By The Tribune-Review
Published: Tuesday, Jan. 15, 2013, 9:11 p.m.
Donald J. Boudreaux's column “Middle-class myths” (Jan. 8 and TribLIVE.com) is seriously flawed.
First, it looks only at purchase price and does not take into account whether the items of 1956, 1975 and today have the same cost to maintain and useful life. Without examining those two additional factors, no conclusions can be drawn about which generation was/is better supplied.
Second, even if the cost of the enumerated items is lower today, those aren't the only items that shape a family's budget, and certainly not the important items. The costs of things such as housing, transportation, health insurance (now required for everyone) and care, education, utilities, food, clothing and other necessities are far more important than the cost of a 10-cup electric coffee maker.
Finally, being better supplied does not necessarily translate into prosperity, particularly if you are unemployed, “underwater” on your mortgage, being driven into bankruptcy by medical bills, trying to figure out how to send three kids to college, or facing any of the other myriad real-world problems we all face.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Islam & women
- Corbett’s choice
- ‘We the people’ are veterans
- Invest in pre-K
- Slots & property taxes
- Not reviled abroad
- Harmar needs better enforcement
- Putin’s actions I
- Obstacles to hiring
- Conspicuous by absence
- Beneficial, irreplaceable