Buying American Cars What Does It Mean?

fintail

I wasn't judging the people as humans, but as useful overhead expenses. Seems a lot of the corporate world has too many chiefs. There are bad apples at every level - but some of the levels themselves maybe shouldn't exist. Even those who actually do the work can judge poor results attained by those who have ascended in ways those who came later simply cannot, and now hold their noses up like they have some special ability. Eventually, the ruse will end.

I see the use of "most" in quotes as the typical distraction or deceptive qualities of overpaid underworked middle management, FWIW. If cutting out the middleman is seen as good... :shades:

tlong

I wasn't judging the people as humans, but as useful overhead expenses. Seems a lot of the corporate world has too many chiefs.

Well of course there is good and bad in the useful overhead expenses, too. Some of it is absolutely necessary. If too much is bad, then senior management isn't doing their jobs. Sometimes the lower trough types try to lump these things all together, which is typically simplistic and perhaps that's why they're lower types. :P Lots at that level aren't too valuable, either. After all, even most of the dregs have jobs. More often than not, they *don't* ascend that far.

I sure hope the D3 makes are weeding out their dregs. Ford - probably moreso than the others. Chrysler- they're smaller to begin with but I'm not so sure. GM - some progress but not enough. After 35 years of bad DNA it's very hard to extract the good from the bad. I'm not sensing Akerson is dynamic enough as he should be. Perhaps time for a change.

fintail

Sadly, being a dreg doesn't seem to stop anyone from rising - not many examples of meritocracy in the world. I'd like to see a lot of these middle aged middle managers be able to start over in the climate of today and rise just the same. Most of them couldn't come close, even though they dismiss complaints about their spoiled and often needless demographic as being simplistic - yet never going into detail as they are simply unable. History won't look too kindly on the boomer middle manager. All they can do is deflect up or down, never explaining what value they add.

For GM, I think they've reformed their interior issues. There still might be some dead wood in the styling arena.

lemko

They've gotta get rid of these uncreative graduates from the same design schools that create all this schlock. Where are today's Bill Mitchells?

busiris

If anyone wants to see a great 1.5 hour program on this subject, search out The American Experience program that airs on PBS, and specifically the episode entitled The Silicon Valley.

The show explains how what we refer to as the Silicon Valley, and its companies came into being... And, how management styles there evolved radically.

fintail

There's definitely some sycophant stuff going on in the design schools, and maybe some cradle to grave ideal in the styling departments, too. I swear I see original Lumina in the Volt.

I don't know about Mitchell, but I think Exner works for Lexus now :shades:

fintail

I did kind of go OT, but maybe not much. I don't think any business needs more management to advance.

ateixeira

Currently made in Spain, but looks like they will shift production to Ohio.

I wonder which engine in the Fusion is the popular pick? So many choices...

andre1969

I don't know about Mitchell, but I think Exner works for Lexus now

Just to clarify, that's Exner, post-stroke! :sick:

tlong

I'd like to see a lot of these middle aged middle managers be able to start over in the climate of today and rise just the same.

I have many business acquaintances who are successful in exactly the situation you lament that's not available today. Very smart people who were clearly superior at early stages of their careers. One runs an entire manufacturing site. Two are Executive Directors at a major Fortune 500 company. Another is a VP in a major IT security consulting practice. These were all average individual contributors a decade ago, who are now middle-aged and doing quite well. For the truly good non-BS types, it takes not only the technical/domain skills, but the right other skills of communication and teamwork to get there. People who are sour, or not team players, or don't have "can-do" attitudes - well they don't work out very well. Lots of people aren't cut out to be successful at managing complexity.

Back to the dregs in Executive Management. An HR rep once told me something very relevant that stuck with me - "A-players hire A-players; B-players hire C-players". The A-players are the best and hire the best. The mediocre B-players feel threatened and don't want somebody smarter than themselves underneath who might be competition, or threatening. So they hire C-players. That's how mediocrity or worse festers in an organization. So take a look at GM over the past 30 years. Get those dregs up into the exec offices and they cannot/will not do what needs to be done to make the company excel. You end up with a lot of mediocrity and the company clearly underperforms. Contrast that with Google or Apple or Costco or Southwest Airlines - companies who have been led very successfully.

fintail

Yeah, Lexus isn't exactly at "Forward Look" today - more like deep in the recesses of 1961. When will they innovate with square steering wheels? :shades:

fintail

Many, huh. Flowery, you must be some kind of published expert. No doubt sheer ability can overcome a lot no matter the economic climate. And at the same time, a huge number of tenured suits I see in various companies don't give any signs that they owe their success to anything but starting in a less competitive environment.

Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, manage. Those who can't manage, middle manage. Those who can't middle manage, consult. The hierarchy of corporate work.

I think the problem at GM and other laggards isn't just bad hiring bad, but friends hiring friends and friends of friends. Good old boys club. Companies without generations of such legacy hiring practices see more success.

tlong

Flowery, you must be some kind of published expert

You're displaying some true colors there!

And at the same time, a huge number of tenured suits I see in various companies don't give any signs that they owe their success to anything but starting in a less competitive environment.

Well as I stated some time back, perhaps you're in the wrong environment where you work or live. I know that Rocky was tainted by his lifelong UAW area and mindset; the same problem could affect others.

Those who can, do. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, manage. Those who can't manage, middle manage. Those who can't middle manage, consult. The hierarchy of corporate work.

Cute. But so simplistic. GM could use a few good consultants right about now.

I think the problem at GM and other laggards isn't just bad hiring bad, but friends hiring friends and friends of friends.

That's not always so bad in and of itself. Certainly most people use relationships to help build companies. "Do you know anybody who would be good in this job?". It's back to the A vs. A, B vs. C issue. Smart people don't hire bad ones, even their friends.

