Richer, poorer - For many in Mass., '90s boom was just a bust

Boston Globe ^ | May 5, 2002 | Marcella Bombardieri

[sarcasm]

EWKSBURY - When times were not quite so lean, Jim Spencer used to buy worms for fishing; now he digs them himself. Last year, he and his wife, Joyce, turned the thermostat down to 62 degrees and burned scrap wood to keep warm. When Jim has errands to run, he makes sure to do several at once so he doesn't waste gas on extra trips to the store.

[sarcasm]

The fruits of a hot economy in the 1980s were distributed across income levels, according to studies. But the most recent boom was different.

Hmmm, exactly who was President during this period? What were the policies which caused this?

[vannrox]

yea. As nice and beautiful as massachusetts is, it is WICKED BAD in cost of living and layoffs.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

The rich in Mass got richer and didn't mind constant tax hikies. The middle class, as usual, were the ones who got the shaft when those taxes took effect.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Massachusetts is one of only two states where the rich got richer and the poor got poorer between the late 1980s and the late 1990s

Hmmmm...

''These were boom times, but it was boom times if you had money to invest, if you had a graduate degree in technology, if you were particularly well-educated and well-skilled,''

Those market forces are a bit@h...

Jim never shied away from hard work.

Neither did the horse in Animal Farm.

Whether it's a lack of job retraining opportunities, or generational attitude, or simply personality, he has never contemplated a career change.

Don't worry, the Liberal politicians will string you along with promises, and pick you up from the soup kitchen in the get-out-the-vote van.

[Always Right]

''These were boom times, but it was boom times if you had money to invest, if you had a graduate degree in technology, if you were particularly well-educated and well-skilled,'' said Jim St. George, executive director of the Tax Equity Alliance for Massachusetts, or TEAM, a partner in the national study. ''If you were cleaning office space for these people, you were not seeing your income rise.''

So if you don't increase your skill level, you stay at the same income....shocking.

[JMK]

What a load of BS this is! For years, there was a labor shortage in northern Mass.

During the past 25+ years, that guy couldn't go back to school and get a Bachelor's degree??? And a woman who has multiple years experience as a secretary couldn't find another secretarial job???

The author probably searched a good, long time to find these people...

[angkor]

Whether it's a lack of job retraining opportunities, or generational attitude, or simply personality, he has never contemplated a career change.

I'm not sympathetic, and there is something obviously missing from this portrait of despair.

When you're taking 50 percent pay reductions, it's time to think about finishing that Associates degree, opening your own business, or doing just about anything other than what is clearly not working.

Dad looks like a slacker to me.

[RLK]

In the late '80s, the richest fifth of families made an average of 8.6 times the poorest fifth. Ten years later, it was 10.5 times more - the fourth greatest increase in income inequality in the nation, according to ''Pulling Apart.'' Among the reasons for this are the disproportionate loss of manufacturing jobs and the nasty bite that many workers took in the recession that started in 1989.

--------------------------

This has been a typical broad occurrence across the country and if anything is understated here. The people at the top 15% of incomes write the articles praising the economy while brokering its decline. The people at the median level and below take the beating and have had no representation in anything since Ross Perot in '92.

The economy began to flatten in the last quarter of '88 and has never fully recovered.

[wheezer]

Don't worry, the Liberal politicians will string you along with promises, and pick you up from the soup kitchen in the get-out-the-vote van.

Yup.

[tbg681]

The drama of it all...

Typical - liberal - horseshit - drama...

And the writer of this piece is probably a freshly graduated 26 y/o with a post-grad degree from an ivy league school (tuition paid by you and I of course) who's buffing up her credentials for a future in left wing politics.

Oh, and what's the deal with "less than $25,000" in credit card debt? Ya mean, like, $24,000 in credit card debt?

Meanwhile, our budding Diane Sawyer tilts her head -- in soft focus lense -- and empathisizes with these assholes.

I think I'm going to puke.

[pdlglm]

This would be incredible if it weren't so sad. These people aren't poor. Own their home, own their cars... 25K in credit card debt, this is their own fault. Perhaps if they were better at budgeting the money they make, they could occasionally go out to eat, but for crying out loud, if they never got to go out to eat... SO WHAT.

