The American Dream Goes On

Reader Comments
Back to article

It's actually guaranteed that most people will make more than the median income at some point in their lives- people's incomes tend to rise with age, so for most people its just a matter of time till they get enough promotions or wage increases and pass the overall median income and younger employees fill up the lower ends of the income distribution.

Yacob Foxe of WA 3:03AM August 19, 2010

Regarding the claim that the middle class is moving into higher income brackets... Statistics lie! Your statistics lie by not including the most important factor of all-- inflation. Take inflation into account and all your claims are for naught.

Bruce Taylor of AZ 2:33PM November 18, 2008

You have heard, no doubt, that in America the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Interestingly enough, our government's own numbers show that many of the poor actually get richer, and that quite a few of the rich actually get poorer. But for the rich who do actually get richer, and the poor who remain poor ... there's an explanation -- a reason. The rich, you see, keep doing the things that make them rich; while the poor keep doing the things that make them poor.
From Neal Boortz Commencement Speech Parody

Joe of TX 8:35AM November 11, 2008

I see you replicate the very same ill-conceived tactics you blame others for. That's shameful. Oh well. Apologists will always exist.

Dianne of KY 1:45AM November 11, 2008

well lets see the american dream should go on I mean people now a days dont appreciate what they have. They take everything for granted, we think the world is against like oh I never have money cause I have to buy food and pay bills. Well maybe you should be thankful you have food to eat. Other people are like I need a better job I hate this job. Maybe you should finish your education dont you think? Instead of fooling around and partying.

of 1:29PM October 31, 2008

Why is it that the top 1% pays over 50% of the taxes in this nation. I say that isn't fair. The Republicans don't take our money and give it to corporations. They help Americans by giving tax breaks to corporations. By taking less in the form of taxes it means more capital for reinvestment; that grows the GDP. With an increase of GDP means more Governmental Revenue. If you raise taxes you lower revenue; if you lower taxes you increase revenue. The problem is not that the rich don't pay their "fair share" but the fact that they government is spending our money on useless projects and increasing the size of government. As Reagan said, "Government is not the answer, Government is the problem". You say that the government should care about the poor, but why should they? If the Government would step out of our way it would be easier to succeed in this nation. By creating a false sense of entitlement to the poor it does only one thing and that is create more poor dependent on a welfare state. They only way for a man to bring another man out of poverty is to make poverty unattractive. By handing out checks and making poverty "livable" and it allows people to get by with the status-quot. Human-Beings are complacent creatures; the majority of us do just enough just to get by. We need to take responsibility for our own lives. After all; Responsibility is a burden of freedom.

Thomas of TX 2:49AM August 14, 2008

Columns such as above are exacty why politicians and the elitists they represent are thought out of touch by regular Americans.
Yes, I have internet. So what? Does that make up for the fact that the stock market effectively has been stagnant since Bill Clinton left office? Does it make up for the fact that gas and insurance and food have doubled or tripled? Let's not even get going on what Bush's deficits, like Reagan's, have done to college affordability and national infrastructure. Hell, we literally have bridges collapsing in America.
No, the richest were just too damned greedy and they destroyed America. It's really not a hardship for someone who inherits 50 million dollars to pay a little in taxes. After all, these people have no trouble taking 40% or more of my income and I've never made more than 75,000 dollars and my mommy and daddy didn't leave me so much as a note when they died.

CherylK of MO 3:23PM July 26, 2008

I hope that I am wrong but my impression is that Mr. Zuckerman is either too out of touch to realize what is really happening to the middle class. First, and this is basic stuff, I really get anoyed when I read statistics that have not been ajusted for inflation. Of course there are fewer people making less than 30k/year all those people ajusted for inflation are probably making 40k. Also my definition of the middle class is not some monitary value but represents a rang around the median income, that is the statistic I want to see.
My understanding is that many economists believe that we are now the worst country in the big 10 economic group in the ability of a person to change they're socioeconomic status in one generation. Not the middle, not second but the worst. I acutually believe in the conservative value of (as Ronald Regan would say) "pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps" the problem is I believe it for everyone including the children of the rich. This lack up upward mobility is ruinging our country and should be the issue of this presidential election.
Ed Pino
ps Thanks to the last oil boom, I was able to completely pay for my own University Education with vertually no loans, is that even possible today?

Ed Pino of CO 12:48PM July 20, 2008

The ultra rich in the world have taken over.The power and manipulation of the masses is complete.The American dream is now a nightmare.This country is heading down a dark path and it has been mapped by the elite.One percent of the population controls ninety percent of the wealth,and they know exactly how to own your life.

scott of FL 10:55PM July 15, 2008

"Finally as to the other comment about the nominal rates, I would hope the writer of this article wasn't that stupid. I have heard this information else where though, and given the length of time compared it doesn't quite make sense if it was unadjusted (I would imagine the difference would be much much more dramatic).
Mike of CA
Jun 26, 2008 01:46:20 AM [permalink] [report comment] "
Mike, sadly it's an unadjusted stat, comparing only nominal income. Watch any show on money (cnbc for example), and you'll note they essentially never make note that nominal comparisons vs. real comparisons are being used. It really is a B.S. game.
Hence 'tis a scam and Zuckerman is obviously promoting nonsense to his, and his associates' own ends. And thise ends do not accrue to the benefit of thee and me.

Scott of 11:01AM June 26, 2008