35%. – watson

        I actually said that 35% is quite enough under the current tax structure. If you, or Obama, however had your way, I would be paying 39%, which is too much.

        The right way to go is to a flat tax of no more than 24% for the top income bracket – no loop holes – just a straight 20% – 24%.

    1. Mark Edward Noonan Post author

      Watson,

      That boat has already sailed….a middle aged man is pretty much set. But I know younger people who wouldn’t mind taking a stab at farming or manufacturing. I work for a better future and no longer desire to kick myself over the mistakes of the past.

      1. Sunny

        Farming? Are you kidding? Do you have a clue what it costs to farm? Obiously not. Unless one inherites a farming operation there is no way a young person could afford to go into such a business/

  3. Thomasg0102

    OT, but since others do it, here goes.

    Did anyone hear the exchange on health care the other evening in the CNN/tea party debate?

    Love how the crowd would rather let a person die if they don’t have health insurance rather than offer government assistance. Great christian values at work there.

    1. watsonredux

      Yes, we covered that yesterday. Today’s conservatives take great delight in seeing other people die. For them, it’s something to cheer about.

      1. Thomasg0102

        They are like modern day Nazi’s. Hell, if it was up to Green, he would fry all the so called communists and marxist just like my Germany did.

        It’s scary and sickening at the same time to think people like him exist in this day and age. Like a flashback from last century.

    2. RetiredSpook

      Thomas,

      I think you either didn’t hear the entire exchange, or you misread the audience’s reaction. The question was, if someone purposefully decides to not buy health insurance, knowing that, if they get sick or injured, someone else will pay their medical expenses, should public tax dollars be used to pay for their bad decision? Ron Paul said they shouldn’t. There’s nothing preventing compassionate Liberals like you from paying for other people’s bad decisions.

      1. Thomasg0102

        nice! atta way to rationalize wanting someone to die spook.

        so you’re supposed to be a christian, but have no problem letting someone die if they choose not to have insurance? talk about pro choice over there.

        and no, I watched the whole debate, It was sickening that people like that exist. I want Perry or Bachmann to win the nomination.

      2. watsonredux

        Spook, the fact of the matter is, when asked about whether a 20 or 30 year old with no health insurance should be left to die, the audience clearly rooted for him on to die. There was no question about it. And in the previous debate, the largest cheer of the entire debate occurred when the moderator merely mentioned that the state of Texas has executed 234 people on Perry’s watch.

        I’m sorry, but letting a young person die because he had no access to health care is a tragedy–especially in the richest country in the history of the world, and regardless of your political views. Instead of cheering for it, it ought to be cause for some introspection.

      3. Thomasg0102

        that’s conservatives for you. They want personal responsibility until it comes to bite them in the ass, then they want government assistance.

        don’t forget now, Spook has been on the government tit since the sixties.

      4. RetiredSpook

        Spook, the fact of the matter is, when asked about whether a 20 or 30 year old with no health insurance should be left to die, the audience clearly rooted for him on to die.

        That was not the way I took the audience’s reaction. IIRC, Paul was never allowed to finish his statement as to whether the young person should just be allowed to die. I took the audience’s reaction to be that taxpayer dollars shouldn’t be used to pay for someone’s bad decision.

        Tea Party folks are some of the most responsible and caring people I know. However, we’re not too tolerant of people who make bad choices and then expect someone else to take financial responsibility for those bad choices. It’s one of the really basic differences between Conservatives and Liberals.

    3. dbschmidt

      Of course Thomas & Watson realize that half (that is 50%) of the audience was chosen by CNN. Half TEA party-half CNN. Which side “cheered” and then was it at the question or the partial response?

  4. Green Mountain Boy

    An evolutionist lecturing on christian values. Hilarious there. Jesus commands the people to charity, not the state. Conservatives give vastly more sums of money to charity. This has been verified over and over. Liberals like Comrades Thomas and Watson want the state to provide everything.

    Who wants to play “Lets buy some votes”?

    1. Thomasg0102

      “An evolutionist lecturing on christian values”

      so I guess the people that shouted to let him die aren’t christians even though they say they are?

      Jesus commands the people to charity, not the state. Conservatives give vastly more sums of money to charity.

      so if someone is not religious, and doesn’t want help from other people due to their goodwill, but from the government he pays TAXES to…that’s wrong?

      Also, can you provide a link, or some sort of evidence about the assertion that conservatives give more to charity than liberals?

      You’re probably going to duck that last request, but that’s typical for a small minded person who believes anything he is told.