This isn't an article about poverty, its an article about covetousness, entitlement and a lack of thrift. It's a shame that the reporter has the gaul to write this.

[AndyJackson]

its an article about covetousness, entitlement and a lack of thrift

What is happening is exactly what von Mieses and his followers said happens everytime that a government engages in an expansionary monetary policy. During the 90's Alan Greensapn engaged in a record breaking printing of money. Unlike in the Carter years where the inflation went into govenment spending - and was pretty widely distributed - most of Greenspan's largesse went, first, to financial institutions, i.e. investment bankers, where it ran up the stock market fueling the profits of the options boomers. What we are seeing - and this article demonstrates it - is the result of the bust phase of the expansion - the result of a decade of malinvestment - or perhaps you think that the dot.bombs or AOL-TimeWarner are the result of sound financial management.

But perhaps the tenants of the von Mieses institute are not conservative enough for you?

[SamAdams76]

Fortunately, they own their house and two cars outright. But they have hefty credit card debt, ''less than $25,000,'' they said. They have no other savings besides $7,000 to $8,000 in their 401(k) plans.

There's your problem right there. That is a staggering level of credit card debt. If the interest rate is around 12% (as most of them are), that is $3,000 in interest every year. So even if these people are paying $500 a month (a hefty payment for a family making less than $30,000 a year), they will spend six months a year just keeping up with the interest. It could well take decades to pay this down even if they ripped up their credit cards and vowed to never use them again. "Easy credit" is the real bane of the working class. If you get yourself into debt with credit cards, you will simply never get ahead.

As for the 401(k), I do not understand. This guy was making over $60,000 a year and "$7,000 to 8,000" is all he has to show for it? He must have been contributing a very small amount. I have been contributing at least 10% of my pay to my 401(k) since 1985 and even with the recent losses, the balance is so high I am embarrassed to even mention it here. I just hope it means something when I turn 59 1/2 and can finally make use of it.

I live in Massachusetts and while there is no doubt there are families having it tough (there always are anyhow), it is still hard getting a seat in a restaurant on a Friday night and just about all the shows are always sold out. Real estate prices are still sky high. I don't see a "bust" situation at all (even though I might get laid off next week and then I might have a different opinion!).

[mass55th]

Hmmm, exactly who was President during this period? What were the policies which caused this?

Thank you!

In essence, the false sense of security rife with lies and deceptions passed off by the Clinton administration, created the atmosphere for this phony economic boom.

[SamAdams76]

''If you were cleaning office space for these people, you were not seeing your income rise.''

I took those kind of jobs when I was a teenager and never expected to be in them more than a few months. These are low-skill, entry-level jobs. Of course your income will not rise if you choose to make a career out of it! You are supposed to use these jobs to move on to bigger and better things. In fact, this article talks about this Jim Spencer "rising from the stock room to supervisor." Well I bet he never would have made the $60,000 if he stayed in the stockroom.

[sarcasm]

It seems that they have been using their credit cards to maintain their standard of living despite declining wages - not a good strategy. What scares me most about this economy is the staggering amount of debt that has been run up in the last few years. It seems that more than a few have decided to "let the good times roll" by using Visa and Master Card. Have you seen the personal bankruptcy statistics?

[Leisler]

Liberals and leftist have done everything they could in Massachusetts and nationwide to put the pillow to small manufacturing, chemical, logging, construction, and any and all small buisnessmen and tradesmen. These people have been screaming for decades. Nada. Nothing. All Archie Bunker cranks. When you kill off the middle size buisness with taxes, rules, regulations, forms, fines, fees, lawyers, permits, codes and zoneing---you kill those jobs. Doh!

[hinckley buzzard]

Love it! "The Decade of Greed" vindicated by the Liberal weenies!

BTW since when was there a recession in 1989?

Oh that's right, this is the home of the Dukakis "Massachusetts Miracle." Right. The left can't win for losing in this pathetic mellerdrammer.