Tag: Communism

  • Half World Wealth With 85 People Beware Of Cataclysm.

    Contrary to what many think the touted Economic Growth in The World has increased the divide between the Rich and The Poor.

    With Communism long dead and buried, the Media in the hands of the Rich, one  does not get to know what the less fortunate have or feel about this economic prosperity.

    last Sunday I watched a Talk show Neeya , Naana, in Star Vijay Tamil TV Channel on the Chasm that exist between the college Going youth of the affluent and the less fortunate.

    The difference between the rich and poor  did exist even when I was in my college(1967-70)

    But the conscious behaviour of the well to do was negligible.

    Now the attitude and the behaviour of both the classes are belligerent towards each other.

    So is the divide between the Rich, Lower middle and middle classes in India.

    After the dawn of the IT Industry, a new class of neo Rich has sprung up, mainly from the lower middle class.

    By nature,the Middle classes in India try to be what they are not even while when they were not affluent.

    But with this IT money this has increased alarmingly.

    Even for small things that can be done by themselves poor people are hired.

    While one used to go out to buy vegetables by walk or at the most by a Scooter, people now use a car or send a servant maid.

    They no longer buy cinema tickets by standing in the Theaters.

    Nor do In find them stand in queue in Railway Stations to reserve tickets in advance, .

    What can be bought in a push cart selling vegetables, people go to Supermarkets of even Hyper Markets to buy Vegetables.

    Servants , Servant maids are engaged, in many cases as ‘living in ‘are engaged in house hold work and are paid anywhere between 5000 to Rs 10,000 per month.

    Often I find these maids have children who have left their children in Free Hostels for study.

    And they  seem to relish their jobs.

    Those who employ them, the neo rich, flaunt their money carelessly.

    This is restricted to Homes.

    One would this group in the malls, where they spend money recklessly, paying at least 200 % more for the same product that can be bought very economically outside.

    Whom do you find at these Malls as Sales girls and Salesmen?

    People of the same class whom on engages  for work at Home.

    These boys and girls are of the same age group that buys things flaunting their money in a vulgar fashion.

    These use a Five hundred Rupee or a Thousand Rupee note very carelessly and often leave this at Home around every place.

    Leave alone the issue of tempting these needy into stealing, are these people aware the resentment they are building in the people who are working for them?

    This, on a Macro Scale is being witnessed in the Society, Government,Media.

    The Government aided by Media is obsessed with stock market and Gold Prices and you find extensive coverage of this news next only to Rapes ans Scams in the Media.

    There seems to be no reporting on the issues of the poor or their grievances.

    I have heard, with out their knowledge, the way these less fortunate look at these things.

    Without going into specifics,  can say that they are seething with anger at these people, the system.

    While we try to convince ourselves we have achieved what we have by hard work, they think that we have usurped these opportunities from them and the system is designed by us to cheat them, deprive them.

    What they are waiting is an Opportunity and a Demagogue of Leader r to ignite a Revolution, which I feel will be cataclysmic.

    On the national level we think we are growing.

    But we are disrupting the Social order.

    Whatever we may say it is a fact that the world is controlled by the Rich than ever before and is run by the Rich , of the Rich  and for the Rich.

    Read this.

    50 % of World wealth is controlled by 85 Rich people.!

    The world’s wealthiest people aren’t known for travelling by bus, but if they fancied a change of scene then the richest 85 people on the globe – who between them control as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population put together – could squeeze onto a single double-decker.

    The extent to which so much global wealth has become corralled by a virtual handful of the so-called ‘global elite’ is exposed in a new report from Oxfam on Monday. It warned that those richest 85 people across the globe share a combined wealth of £1tn, as much as the poorest 3.5 billion of the world’s population.

    Working for the Few - Oxfam reportSource: F. Alvaredo, A. B. Atkinson, T. Piketty and E. Saez, (2013) ‘The World Top Incomes Database’, http://topincomes.g-mond.parisschoolofeconomics.eu/ Only includes countries with data in 1980 and later than 2008. Photograph: Oxfam

    The wealth of the 1% richest people in the world amounts to $110tn (£60.88tn), or 65 times as much as the poorest half of the world, added the development charity, which fears this concentration of economic resources is threatening political stability and driving up social tensions.

