[Nemesis]

Education inflation is a big part. You need much higher education to be competitive and secure reasonable jobs. In my field, people used to be able to enter private industry with a masters degree (even undergrad), now you'd be hard-pressed to secure a reasonable industry job with a post-doc and even then, the pay is meager. Too many years spent getting low-yield degrees while not making any cash.

The pursuit of higher education is now a choice between working to live or living to work.

[Storm]

If your mom stayed at home, there's a good chance she was the one actually managing the finances. You might gain a lot of insight talking to her. There's also the possibility that your parents had a lot of stocks and bonds and such that did well, but you didn't know about. Consumerism probably has a lot to do with it, too. People use to eat a lot of canned foods, but that's out of style now because of the salt content. But fresh foods costs a lot more. Churches use to allow their patrons to send their kids to the church school for free, now it's a few thousand or more a year. Are you sure the hockey team was expensive? There are usually free or cheap sports offered by the school and places like the YMCA and the city, but get into club sports and you're suddenly spending an arm and a leg. Same with golf - was it perhaps a public course v. a private country club? Do you remember wearing a lot of hand-me-downs as a kid? Do your kids get hand-me-downs? Was your dad lucky enough to have children all of the same sex so he didn't have to buy at least 2 sets of clothing? What kind of vacations did you go on as a kid v. as an adult?

To add to what Nemesis said, you use to be able to be a pharmacy technician with just a high school education. You'd start off as an assistant and they would train you up if you seemed smart enough. Nowadays, you need an expensive degree to be a pharmacy technician, but they are paying about the same amount. Which works out to be less money because you have to pay for your education.

Not to mention that the price of education is out of control (although I hear this is different in Canada?) I remember being told by an acquaintance that back in the 1970s, she had a scholarship for $300 a semester to a prestigious law school, it completely paid for her tuition and all of her books. That's about $1,200 in today's dollars. You could barely pay for a single class with that amount at even a state school.

[Dancingqueen]

Real housing hosts, adjusted for inflation have risen since the 1950's. Lower interest rates did not make up the difference. This could explain your $200,000 dollar mortgage. 1950's biggest expense was food, now it's housing...I found data to back this..I'll hunt for it when I get a sec later.

[Distance]

Calculate the cost of two cell phone plans over 10 years, compounding annually. This is only one very minor data point.

[envirodude]

	Originally Posted by Storm To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Are you sure the hockey team was expensive?

No. That is part of the issue. Kids sports are ridiculously more expensive than they used to be. In part because of this cultural mythology of progess. People think "I wore hand-me-downs" but MY kids won't have to because things get better over time. And it's just not working out.

@Nem & Aronnax, higher education is a good thing, but I fear we are widely overeducating people. Everyone can go to university; not everyone should. This gets very messy because Canada and developed nations in general need to find competitive advantages to keep real wages from falling more. I just don't think having a Masters or PhD as an entry level job requirement for professions is the way to go about it.


Thanks to the many contributors to this thread. I hope my situation is just being used as an example of a culturally widespread phenomenon. People are working harder and harder to get by and still feel like they cannot keep up. Two salaried parents used to be unusual and now it's the norm.

It's still a bit of a mystery to me why all the unambiguous technological advances in the last 50 years haven't translated into a noticeably easier life for white collar workers in mature democracies, but at least my thinking on things is clearer. I'm starting to lay a lot of cultural blame on the myth of progress and economic growth. If real wages haven't increased since 1970, how can we say there's been economic growth???

---------- Post added 04-17-2012 at 12:47 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by themuzicman To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I bet your dad didn't have any debt except the mortgage, and he put 20% down on the house. That'll be your difference.

Agreed that loose credit is a major factor. Back then, you bought cars second hand. Now we buy new because the financing is ridiculously cheap. Can't afford heated leather seats? Why not just finance it over 7 years and look, your monthly payments actually go down...

[Nemesis]

Originally Posted by Storm To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Not to mention that the price of education is out of control (although I hear this is different in Canada?) I remember being told by an acquaintance that back in the 1970s, she had a scholarship for $300 a semester to a prestigious law school, it completely paid for her tuition and all of her books. That's about $1,200 in today's dollars. You could barely pay for a single class with that amount at even a state school.

Yeah, the difference between the cost of education between Canada and the US is massive. When I was applying for positions in the US, my tuition would have been almost $60,000 a year for my Phd, whereas my current program costs me only about $4,500 with free summers, which is entirely covered by my stipend (which also pays for my living expenses). Reflect on that for a moment. The kicker is that my program is among the top 3 in the world for my field, and the US school is ranked about 47th (if you put much stock into rankings like that). The choice to stay here was an easy one.

Although we're relieved of crushing debt, we are still not banking any money during 10+ years of education and the Canadian job market is much more competitive due to our tiny population. That's what's driving the education inflation here. There's a big trade-off.

