Looking for historical data on the middle class in the US

[NewJeffCT]

Mostly, I am looking for information from the start of the 20th century to before the Great Depression - 1900 to the mid 1920s, mainly.

my google skills are weak on this one, but I'm sure I've seen it before.

Specifically, what were the divisions in America in this era between poor, middle class and the rich (for example, 65% poor, 25% middle class and 10% rich in 1910... not saying those are the real numbers, just an example of what I'm looking for overall.)

I also know that social security and medicare have led to dramatic declines in the poverty levels of the elderly, but don't have those numbers.

(If anything divides it up by race, it would be great, too.)

Thanks!!

[Proud Public Servant]

1. Your problem may be your categories

I'm not aware of any generally-accepted definitions of "middle class" or "rich" (see, for example, the many recent debates on DU over whether $250,000 is a middle class income) -- which may be why you can't find data using those terms. And while the poverty threshold has been measured by the US census for some time, the definition of that threshold (and, thus, of who is impoverished) has changed over time, making an apples-to-apples historical comparison impossible without digging deeper.

[NewJeffCT]

3. Thanks

I've seen stats in the past, though, that something like 90% of seniors lived in poverty before Social Security and 50% did before Medicare, but I'm trying to figure out where, and wanted to get a bit more than just that.

[Proud Public Servant]

4. Here's an interesting link from Pew

It doesn't go all the way back to pre-Social Security, but it does cover pre-Medicare and -Medicaid.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/13/whos-poor-in-america-50-years-into-the-war-on-poverty-a-data-portrait/

[7wo7rees]

2. Look for books by Ferdinand Lundberg.

"The Rich and the Super-Rich" I found in an antique shop years ago. My eyes were truly opened then.

The 1st printing was in June, 1968.


http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/03/obituaries/f-lundberg-92-author-who-wrote-of-the-rich.html

[Xithras]

5. What is "middle class"?

One of the problems you'll quickly run into is the differering definitions of "middle class". Some definitions put everyone who isn't poor or rich in the middle class. Other perspectives break Americans into 4-6 classes.

Poor - People who don't make enough money to sustain themselves. They require charity or public aid to survive.
Working Class - Make enough money to sustain themselves, but with very little discretionary spending. They may be able to buy a house, or eke out a car payment, but they aren't buying new consumer electronics, new cars or going on vacations. Tend to work in fields not requiring degrees.
Middle Class - Make enough money to sustain themselves with discretionary spending. They are buying houses, and sometimes vacation homes. They are buying new cars, big TV's, etc. Tend to work in fields requiring degrees. Middle class can be subdivided into upper and lower, using all sorts of different definitions ranging from income level to investment capabilities.
Upper Class/Rich - Weathy enough to make work optional. Can sustain themselves from accrued wealth and investments alone.

Historically, most Americans have been Working Class, not Middle Class, but the two groups get mixed a lot (the division between the two is very muddy).
s.

[haele]

6. There was never really a solid "middle class", even in the 1960's.

Class based on social status is more of a bell curve; very few people are actually in the middle.

A more accurate class structure breakdown based on income/employment would be:

Unemployable dependents - very young children, elderly, disabled, those with employment limitations (Social Lower Class)

Working Poor/Unskilled Labor/"Hired Help" (whether or not there were jobs available) - those whose only opportunities for income are as short term transient or "as needed" employees, day labor, non-commissioned retail/food service, janitorial, farming
This class of worker needs to be separated into rural and urban categories, because those two environments determined to what level the majority of those within this classification needed to work to maintain a comfortable standard of living and pay bills/debts without seeking assistance or additional work beyond one "job" (see 1960's example below) . Workers are generally considered fungible.
(The people working these jobs would be considered Social Lower Class/Lower Middle Class)

Working Semi-Skilled Labor (typical hourly/union jobs) including tradesmen, artisans, teachers (Social Lower-Middle Class). The work here is based more on "career" than as a job. This classification should be separated into manufacturing, service, and certification required jobs. Workers are not necessarily fungible, as there is some training required to do the job.
This class would be defined as those who can maintain a comfortable standard of living, pay bills/debts, and still have enough left over for the occasional inexpensive entertainment event, leisure purchase, or some little investments like college or certification.

Professionals/Specialists/Skilled Labor - Doctors, Engineers, Managers, Artists, Small/Mid-sized business Officers (CFO/COO/CTO types). People who are in the position to "work their way up the ladder" or own their own means of income. Break down into managerial and specialist categories. This class should be defined as those who can both maintain a comfortable standard of living and invest up to a third of their income in education, leisure, and/or retirement. (Social Upper middle/Upper Class)

Investment/Rentiers/Leisure Class - People who don't "need to work" and network their way into highly paid positions rather than working their way up the ladder. developers, landowners, investors, BoD members, Corporate CEOs, Trust Fund babies. (Social Upper Class)

When I was growing up, many people who were financially poor were also "land rich" - subsistence farming had not yet died out, and a significant number of people were still rural and could maintain a fairly comfortable lifestyle without having to do more than make enough pay property taxes, utilities, and an occasional purchase of a replacement tool or other household item once and a while.
A co-worker who grew up with four other siblings on a 25 acre farm in the 1960's often says "We didn't know we were poor growing up - we didn't have a TV to tell us we were poor". They had one car, one good set of clothes each along with their work and school clothes, a clean, warm, sturdy house, and they never went hungry. Her family income growing up was around $600 -$800 a year, very close to poverty during that time.

Assigning class to income levels is more than a bit subjective, especially when talking about "middle class".
If you're going to make an official study, even for an article that will go out to the general public, better to go with income levels and job types. Otherwise, you're just turning all that hard work into a letter to the editor type of article.

I just got a Bachelor of Science in Business/Emerging Technology - that's where I learned that using the term "middle class" in anything but a casual social or political construct is like using the term "meat" when you're writing an article on common protein-based meals at the average fast-food restaurant.
Everyone has their own idea of what "middle class" is.

Another option might be to use the terms "lower 10% percentile income Americans", "median income Americans", "upper 10% percentile Americans". Just a thought.

Haele

[NewJeffCT]

7. Thanks

congrats on your BS. (Bachelor of Science - not sarcastically mocking you for bullshit!)

I was trying to figure out levels of wealth overall, so bottom 10% now doesn't mean quite the same as it did before.

I would assume there were more working poor/working class and working semi-skilled 100 years ago than there are now, while there are more professionals/specialists/skilled labor types now - accountants, programmers/IT, actuaries, electricians, engineers, insurance underwriters, etc.