    It’s a chilling reminder of the depths of wealth inequality as political leaders and top business people head to the snowy peaks of Davos for this week’s World Economic Forum. Few, if any, will be arriving on anything as common as a bus, with private jets and helicopters pressed into service as many of the world’s most powerful people convene to discuss the state of the global economy over four hectic days of meetings, seminars and parties in the exclusive ski resort.

    Winnie Byanyima, the Oxfam executive director who will attend the Davos meetings, said: “It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world’s population – that’s three and a half billion people – own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all fit comfortably on a double-decker bus.”

    Oxfam also argues that this is no accident either, saying growing inequality has been driven by a “power grab” by wealthy elites, who have co-opted the political process to rig the rules of the economic system in their favour.

    In the report, entitled Working For The Few (summary here), Oxfam warned that the fight against poverty cannot be won until wealth inequality has been tackled.

    “Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table,” Byanyima said.

    Oxfam called on attendees at this week’s World Economic Forum to take a personal pledge to tackle the problem by refraining from dodging taxes or using their wealth to seek political favours.

    As well as being morally dubious, economic inequality can also exacerbate other social problems such as gender inequality, Oxfam warned. Davos itself is also struggling in this area, with the number of female delegates actually dropping from 17% in 2013 to 15% this year.

    How richest use their wealth to capture opportunities

    Polling for Oxfam’s report found people in countries around the world – including two-thirds of those questioned in Britain – believe that the rich have too much influence over the direction their country is heading

    Source:

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jan/20/oxfam-85-richest-people-half-of-the-world

    Enhanced by Zemanta
  • Communists Routed in West Bengal.

    Mamata Bannerjee led Alliance has ended the 34 year reign of  the Communists democratically, by winning 226 out of 294 seats, trouncing their opponents, the coalition of communist parties.

    Mamata Bannerjee’s win is mainly due to

    Her fiery and rumbustious style of  Politics.

    Ability to gauge the Public mood .

    Persistent espousal of Public Cause,like forcible grabbing of lands from farmers in favor of Industrial houses.

    Astute selection of State Politics over National Politics.

    Meeting violence of Communists with Violence(though it is not good for her party or State in the long run)

    and due to Communist’s

    Ambivalence of Communists on Industrial Policy.

    Blind adherence to out dated cliches and arm chair National Leadership.

    Forcible eviction of Farmers from their lands.

    Confusion over the handling of Maoists violence, whether to support it or not.

    Non developmental activities.

    Maintaining of private armies and encouragement of thuggery by party cadres.

    Now Mamata’s skill will be tested in running the State.

    It will be an onerous task,considering her record as Central Minister, dictatorial way of functioning and brinkmanship and lack of second rung leadership in the party and a dearth of talent.

    http://www.mumbaimirror.com/article/44/2011051420110514042125162bec918eb/Left-rout-at-Kalighat.html

    Related:

    KOLKATA: Everyone knew that the Titanic was sinking. The end came on Friday as a natural sequel to the rising anti-incumbency displayed in the couple of elections in Bengal since 2008 – panchayat, Lok Sabha and municipal polls. Mamata Banerjee made history on Friday with her party romping home to victory, far crossing the single majority quotient. It marked the end of the 34-year communist rule and a break from the stifling status quo resting on political patronage.

    http://hindulinebengal.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/end-of-an-era-left-no-longer-right-for-bengal-voters/

  • Naxal elements part of our society.


    Naxal Dominant area

    First sane statement from any politician.The problem is not one of Law and Order but of the rage of the neglected regions,castes and unthinkable difference between the rich and the poor.Successive Governments have been paying lip service by announcing paper schemes and the political parties have been sabotaging the programmes for votes, for undoused embers shall get votes.
    Unless the problem is attacked at the sociological level by developing the areas and improve literacy, the problem shall continue.How about placing these states really under President’s rule and only administrative work is carried out in a time bound manner for 10 years?

    Story:

    NEW DELHI: Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar said an “integrated approach” was needed to tackle the Naxal menace as “enforcement action alone” would lead to their wider alienation.

    Addressing a meeting of Naxal-affected states convened by the Prime Minister, the Bihar chief minister also attacked the Centre for not providing requisite support to his state for tackling the menace.

    Stressing on the need for an “integrated approach” against Left-wing extremism, Kumar said, “Enforcement action alone leads to wider alienation, making heroes out of the leaders of the extremist organisations and leads to only symptomatic treatment, leaving the underlined disease to reappear in a more virulent form.”

