Thursday, July 31, 2008
Health Care
Gas prices are in the political spotlight right now; this year's spike has been painful and the calls for action — and heads — have pushed other issues to the side. But it is worth remembering that when it comes to real, sustained growth in costs, when it comes to real, sustained erosion of families' disposable income, gas still can't hold a candle to the real elephant in the room: health care.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
MIDDLE CLASS
The Middle Class in America Isn’t Happy
Posted in: individual
There has been a lot of talk about which presidential candidate has the best tax plan for “middle class” America. It’s an interesting question because I’m not sure that anyone can actually define “middle class” anymore - my readers seem to feel that it’s all over the place.
Middle class - as it’s widely defined - is generally defined as those families who are in the middle of income brackets. That can be confusing. Based on 2005 Census Bureau reports, 40% of Americans earned less than $36,000 a year (the bottom 20% earn less than $19,000). The next 40% - the so-called middle class - reported betwen $36,000 and $91,705 of earnings. The top 20% of earners, making $91,705 or more, earned 50% of the income reported in the US.
[Kelly’s geeky note: From a math perspective, that’s pretty interesting: while the richest 20% took in nearly 50% of income, the middle class (representing 40% of Americans) earned a fairly representative proportion of total income (37.5%).]
So there you have it, statistically you are middle class if you earn between $36,000 and $91,705 (adjusted for inflation since 2005) per year. Easy, right?
Not so fast.
There are a lot of factors that pure numbers don’t take into consideration including the size of your family and the cost of living in your geographical location. Lots of folks who make more than $75,000 per year may live comfortably in some areas of the world - but that kind of money won’t take you very far in areas like New York City or San Francisco where housing costs alone can easily reach $1 million for relatively modest homes.
The reality is that almost everyone thinks that they’re middle class, though of course, you can’t be. And realistically, you don’t want to be right now. Here’s why.
Elizabeth Warren, professor at Harvard Law School, just testified before the Joint Economic Committee in Congress that the middle class is suffering. How much so? Adjusted for inflation, median household income for middle class families has dropped by $1,175 between 2000 and 2007 - that represents a significant decline. While income is dropping, expenses are rising. The average family is spending $4,655 more each year on basic expenses, such as gas, food and health insurance.
Let’s talk the bane of my existence (as most working parents): child care costs. Families with children under the age of 5 spend $1,508 a month more on child care costs (yes, do the math, that’s more than $18,000) - older children cost about half that much. You don’t escape during the teens, either: the cost of sending a child to college has more than doubled over the last 20 years, far outpacing increases in income.
Also in the news these days are those folks who cannot afford housing. The proportion of families who spend more than 35% of income on housing has quadrupled in a single generation - a disproportionate number of middle class families spend nearly half of their income on housing. Two “middle class” Americans earning an average salary could not afford to pay the mortgage of a median-priced home in 2/3 of the nation’s metropolitan areas including my own Philadelphia (which is reasonably priced, I might add). In addition to the increased costs of housing stock, real estate taxes have also increased. Most municipalities have not tweaked their systems to account for a disproportionate increase in property “value” (albeit somewhat artificial) - this means that taxpayers are often paying too much (for reassessed properties at historic rates) or too little (for properties that have not been reassessed) in real estate tax from neighbor to neighbor. The high costs, as much as $10,000 in some middle class neighborhoods, are hitting folks in the pocketbook.
According to Warren, if you include real estate taxes, along with Medicare and other taxes, the total tax burden for a two income family today is 38% more compared to one income families a generation ago. And yes, I realize in a progressive tax system, that was bound to happen. It’s not so much that it happened that’s surprising, it’s what it means. It means less money in the pockets of middle class Americans at the end of the day.
Income is decreasing and expenses - including taxes - are increasing. So what are people doing? Charging up a storm. Credit card debt for middle-income families rose 75% between 1989 and 2001, according to Demos, a non-partisan public policy organization. Warren’s report claims that 10% of total disposable income in the United States goes to paying off credit cards. This, of course, jives with much of what you told me you would do with your economic stimulus check.
There has been a clamoring for a second stimulus package to offer some relief. Despite the rumors to the contrary, no such package has yet been seriously proposed. Jared Bernstein, senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute, has advised that a package should rely on getting funds together for the states, particularly for infrastructure projects, and not into the hands of taxpayers. Infrastructure means jobs - this was made abundantly clear when Congress thought about tinkering with the gas tax.
Second stimulus package or not, it’s clear that something needs to change. What is the breaking point before the middle class is no longer middle class?
Tags: America, cost of living, Economic Policy Institute, economic stimulus, economy, Elizabeth Warren, gas-tax, middle-class, second stimulus package
Posted in: individual
There has been a lot of talk about which presidential candidate has the best tax plan for “middle class” America. It’s an interesting question because I’m not sure that anyone can actually define “middle class” anymore - my readers seem to feel that it’s all over the place.
Middle class - as it’s widely defined - is generally defined as those families who are in the middle of income brackets. That can be confusing. Based on 2005 Census Bureau reports, 40% of Americans earned less than $36,000 a year (the bottom 20% earn less than $19,000). The next 40% - the so-called middle class - reported betwen $36,000 and $91,705 of earnings. The top 20% of earners, making $91,705 or more, earned 50% of the income reported in the US.
[Kelly’s geeky note: From a math perspective, that’s pretty interesting: while the richest 20% took in nearly 50% of income, the middle class (representing 40% of Americans) earned a fairly representative proportion of total income (37.5%).]
So there you have it, statistically you are middle class if you earn between $36,000 and $91,705 (adjusted for inflation since 2005) per year. Easy, right?