      1. Sunny

        I would venture to guess, since I do not know for sure, but I would guess that Bill Gates and his wife lean more to the liberal side than conservative; that most of the Hollywood types are more liberal than conservative, that Oprah is more liberal than conservative, that Warren Buffett is more liberal than convervative – and they are huge contributors to the needy and such causes. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton have foundations that actually give to those who are needy. The conservatives (i.e. Newt Gingrigh etc) set up their foundations to rake in contributions but it is hard to see that they actually spend it on the needy. What are the millionaire conservatives like the Koch Brother, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck doing to help those in need? How about nothing but helping themselves to ever dime they can get their hands on. Please provide examples of conservative dogooders.

      2. Green Mountain Boy

        Here is a good one for you. Bams classified a $13,107 contribution to the Congressional Black Caucus as a charity gift. hehe. Now thats what I call charuty!!

    2. dennis

      “Conservatives give vastly more sums of money to charity. This has been verified over and over.”

      This is such an old cliche it goes back to Christ’s time. Sure, they give vastly more amounts to charity. All the rich do – look at Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. You care to match up any of your conservatives with their philanthropy?

      But that misses the point entirely. Here’s why:

      As Jesus looked up, he saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. “Truly I tell you,” he said, “this poor widow has put in more than all the others. All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on.” Luke 21:1-4.

      Now if you can show me just one conservative doing that, you may have a point to make.

      Yes, Jesus told individuals to give to the poor, he did not instruct the state. But the Torah already commanded the wealthy to leave part of their income to the poor – what Jesus asked went beyond the mandatory redistribution of wealth to sacrificial charity. Something I see very few people, liberal or conservative, doing these days.

  5. Green Mountain Boy

    Your Germany? LOLzer x100. Keep trying though maybe someday you can get someone to believe you. CAPUT!!!

    1. Thomasg0102

      are you 10? “lolzer x100″??? you sound like my 10 year old niece.

      Also, it doesn’t matter if you don’t believe me, who gives a F**k. you’re one to talk.

    1. Thomasg0102

      BINGO! right on the mark! look it up yourself! that’s a great way to prove your assertion there Green.

      idiot.

  6. Green Mountain Boy

    Trying to prove? LOL again. You are under the impression I care about what you have to say. Let me state this in terms that you can understand.

    Du hast ein großes mund aber nichts dahinter. Understood. Your gums are flappin but you are being ignored. You are just irrelevant. Is that clear?

    1. Thomasg0102

      keep up the “I don’t care about what you think because I am right anyway” attitude. I am sure that gets you really far in life.

      Maybe that’s why you end up sitting out elections huh? truly crazy world we live in…I feel sorry for people in Illinois.

  7. Mark Edward Noonan Post author

    We seem to have utterly lost control of this thread…but don’t anyone get used to it: the rule still is to stay on topic.

    1. Thomasg0102

      I believe Green was the one who took it off thread by talking about communists and referring to others as communists.

      I posed a simple question to you up top, lead by example.

  8. watsonredux

    So let’s get back on topic. Mark’s post said we need to make, mine and grow things–a familiar refrain of his. I challenged him–again–to do just that, but he responded, “That boat has already sailed….a middle aged man is pretty much set. But I know younger people who wouldn’t mind taking a stab at farming or manufacturing. I work for a better future and no longer desire to kick myself over the mistakes of the past.”

    That’s a coop out, Mark. Sorry. If a middle aged man loses his job, you would tell him, tough luck, reinvent yourself, but don’t count on any support from us. And yet you can’t do the same. If you lost your job, no doubt you would be the first in line demanding unemployment because the boat has sailed and you’re unable to do anything else. Sheesh.

    You are simply unwilling to walk the walk. It’s that simple.

    1. Mark Edward Noonan Post author

      Watson,

      The topic isn’t about me; its about America. Nice try, though. If you can’t answer the question, leap to another subject.

    2. Bodie

      “You are simply unwilling to walk the walk.”

      Most conservatives are–they always have some excuse as to why they won’t live by what they profess their beliefs to be.

  9. watsonredux

    And the boat has sailed for your retirement, too, I guess. Social Security is an evil Ponzi scheme, and just as soon as Mark collects on it, it ought to be busted! And keep government out of Medicare because Mark’s going to need it!

  10. Green Mountain Boy

    Obviously you don’t get sarcasm. Things would only be better foe the working man if we would adopt soviet style communism. There would be no need of any study to find out how much anyone would make year to year.

    They would make whatever the state decreed they could make. It would truly be a proletarian paradise.