    “Naxal elements are a part of our society even though they have been misled into following the path of violence,” he said.
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Naxal-elements-part-of-our-society-Nitish-Kumar/articleshow/6167097.cms#write

  • 10 Greediest People of 2009


    This makes one feel that Communism is attractive.!

    As ordinary Americans reel from the Great Recession, these gluttonous all-stars continue to claw in absurd amounts of money.

    Has picking a year’s greediest “top ten” ever been easier? We don’t think so. We could, this year, fill an entire top ten just with bankers from Goldman Sachs — or JPMorgan Chase or any of a number of other Wall Street giants. All sport executive suites packed with power suits who fanned the flames that melted down the global economy, then helped themselves, after gobbling down billions in bailouts, to paydays worth mega millions — at a time when, in over half our states, over a quarter of America’s kids are living off food stamps.

    Now that’s greed. But that’s also not the whole picture. The Great Recession’s greedy don’t just sit on Wall Street. They occupy perches of power throughout the reeling U.S. economy. So we’ve tried, in this our latest annual ranking of avarice, to survey that bigger picture.

    Where does all this greed come from? We humans have always, of course, had greed among us. But levels of greed vary enormously from one historical epoch to another — and from one society to another.

    What determines which societies see the most greed and grasping? In a word: inequality. The more wealth concentrates, the more greed grows. The United States remains the most unequal nation in the developed world. Next year, we suspect, will bring us still another bumper crop of greedy.

    10: Richard Anderson

    America’s airlines have been flying, for the most part, under the media radar ever since the nation’s banks went into meltdown mode, and that suits Delta CEO Richard Anderson just fine.

    Delta, now the world’s biggest airline, has been richly rewarding Anderson ever since he became the airline’s top exec in September 2007. If folks were paying attention, they might wonder why. Delta, after all, lost $8.9 billion in 2008. In 2009, Delta and other U.S. carriers, says the International Air Transport Association, will likely lose a combined $1 billion.

    Passengers are certainly feeling this red ink. Delta and other carriers have been trimming seating capacity, a move, notes the Orlando Sentinel, designed to “enable them to raise ticket prices more often.” Delta is also squeezing passengers with airport bag fees. In August, the airline’s bag charges bounded to $20 for the first bag and $30 for the second.

    Anderson and his family, meanwhile, don’t just fly free on Delta. The airline also pays the taxes due on Anderson’s free tickets — and lots more, too.

    For agreeing to become Delta’s chief, 28 months ago, Anderson picked up $8.5 million in stock awards. Seven months later, another $3.4 million. Six months after that, to celebrate the Delta-Northwest merger, more options to buy Delta stock, worth $7.3 million, and more actual shares, worth $6.1 million.

    With all those rewards, Anderson must be devoting every waking hour to making Delta soar, right? Well, almost every waking hour. Anderson has been spending some of his precious hours serving on the corporate board of Medtronic, a medical tech firm. In 2009, from the good people at Medtronic, he’ll pocket $188,000 for his directorship services.

    9: George David/Marie Douglas-David

    This power couple hit the headlines last March, with a nasty divorce trial. We tried to pick the most greedy of the pair. We failed. Here’s why.

    The 67-year-old George David, the former CEO of defense contracting powerhouse United Technologies, comes with impeccable greed credentials. In the four years after the 9/11 attacks, David hauled home bigger paydays than any other defense executive, over $200 million in all, including $88.3 million in 2004, a sum that made him that year’s top-paid CEO.

    Taxpayers, noted the Institute for Policy Studies Executive Excess CEO pay report in 2006, provide a third of United Technologies annual operating income.

    But George has found his match in avarice. Marie Douglas-David, a Wall Street investment banker before she married George in 2002, signed a pre-nup before her wedding day that entitled her to $20,000 a week should the marriage break up, a not unreasonable possibility given the 30-year age gap between the two.

    The couple did separate last year and this past spring went to court after Marie sued to overturn the pre-nup. She demanded $53,000 a week. Marie needed extra cash, said her lawyers, to cover her basic expenses. Among those basics: “$4,500 a week for clothes, $8,000 for travel, and $1,500 for eating out.”

    8: Steve Wynn

    Last February, Las Vegas gaming industry kingpin Steve Wynn announced an across-the-board wage and hour cutback for all employees at his resort empire. The total savings for Wynn Resorts: between $75 and $100 million.