Not so fast.
There are a lot of factors that pure numbers don’t take into consideration including the size of your family and the cost of living in your geographical location. Lots of folks who make more than $75,000 per year may live comfortably in some areas of the world - but that kind of money won’t take you very far in areas like New York City or San Francisco where housing costs alone can easily reach $1 million for relatively modest homes.
The reality is that almost everyone thinks that they’re middle class, though of course, you can’t be. And realistically, you don’t want to be right now. Here’s why.
Elizabeth Warren, professor at Harvard Law School, just testified before the Joint Economic Committee in Congress that the middle class is suffering. How much so? Adjusted for inflation, median household income for middle class families has dropped by $1,175 between 2000 and 2007 - that represents a significant decline. While income is dropping, expenses are rising. The average family is spending $4,655 more each year on basic expenses, such as gas, food and health insurance.
Let’s talk the bane of my existence (as most working parents): child care costs. Families with children under the age of 5 spend $1,508 a month more on child care costs (yes, do the math, that’s more than $18,000) - older children cost about half that much. You don’t escape during the teens, either: the cost of sending a child to college has more than doubled over the last 20 years, far outpacing increases in income.
Also in the news these days are those folks who cannot afford housing. The proportion of families who spend more than 35% of income on housing has quadrupled in a single generation - a disproportionate number of middle class families spend nearly half of their income on housing. Two “middle class” Americans earning an average salary could not afford to pay the mortgage of a median-priced home in 2/3 of the nation’s metropolitan areas including my own Philadelphia (which is reasonably priced, I might add). In addition to the increased costs of housing stock, real estate taxes have also increased. Most municipalities have not tweaked their systems to account for a disproportionate increase in property “value” (albeit somewhat artificial) - this means that taxpayers are often paying too much (for reassessed properties at historic rates) or too little (for properties that have not been reassessed) in real estate tax from neighbor to neighbor. The high costs, as much as $10,000 in some middle class neighborhoods, are hitting folks in the pocketbook.
According to Warren, if you include real estate taxes, along with Medicare and other taxes, the total tax burden for a two income family today is 38% more compared to one income families a generation ago. And yes, I realize in a progressive tax system, that was bound to happen. It’s not so much that it happened that’s surprising, it’s what it means. It means less money in the pockets of middle class Americans at the end of the day.
Income is decreasing and expenses - including taxes - are increasing. So what are people doing? Charging up a storm. Credit card debt for middle-income families rose 75% between 1989 and 2001, according to Demos, a non-partisan public policy organization. Warren’s report claims that 10% of total disposable income in the United States goes to paying off credit cards. This, of course, jives with much of what you told me you would do with your economic stimulus check.
There has been a clamoring for a second stimulus package to offer some relief. Despite the rumors to the contrary, no such package has yet been seriously proposed. Jared Bernstein, senior economist with the Economic Policy Institute, has advised that a package should rely on getting funds together for the states, particularly for infrastructure projects, and not into the hands of taxpayers. Infrastructure means jobs - this was made abundantly clear when Congress thought about tinkering with the gas tax.
Second stimulus package or not, it’s clear that something needs to change. What is the breaking point before the middle class is no longer middle class?
Tags: America, cost of living, Economic Policy Institute, economic stimulus, economy, Elizabeth Warren, gas-tax, middle-class, second stimulus package
Monday, July 21, 2008
Medicare
http://www.newamerica.net/blog/new-health-dialogue/2008/reform-project-medicare-reform-ready-runway-5267
TRY THIS FOR MEDICARE INFO
TRY THIS FOR MEDICARE INFO
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Malden Senior Community Center
As an observer at the Malden Senior Community Building meetings I heard many suggestions on the use and outreach plans for the building. Everyone seems pleased with the progress but at the walk through I was told the the tower at the end of the building was to be closed off and just made pigeon proof.
I was surprised because this is an integral part of the building. Walking by I observed the work being done and how massive the opening of windows and how the tower faces in all directions toward the downtown area.
I think with a little imagination and thought with planning of the committee this area could become a valuable part of the Community Center. I thought that it would be great to be a monument to the World War II era. or a memorial for 9/11 but this was dismissed Since we are planning a big celebration come December maybe holiday decorations should be displayed. I would at least make open for discussion and maybe get the Seniors, Downtown Merchants, taxpayers involved. WE Should practicee the Vision for Malden concept of community involvement
--
Howard McGowan
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Housing
Provide adequate funding streams to support housing production
1. Add Comment
Historically, the federal government has been a key player in providing affordable housing. Declining federal funding for housing in Massachusetts has been a long-documented problem. Federal support for affordable housing fell by seven percent or nearly $29 million from 2006 to 2007. Similarly State funding for affordable housing has not kept pace with housing production costs. Paradoxically, since 2004, the State has increased funding for housing programs in the Department of Housing and Community Development. In 2008, the budget for DHCD programs will be $199 million, which represents the highest level of State support since 1991. Because State funding remained low, the current spending level is 23 percent less than it was in 1991 and only half the $410 million committed in 1989.
1. Add Comment
Historically, the federal government has been a key player in providing affordable housing. Declining federal funding for housing in Massachusetts has been a long-documented problem. Federal support for affordable housing fell by seven percent or nearly $29 million from 2006 to 2007. Similarly State funding for affordable housing has not kept pace with housing production costs. Paradoxically, since 2004, the State has increased funding for housing programs in the Department of Housing and Community Development. In 2008, the budget for DHCD programs will be $199 million, which represents the highest level of State support since 1991. Because State funding remained low, the current spending level is 23 percent less than it was in 1991 and only half the $410 million committed in 1989.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
