SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (69399)4/9/2012 12:09:14 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof1 Recommendation  Read Replies (3) of 103300
 
Re: [The slight decline in household size over the period of the nineteen seventies was MORE than offset by the rise of 'two wage earner' households over that same period, as WOMEN entered the working world in a big way.] "It doesn't ofset anything. If there is more income per person because there are more people working, than there is still more wealth per person."

You are tripping all over the words.

There was *NOT* significantly 'more income PER PERSON'... the term you are searching for is "per FAMILY".

In real terms --- per PERSON --- the seventies saw stagnation set in PER PERSON with wages, which began the squeeze on Middle Class incomes in particular.

The American Middle Class reacted to this by doing everything it could think of to pull in more money for their families... first the HOURS WORKED rose (workers worked harder and longer hours), next females entered the work force in large numbers (albeit at lower average wages than men) to help support their families.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News