    1. Thomasg0102

      stick to the topic communist fear monger boy. Your posts are littering this already filthy blog to a point of oblivion.

      either get educated or get out. I hear suburbia in Illinois has some good community colleges.

  11. Green Mountain Boy

    Thomas, once again you prove you are not as smart as you think you are. When the choice is voting for Lucifer or Satan, I think I will skip that ballot. Six of one, a half dozen of the other, No?

  12. Green Mountain Boy

    Why do you need my validation? Whats in it for you. We are diametriclly opposed on every issue. Nothing you can say will ever change my opinion. Why do you need to argue with me?

    1. Thomasg0102

      its called debate you doofus. why are you on this blog if you’re not interested in debate?

      if you want affirmation of your beliefs, go to church, or go talk to a fellow mennonite. that’s the problem with this nation — people like you who think they are right on everything and don’t discuss or compromise on any issue. in some ways, you’re the cause and root of our nation’s sickness.

      grow up jesus jr.

      1. Green Mountain Boy

        I am done compromising with the likes of you. Compromise got us where we are today. 15.1 trillion dollars in debt. Compromise got us the TSA and 30plus czars that have no constitutional basis but act with authority.
        Compromise got us a congressional super commitee that again has authority but no constitutional basis.

        Compromise for compromise sake? Again, not with the likes of you.
        You are in all ways the root cause of our nations sickness.

        You have a nice day. Hope the sun is shining in Houston, or is it Austin?

      2. Thomasg0102

        that’s right! get ideological for me baby!

        why don’t you move out, since you can never win anything without compromise of some sort…especially in politics.

        bye bye doofus, hope the sun isn’t shining whereever you are.

        ps. I live in Austin, right close to UT.

      3. Green Mountain Boy

        As a matter of fact the sun is not shining here in the Peoria area. It is going to rain. The rain is needed. Good for the crops i am raising.

        Compromise with Thomas equals doing whatever Thomas says. Not really a compromise is it?

  13. watsonredux

    Mark said, “The topic isn’t about me; its about America.”

    No, Mark, this topic is about you, and people who think like you. Are you not a part of America? Or are you just to talking about some other Americans?

    Every day you come up with simplistic answers like, “we just need to make, mine and grow things.” And yet you are unwilling to follow through yourself. To me, you are a shining example of today’s conservatives in action, armed with simple solutions that are no solutions at all.

    Honestly, Mark, I wonder how you can espouse the political beliefs that you do and continue to live like you do. By your own admission here on this blog, you are a 50-year old who expects to work until he’s 70, doing entirely non-productive work. You will rely on Social Security and Medicare in your old age, and yet you abhor any redistributive programs. By your own definition, you will be a drag on the nation, the economy, and the taxpayers for the next 30 years.

    This is the achilles heel of your entire political and philosophical argument–at least as you present it here. Until you resolve it, what you say on the subject lacks credibility.

  14. Cluster

    I want to comment on the 30 yr old question posed by Blitzer, and the premise of the question is ridiculous and nothing more than appealing to the hyper emotional left. The answer to the question is of course that person would receive the care they need, as they ALWAYS have, but that completely glosses over the actual problems of escalating healthcare prices brought on by layers of government, insurance, regulations, and administration costs that have nothing to do with actual care. What this country needs to do is STOP listening to the hyper emotional left, and let’s deal with healthcare from a BUSINESS perspective.

    1. Thomasg0102

      healthcare should be run as a non profit.

      its been run as a business by drug companies, doctors, insurance companies and other care providers for the past 75 years…and access to care has degraded each decade while costs have gone up and profits have gone up.

      to think that the conservatives believe everything should be run as a business is ignorant at best and dangerously deranged at worst.

      1. tiredoflibbs

        tommy-boy flails: “its been run as a business by drug companies, doctors, insurance companies and other care providers for the past 75 years”

        And it worked until the government got heavily involved 45 years ago, hence the degrade each decade.

        Tell us who proposed the great federally certified HMO legislation and wedged the federal government into the health care industry? – Ted Kennedy and the Democrats.

        Tell us who protects the lawyers in tort reform of excessive malpractice suits? The Democrats.

        Who opposes real reform to get government out of the industry and place reasonable criteria for malpractice suits? Democrats.

        Who is responsible for this latest surge in government involvement in health care? Again, democrats.

        Try again tommy-boy.

