Could anyone direct me to sources of information regarding the “creation” of the “middle class?”
Paul Krugman, in a video I happened across a few months ago, stated that the middle class didn’t really exist before the 1930’s. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kwA-CwFK5A ) In addition, in Restoring the American Dream, by Robert Ringer, the author mentions that the welfare state essentially created the middle class.
When so many people in the media tout “middle class” and “middle class values,” as well as “the shrinking middle class,” I get a little lost trying to figure out exactly what image they are trying to elicit. Why is it important to preserve that portion of the economic strata, and where would the people really end up if the “middle class” truly disappeared in a free society?
The ‘middle class’ are people who aren’t poor (eating dirt) and who aren’t rich (people who own sweatshops and saunas).
The middle class was created when lots of people lifted themselves out of poverty. How did they do that? With the help of capitalism of course. In other words: property rights.
Where there are genuine property rights, you get an industrial revolution and an end of grinding poverty. When those property rights disappear (welfare/warfare state), then the middle class is wiped out and you only have the rich and the poor left.
It’s a fairly broad term. You could say ancient Greece had a middle class (the hoi mesoi), as well as the romans (the plebs), the middle ages had the bourgeoisie, it then could have evolved to mean the bougeoisie and petite bougreoise have traditional Marxist terms, or some white collar workers in finance capitalism (another Marxian term).
He could also be talking just about house ownership and holding profesional degrees: which did proliferate after the 30’s. I think this may be what he is talknig about.
With sound money the living standards of all classes will rise. Under fiat and protectionism even the fat cats will lose long run.
Probably, their would be a larger amount of upper class and a lower amount of indigent. What would classes really matter in a prosperous, free, and peaceful, contractual society?
Unfortunately, the answer would still be ‘yes’. Still, it is helpful to have large swathes of people to whom you can market cheap and effective products to.
In modern society, we can separate the citizenry into three classes: the capitalist class, the middle class, and the underclass. What determines what class one belongs to is their property. The capitalist class owns capital and earns rents on this capital. They get to define the structure of production, hire and fire workers, and so on. They are risk-takers. The middle class does not own capital but owns assets, such as bonds, stocks, and more likely a house. They are wage or salaried-workers for capitalist or government. The underclass does not own anything and in some cases is dependent on the public welfare.
From this relationship to property, one can broadly guess what political program each class will favor. One can also tell why only during the industrial revolution could such a class system develop.
In the early industrial revolution, the class system consisted of the hereditary landlords, the bourgeoisie of the cities, and the peasant-cum-proletariat population. The political system was typically split between the landlords and the bourgeoisie.
It’s an empty term politicians like to use, because most people consider themselves “Middle Class”. When they invoke the term concerning a policy, they are attempting to make that policy favorable to the widest swath of the population as possible. Much like “working families”.