    In November Wynn Resorts announced a special $4-per-share dividend. Total cost of the dividend payout to Wynn Resorts: $492 million. Total dividend check that will go to Steve Wynn: $88.6 million.

    Wynn currently rates 141st on the annual Forbes list of America’s 400 richest. But his fortune has faded some $900 million, to just $2.3 billion now, since last year. A typical American family, according to Census Bureau figures, would have to work nearly 18,000 years to make $900 million.

    Wynn, ever the trooper, isn’t crying in his cocktails over his near-billion-dollar misfortune. He “rang in” the 2009 new year skimming the Caribbean on a 183-foot mega yacht, then went on to spend lovely winter days dodging gossip columnists on the Riviera and in the Alps.

    7: Robert Rubin

    Back in 1997, then-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin won huzzahs the world over for his efforts to fix the Asian financial crisis. One crisis “solved,” Rubin proceeded to help create another — by brokering the 1999 deal that repealed the New Deal’s most important financial industry reform legislation.

    That reform, the Glass-Steagall Act, essentially prevented investment banks from speculating with the cash commercial banks and insurance companies were collecting from depositors and policy holders. Glass-Steagall would be weakened over the years, but still had enough oomph, at century’s end, to prevent Citicorp from finalizing a merger with Travelers Group insurance.

    Citi, America’s biggest bank, and Travelers needed Glass-Steagall eliminated. Rubin obliged. His contacts and credibility, notes Public Citizen president Robert Weissman, helped speed repeal through Congress — and paved the way for the wild Wall Street run that crashed the U.S. economy.

    Rubin, a Goldman Sachs alum before his stint at Treasury, would go on to join the newly merged Citigroup as a senior strategist. Citi, betting heavily on subprimes, would go on to lose over $65 billion during Rubin’s stint, and, this past January, Rubin formally resigned his Citi duties.

    Overall, Rubin pocketed $126 million in cash and stock for his Citi labors. But he seems to regard his years at the bank as something akin to public service. Declared Rubin in one exit interview: “I bet there’s not a single year where I couldn’t have gone somewhere else and made more.”

    6: Andrew Hall

    If you happen to be Andrew Hall, the world’s most celebrated commodity trader, you don’t care what other people think. Hall waged a four-year battle — against his neighbors in the posh Connecticut town of Southport — to keep a 80-foot-long concrete sculpture on his lawn.

    The neighbors won, and Hall had to remove the concrete eyesore. He promptly replaced it with two garishly painted “cartoonlike” sculptures of cars.

    Hall can afford plenty of sculptures. He took home $100 million betting on oil futures and other commodities in 2008 — after picking up a quarter-billion over the previous five years — and stood to receive another $100 million this year.

    But his employer, Citigroup, balked. Citi, by that time, was sitting on $45 billion in taxpayer bailout dollars, and handing $100 million to Hall, the honcho of Citi’s commodity-trading subsidiary, would have created a PR disaster for the bank — and the Obama administration as well.

    Hall didn’t care. He demanded his trading fee. Citi ended up having to sell off Hall’s subsidiary, at a bargain basement price, to end the Hall headache.

    Our story, to be sure, does have a happy ending — for Hall, Citi, and federal pay czar Kenneth Feinberg. Hall will get his $100 million, but not until next year. That deferral let Citi claim a zero pay expense for Hall in 2009, and Citi’s pay outlays for the year now show up about $100 million less than last year.

    This accounting razzmatazz helped skew the 2009 executive pay totals for the seven biggest bailout basket cases and enabled pay czar Feinberg to claim that pressure from his office had, “on average,” reduced executive cash comp at the seven by an impressive — and thoroughly misleading — 90 percent.

    5: John Chambers

    Earlier this year, with lawmakers mulling over legislation to limit CEO pay, a high-powered New York business group convened a “Task Force on Executive Compensation” to show that corporations could clean up their own act.

    The final report from this task force, issued this fall, asked companies to commit themselves to executive pay that’s “fair” and “clearly aligned with actual performance.” Among the first half-dozen companies to make that commitment: Cisco, the Internet networking giant.

    Just days later, a federal filing revealed that Cisco was awarding “discretionary bonuses” to its five top executives for the fiscal year that ended this past July. Why “discretionary?” The company couldn’t give the execs regular bonuses since all five missed their “performance” targets.