    2. Cluster

      In the 1960’s, following my parent divorce, my mom and brothers and sisters use to walk right into our doctors office which was just a few blocks away, and we were there frequently with my sister. Not long ago I asked my mom if she ever had insurance, or how she use to pay for that. Her answer – no insurance, and she would pay according to what she could afford, and the doctor worked with her on payments.

      In today’s world, costs have escalated not because of the doctors, mainly because of the layers of crap. Aside from major proceedures, health care can still be delivered efficiently and cost effectively by stripping away the layers. For major procedures, health insurance could be more affordable if insurance companies were free to compete in every state for everyone’s business, and I have no problem with doctors making profits.

      1. dbschmidt

        That is how it was when I was growing up except we had an affordable “catastrophic” insurance binder in case. We paid the doctor’s and if we couldn’t afford the entire payment–he would let my mother and eventually me make payments. Worked just fine without government intervention between the patients and the doctors.

  15. Cluster

    I also want to comment on the “compromise” issue – the left and the right are as far apart as I have ever seen in my lifetime, and we have now gone beyond difference in simple policies, and now disagree on the fundamental role of the federal government, and that is what I hesitate to compromise on. Liberals are advocating a large, centralized, bureaucratic government that regulates nearly everything we do. I oppose that with every fiber of my being, therefore I will oppose any compromise on that premise.

  16. cory

    I don’t get it. The quotation seems like an incredible justification for increasing the tax rate on our highest tax brackets. The median income has decreased, but the mean has gone up a great deal. Which in turns means we are making more money, but more and more of it is getting into fewer and fewer hands.

    Not only that, but the comparison is being made to 1968, when the top marginal tax rate was 75.25%! If that’s what you are pushing for, by all means, you’ve done a great job making your point. Sign me up.

  17. David

    This has been covered a great deal by plenty of economists. The country is doing a great job of “making, mining, and growing things” just like Mr. Noonan wants. This can be seen in our implacably rising GDP. In fact, since the workforce is shrinking, but GDP is still going up, worker productivity is at an all time high, but worker pay is not.

    This is because the progressive tax structure established during the Eisenhower administration has been destroyed, allowing the wealthiest Americans to gain wealth vastly faster than the middle and lower class Americans, giving them incredible power over both public and private enterprise.

    The power has been used to bust unions, which further reduces the power of the working class. Once this is done, the pesky cost of production due to labor can be reduced with reckless abandon as all the bean counters are taught to do in MBA school. What are the workers gonna do? Vote Republican? (Bonus if you know where that’s from!)

  18. watsonredux

    Custer said, “I actually said that 35% is quite enough under the current tax structure. If you, or Obama, however had your way, I would be paying 39%, which is too much.”

    Oh, so you didn’t mean that you would be willing to spend 35% of your income on taxes? You just meant that the top marginal tax rate for your federal income tax should be 35%? Big difference. Please explain.

  19. watsonredux

    Custer said we need to “deal with healthcare from a BUSINESS perspective.”

    I’d love the here the business plan for providing health care for old, sick people.

    1. dbschmidt

      Look up Galveston county, Texas who opted out of SS over 25 years ago and are now returning 3 or more times than SS to it’s retirees. Add to that there are plans for retires to choose from just like Medicare & Medicaid;

      In Galveston County, Texas (zip 77573), you have at least 94 available plans to choose from, of which 41 meet your criteria. [Medicare]

      Above are 7 excellent plans that have high customer satisfaction.

      Old, sick, [indigent] people perhaps? Charities abound. Let people do what people do best (including keeping more and spending of their money) and they will solve the problems government only screws up royally while making a few politicians and their friends rich.

      1. watsonredux

        db, I looked up the medical plans to which you refer in Galveston County:

        http://www.senioreducators.com/plans/list?county_id=135300&zip_code=77573

        These are all Medicare prescription drug plans that contract with the Federal government. You must be enrolled in Medicare to use these plans. If I’m wrong provide the link to what you’re talking about.

        I doubt that’s what conservative folks have in mind when they want the government out of health care and run like a business. So I’m still waiting to hear about these insurance companies who think they can turn a profit by insuring sick, old people.

        In my state, insurance companies are free to insure or not insure whomever they want. Guess what? They don’t insure you if you were or are sick. Or fat. Or a bunch of other reasons. Why? They can’t make a profit off of people like that. Further, we know from the insurance company’s own testimony before congress, as well as other documents, that they actively cancel the insurance of people that are costing them money.

        Your suggestion of charity is fine, and it could help, but not nearly enough. And it’s simply incorrect to think that charities are uniformly efficient and free of screw-ups and corruption.

        Do you have any relatives on Medicare, db?

Comments are closed.