[plotthickens]

ED, what kind of vacations did your family take while you were in grade school?

What kind of vacations does your family take now?

[Aronnax]

Originally Posted by envirodude To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It's still a bit of a mystery to me why all the unambiguous technological advances in the last 50 years haven't translated into a noticeably easier life for white collar workers in mature democracies, but at least my thinking on things is clearer. I'm starting to lay a lot of cultural blame on the myth of progress and economic growth. If real wages haven't increased since 1970, how can we say there's been economic growth?

Growth has translated into increased share value and dividends, not wages.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by Aronnax To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Growth has translated into increased share value and dividends, not wages.

Which is why GDP is bullshit.

[curiousgeorge01]

I don't know about Canada but in the US there's a big difference and maybe this might give you some perspective.

One of my older friends worked in IT in the 1970s. At that time he made 30K and the first home he bought was 60K. The same job now in the same place might pay 75K but the same home would cost 425K.

The US stock market run up between 1982 and 1998 is the longest and most profitable in US history. The people primed to take advantage of that would be born in the early 1950s or earlier.

Educations costs in the US, since 1985 until 2011 increased by 498% while the CPI increased by 115%.

Taken together, it would seem things are a lot more expensive for us.

[Dancingqueen]

There's a wonderful Tedtalk about this subject, I've been searching the site for an hour trying to find it no luck. If someone finds it, please post; she's a sociology professor. She discusses how housing is now our greatest expense whereas in the '50's it was food.

[zippikay]

there are cash inflows and there are cash outflows, perhaps in the past mom cooks everything so even if she did not work she managed to save money; 5 kids into sports? perhaps that's all they do for their spare-time, instead of wasting on texting and browsing internet and video games. not only from the cost of gadget itself, all of those activities also cost money in terms of electric bills and cell phone bills. Houses are more expensive nowadays because of more stringent regulations force homebuilders and homefixers to use better material and add more things (i.e. non-lead based paints, radon mitigation, etc. that may not exist way back) than the previous years.

[Storm]

Originally Posted by Nemesis To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Yeah, the difference between the cost of education between Canada and the US is massive. When I was applying for positions in the US, my tuition would have been almost $60,000 a year for my Phd, whereas my current program costs me only about $4,500 with free summers, which is entirely covered by my stipend (which also pays for my living expenses). Reflect on that for a moment. The kicker is that my program is among the top 3 in the world for my field, and the US school is ranked about 47th (if you put much stock into rankings like that). The choice to stay here was an easy one.

Ok, I believe you that the Canadian schools are cheaper than U.S. schools, but I don't think your particular example is a good one. The average total cost for a U.S. undergraduate student is around $10,000 a semester (that's both public and private). I've never heard of tuition costing $60,000 a year - many PhD programs are free to those who qualify and even have stipends. Actually, in the U.S. top PhD programs are cheaper than lower-ranked programs because the top programs get grants and rely heavily on undergraduate tuition. The lower-ranked programs are reliant on those fees.

Actually, costs tells you very little about how good a U.S. school is. Some of the top ranked schools in the nation are also the cheapest because they are publicly funded. Of course, if you want to go to a top-ranked private school, like Harvard, you'll still be paying a lot of money. Unless you're really cream of the crop, then you can get a scholarship.

[plotthickens]

	Originally Posted by Aronnax To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Growth has translated into increased share value and dividends, not wages.

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Which is why GDP is bullshit.

What happens when the Boomers retire&spend/die&disburse these monies?

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What happens when the Boomers retire&spend/die&disburse these monies?

Haven't noticed why pharma, med/retirement related and travel are so emphasized whether in expense or ease of use? The boomers are being drained, every minute they live.

[plotthickens]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Haven't noticed why pharma, med/retirement related and travel are so emphasized whether in expense or ease of use? The boomers are being drained, every minute they live.

I'm sorry, but this is a very dense paragraph and I can't quite understand it. Could you expand it with more words please?

[scorpiomover]

The Western economies have been shrinking since the 1970s.

[Nemesis]

	Originally Posted by Storm To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I've never heard of tuition costing $60,000 a year

That will vary by type of program. The one I was looking into was a clinical program, which are generally more expensive because they don't get the same kinds of funding as research programs. Also keep in mind foreign students pay higher tuition than domestic students (my example was as a foreign applicant). But yeah, probably not the best example.

[Distance]

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	I'm sorry, but this is a very dense paragraph and I can't quite understand it. Could you expand it with more words please?

As an easy example of such, Viagra symbolises my perspective, as it relates to pharma and entertainment.