    Cisco says the five execs delivered “solid financial performance” while facing “tough economic challenges.” Not that solid. Cisco has laid off over 1,500 workers since the economy turned challenging. Cisco CEO John Chambers, for his part, has pocketed $232.7 million over the last five years.

    Back in 2000, Cisco reigned briefly as the world’s biggest company, as measured by total share value. Then the dot.com bubble burst. But Chambers unloaded a ton of shares before the bubble popped — and cleared a $156 million windfall.

    The janitor who cleaned Cisco’s executive suites that year, observed the San Jose Mercury News at the time, would have to work 8,653 years to earn what Chambers made in one.

    4: Rupert Murdoch

    Billionaires never rest. They don’t let their assets rest either. Take media mogul Rupert Murdoch, for instance. Three years ago, Murdoch shelled out an estimated $30 million for a 183-foot yacht he calls the Rosehearty. He’s apparently enjoying his investment. Billionaire-watchers have sighted him holidaying offshore with actor Mel Gibson and crooner Billy Joel.

    But what do billionaires do when they can’t find an aging celebrity to join them aboard? They rent their boats out, says Superyacht World — discreetly, of course, through charter agencies that never reveal the boat’s actual owner.

    But sometimes that identity does slip out. Murdoch’s Rosehearty, an enterprising reporter has disclosed, charters for just under $300,000 per week. Murdoch’s “exceptionally solicitous staff” comes included in the fee.

    Speaking of fees, Murdoch has launched a crusade to force Web surfers to pay for the newspaper articles they read online. One reason: His take-home last year from the News Corp. — the base of his media empire — dropped 14 percent to $27.5 million.

    3: Mark Hurd

    Computer printer ink, a high-tech financial analyst pointed out a few years ago, “costs more per drop than expensive perfume.” Mark Hurd, the CEO at Hewlett-Packard since 2005, wouldn’t have it any other way.

    HP, under Hurd, has been busy squeezing every bit of revenue possible out of the printer ink cash cow. Last year, HP upped ink prices up at double the inflation rate. The typical $30 ink cartridge, SmartMoney reported this past June, costs $3 to make.

    Hurd apparently enjoys cutting wages and jobs as much as raising prices. In May, he axed 6,000 workers off the HP payroll and cut paychecks for the survivors from 5 to 15 percent.

    Hurd did take a 20 percent salary cut himself for 2009. But “salary” in 2008 only accounted for $1.45 million of Hurd’s $26.04 million in cash compensation. He took in another $7.9 million in new stock awards — and cleared still another $10.1 million cashing out previously awarded stock options.

    Hurd’s CEO stint at HP has so far seen about 40,000 employees lose their jobs.

    2: Richard Scott

    Mike Snow, a regional health care executive, earlier this month recalled that evening a dozen years ago when his then-boss, Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp. CEO Richard Scott, revealed to Snow and the rest of the company’s top management that the FBI had just raided the firm’s El Paso office.

    Scott defiantly declared the government had no case. Mike Snow and his fellow execs lustily applauded. Remembers Snow: “Like so many others that night, I drank the Kool-Aid.”

    The federal government went on to indict key Columbia/HCA personnel for “bilking Medicare while simultaneously handing over kickbacks and perks to physicians who steered patients to its hospitals.” The company ended up pleading guilty to 14 felonies and paying $1.7 billion in criminal and civil fines.

    The board of Columbia/HCA, then the nation’s biggest for-profit hospital chain, would go on to ease Scott out the door, but ever so gently. He left with a $10 severance package and stock worth $300 million.

    This past spring, Richard Scott burst back into the news, pouring more Kool-Aid as the moving force behind the year’s first media blitz designed to demonize the Obama administration’s drive for health care reform.

    If President Obama ever gets his way, Scott warned in one ad that his multimillion campaign ran, bureaucrats will “decide the treatments you receive, the drugs you take, even the doctors you see.”

    Scott’s ads would set the “Tea Party” tone for the year’s health care debate — and help leave tens of millions of Americans without affordable health care, a state of affairs that has never bothered Scott, originally a corporate attorney specializing in buyout deals.

    As Scott used to rail back in his CEO days: “Do we have an obligation to provide health care for everybody? Where do we draw the line? Is any fast-food restaurant obligated to feed everyone who shows up?”