Also symbolic of boomer mentality:


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[plotthickens]

	Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	As an easy example of such, Viagra symbolises my perspective, as it relates to pharma and entertainment. Also symbolic of boomer mentality: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Let me try this again. You stated some point of view. Please restate, as your wording was too dense and complicated for me to understand it. Giving related topics does not help me understand your POV.

A parallel:

Original:
If the media continue to publicize unpopular & non-revenue-generating diabetes fixes we'll be saddled with so much debt and poor sick that only the well-eating rich will be laughing.

What you just gave me:
As an easy example of such,
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
has a few rather hideous sideeffects; not reported in studies, but hello, neonicotinoids and CCD.

An example of a good expansion of the original statement:
Many reports about diet changes directly changing (and reversing!) diabetes and other negative outcomes have been underpublicized. This may be because diet is not a fun subject, whereas surgeries such as stomach stapling are headline-grabbing and are now being featured. While surgeries do reverse the results of diabetes, the true solution is not solved by $25,000 procedures; it is solved by altering the patient's diet. This is a more realistic and feasable way to address the obesity and diabetes problem we face through all levels of society.

[yoginimama]

	Originally Posted by envirodude To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Not too successful if real wages haven't risen since 1970...

Yup, that would be the upward redistribution of wealth exemplified by those flat wages (while the income of people at the top has kept going up and up).

[Aronnax]

	Originally Posted by plotthickens To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	What happens when the Boomers retire&spend/die&disburse these monies?

It's being consumed,there won't be much to disperse. The profits from this consumption are being channeled back into share value and dividends, if you don't currently own a large amount of shares (or will in the near future) you won't see the "fruits" of economic growth.

[envirodude]

Another factor I have to bring into the mix is international competitiveness. An anecdote to set the stage: I lived in South America for several years, and I came to ask a question without answer: Why do I earn 10 times the salary of these engineers? Mano a mano, yeah, I could take them easily. I'd have no problem saying I was as productive as 2, maybe 3 local engineers, but 10? No way. My conclusion way back then (1998) was that the income differential with North America was unsustainable, and the inevitable equilibrium was to increase wages in SA and decrease them in NA. Nothing in the subsequent 14 years has shaken me from this "thermodynamic" conclusion. So I've had a deep-seated concerns about NA's long-term prospects from long back. But I always thought, well, as long as wages are outpacing inflation, and technology is making things better, I'll be fine.

So with manufacturing jobs flying out of NA inexorably, what are our long-term prospects? I've only got two kids, but I'd still kind of like to think I'm leaving them a world with decent prospects, even if inheritance now seems unlikely. Should we stay on the SS Titanic NA - luxurious but doomed? Or should we jump to one of the growing economies where English may have some marketable prestige?

[INTelliJent]

In 1971, the US government finally admitted it had been cheating on the gold standard (mainly to pay for wars), and officially went off of it. Real wages froze.

Since then, corporations have lobbied to break down trade tax barriers so that they may take advantage of the global poor, working not only through local/national governments, but other international agencies such as the IMF.

This has caused an exodus of jobs in first world countries to third world, but the corporations have already insured high barriers to entry so entrepreneurs (and wide-spread competition) cannot arise from the unemployed, compounded by the fact that the inflationary (government theft) economies make it nearly impossible to build capital (savings) in the traditional manner for a personal business, it must be handed to investment corporations. Who will promptly steal it.

This is the world since 1971.

[Fishism]

	Originally Posted by envirodude To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So with manufacturing jobs flying out of NA inexorably, what are our long-term prospects? I've only got two kids, but I'd still kind of like to think I'm leaving them a world with decent prospects, even if inheritance now seems unlikely. Should we stay on the SS Titanic NA - luxurious but doomed? Or should we jump to one of the growing economies where English may have some marketable prestige?

As I see it, some groups with money (the evil corporatist/capitalist), have already jumped to the growing economies in the chase for both low wages and other markets for demand. The companies that haven't jumped borders are simply sitting on their cash and waiting to see if domestic economies kick start demand, or if the labour market continues to supply/demand itself into a situation of more globally competitive wage parity, making domestic investment in manufacturing and production feasible again. This "treading water" method of business management has a short window because shareholders do not like stagnant returns. A "find a niche market to exploit. We don't care where." order is forthcoming.

Speaking as a decision maker, although I like the idea of my bank calling me asking if I want to borrow some of the cheap money available to business as our low interest rates try to provoke businesses into capital investments and hiring, I simply have to pass until I can see a positive reason in the form of aggregate demand. Businesses having shiny new machinery standing idle, employees leaning against the wall and shelves full of inventory does not solve anything.

EnviroDude, to summarize, as brilliant, well trained and properly parented as your two children may be, I'm afraid I can't hire them, even if I have the resources to, until I have something for them to do. I have to manage my spending side because my revenue side is in the crapper. Sounds quite similar to a few governments doesn't it?