    1: Larry Ellison

    Larry Ellison appeared on our “greediest” list last year. He may appear every year. No one may better personify, personally and professionally, the self-absorption, arrogance, and insensitivity that separates the merely greedy from the greediest.

    In 2008, Ellison, the CEO of Oracle business software, contested the $166.3 million tax appraisal on his Northern California estate. The assessment appeals panel gave him a $3 million tax refund in a ruling that will cost the local school system an annual $250,000, the cost of hiring and supplying three teachers.

    Ellison, the holder of a $27 billion fortune, spent a good bit of 2009 sparing no expense to build a yacht speedy enough to win next year’s America’s Cup, the world’s top sailing race. His new racing yacht has a $10-million mast “18-stories tall and sails large enough to cover a baseball infield.” Some 30 designers and scientists spent 130,000 hours putting the vessel together.

    For more casual water fun, Ellison takes to the seas on his 453-foot mega yacht, the Rising Sun, a boat he co-owns with Hollywood mogul David Geffen. This five-story little ship boasts 82 rooms and a basketball court that doubles as a helicopter pad. The construction cost in 2004: $200 million.

    On the business side, Ellison did his best in 2009 to top the $557 million he took home as Oracle’s CEO in 2008. His magic formula: Ellison’s a serial merger. He buys companies, takes their customers, and fires their workers. His top 2009 gobble-up: Silicon Valley’s Sun Microsystems.

    The Sun merger, analysts believe, will almost certainly end up eliminating more jobs than the 5,000 positions lost when Oracle bought out rival PeopleSoft.

    And did we mention the dividends? Oracle this past spring announced plans to pay out its first dividend. The announcement, CNBC estimated, meant a $57.5 million quarterly check for Ellison in May and another $230 million in dividend checks over the next 12 months.

    In 2009, the old Silicon Valley joke still rang true: “What’s the difference between God and Larry Ellison? Answer: God doesn’t think he’s Larry Ellison.”

    http://www.alternet.org/workplace/144718/10_greediest_people_of_2009

  • America Without a Middle Class .

    History teaches us that without a strong middle class , it is an invitation to revolution, as French Revolution has demonstrated.To day, not only US, but countries like India are traversing the Capitalistic path with out bothering about the poorer classes, with their obsession with Stock market.Mere creation of wealth will not guarantee stability to society.Equitable distribution of wealth has to be ensured.Detailed blog on Communism in this site deals with it.Communists have missed the bus because of their obduracy and obsession with verbosity. Let us admit that Keynesian economics has failed to deliver.

    Can you imagine an America without a strong middle class? If you can, would it still be America as we know it?

    Today, one in five Americans is unemployed, underemployed or just plain out of work. One in nine families can’t make the minimum payment on their credit cards. One in eight mortgages is in default or foreclosure. One in eight Americans is on food stamps. More than 120,000 families are filing for bankruptcy every month. The economic crisis has wiped more than $5 trillion from pensions and savings, has left family balance sheets upside down, and threatens to put ten million homeowners out on the street.

    Families have survived the ups and downs of economic booms and busts for a long time, but the fall-behind during the busts has gotten worse while the surge-ahead during the booms has stalled out. In the boom of the 1960s, for example, median family income jumped by 33% (adjusted for inflation). But the boom of the 2000s resulted in an almost-imperceptible 1.6% increase for the typical family. While Wall Street executives and others who owned lots of stock celebrated how good the recovery was for them, middle class families were left empty-handed.

    The crisis facing the middle class started more than a generation ago. Even as productivity rose, the wages of the average fully-employed male have been flat since the 1970s.
    But core expenses kept going up. By the early 2000s, families were spending twice as much (adjusted for inflation) on mortgages than they did a generation ago — for a house that was, on average, only ten percent bigger and 25 years older. They also had to pay twice as much to hang on to their health insurance.

    To cope, millions of families put a second parent into the workforce. But higher housing and medical costs combined with new expenses for child care, the costs of a second car to get to work and higher taxes combined to squeeze families even harder. Even with two incomes, they tightened their belts. Families today spend less than they did a generation ago on food, clothing, furniture, appliances, and other flexible purchases — but it hasn’t been enough to save them. Today’s families have spent all their income, have spent all their savings, and have gone into debt to pay for college, to cover serious medical problems, and just to stay afloat a little while longer.
    http://www.alternet.org/workplace/144388/america_without_a_middle_class_–_it’s_not_far_away_as_you_might_think/