For the US automakers, this discusion is a good example of why some of us wanted a much more significant redo that the bailouts prevented. By not letting entire groups be sold off, or entire management chains let go, there is still a lot of the mediocrity present in the organization. The full BK process would have been more likely to substantially clean all the old garbage out of the organization - something that only occurred to a lesser degree given the government sponsored BK process.

busiris

So take a look at GM over the past 30 years.

Take a little time and read about the internal infighting going on at GM during the creation of the Vega.

Lots of upper management infighting and sabotage going on at that time.

Here's one link for a quick read...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/news/vintage-speed/how-the-chevy-vega-almos- t-destroyed-gm

gagrice

That's not always so bad in and of itself. Certainly most people use relationships to help build companies. "Do you know anybody who would be good in this job?". It's back to the A vs. A, B vs. C issue. Smart people don't hire bad ones, even their friends.

You have a good handle on corporate America. I think the hiring of friends and family is much more prevalent at the worker bee level and especially Union hiring. Of course small businesses depend on friends and family to help, sometimes working for nothing if the business is failing. Working in the oilfields, the hiring is probably 90% friends and family. And when you put your reputation on the line recommending someone it is remembered. I was hired in the Arctic when the company was getting started. I recommended all but one of the original crew. We had all worked together at AT&T. So I knew the good techs. I was not very well thought of at AT&T after stealing 4 of their best technicians. That crew stayed together over 30 years total. My best friend worked with me for 37 years. He was the last to retire. Hiring friends & family can be good and bad.

uplanderguy

The comments underneath the article are interesting. What, not every Vega owner had to buy new fenders and doors in ten months? Or had to replace the engine in 10K miles? There's actually that kind of stuff said in a blog or two. As is usually the case IMHO, things are never as great or as bad as we remember, but generally someplace in the middle. I wouldn't have hesitated to buy a new Vega in the last couple years of production...in fact, I much prefer them to Chevettes.

xrunner2

I wonder which engine in the Fusion is the popular pick? So many choices...

Not to worry. Let the official Ford spokesman, in the baseball cap, in the interior of the building of a Ford commercial, help guide you. I mean, he has official Ford credentials in that he is not wearing his cap backwards.

tlong

Hiring friends & family can be good and bad.

Great story Gary. The key is that the best people won't recommend others (even friends) who aren't going to be good for the company. The dregs will recommend any friend no matter how shiftless or useless, since they are useless themselves. I'm sure your reputation would have been tarnished if you'd been a dreg recommending useless other job candidates. But you were a good worker who recommended good workers. Which is how a good (as opposed to bad) organization can be developed and be good for the employees and the business.

xrunner2

I wouldn't have hesitated to buy a new Vega in the last couple years of production...in fact, I much prefer them to Chevettes.

Absolutely amazing statement. Two of GM's pretty bad vehicles of all time. Per many car magazine reviewers. Vega, Chevette. GM apologizers, continue to drink the Kool-Aid. Do these people get any comps for their ridiculous endorsements of these GM products that GM has put their names into the graveyard? Will GM ever, ever rename any future product as a Vega or Chevette? Hmmm?

uplanderguy

Were you actually around to have ever driven in one, yet ridden in one? Yeah, I didn't think so.

I hated the styling, but my wife had a twelve-year old Chevette, in rusty NE OH, when we married. I never knew it to not start and run. I still hated it, because it was a Chevette! But it was built when Hondas also rusted out at the tops of front fenders here, a la Vega, and the CVCC engine was giving certain owners fits. Ever look at an early '70's Subaru? You'll be underwhelmed. Our local dealer gave his franchise back.

stever

And when you put your reputation on the line recommending someone it is remembered.

I dunno, the Slope is a different animal. An old friend of mine got fired not long ago. Lost track but I think it's the fourth or fifth time. He went to Mexico to chill for a while until the grapevine gets him another job up there.

Back to cars, I had a lot of friends in the 80's with Subarus and it's hard to imagine any car that suffered more rusted fenders than their cars did. They ran good but people literally had duck tape holding the sheet metal on.

Predicted falling sales for February don't involve GM or Ford. Try Honda and Nissan.

Despite Rising Gas Prices, February Auto Sales Strong at Estimated 15.5 Million SAAR, says Edmunds.com

fintail

I am stating it for what it is. A lot of smarmy suits who couldn't hack it if they came out school in the 21st century don't like that.

Funny though, I wasn't only talking about suits in my workplace, but outside people I've dealt with. Not seeing all of the smartness some seem to suggest exists out there in the middle and upper echelons of the corporate mirage. Just random claims and "simplistic" accusations by those who themselves never ante up any details.

So really, what realm of the pseudo white collar workplace has all of this smartness? Admit it, all of that is theory, just like 99% of economics - what you read in a book and study in class isn't what takes place in reality.

If the bad ones weren't hired, a lot of issues in the overall socio-economic spectrum wouldn't exist today. The smart ones hire stupid, too. I wonder what the proportional labor expenses are in management vs workers are today vs when the country had a healthy middle class, say 50 years ago. I bet it has risen.

I don't really see anything tangible showing a full on BK would have cleaned out the 74 layers of management and cronyism - it would have just employed more consultants, who have connections to the old guard. And the federal money would have eventually poured in.

busiris

I'm somewhere in the middle.

By the end of the Vega's production life cycle, most of the problems had been worked out. The problem at that point was a crap reputation, and no market for used Vegas. If you had one, you could only sell it for scrap... Other than a private sale, no dealer in his right mind would give you anything for it...

roadburner

Were you actually around to have ever driven in one, yet ridden in one? Yeah, I didn't think so.primary issue

I drove both. When they were new. From my standpoint, the Vega's greatest preference for European weakness was that moronic aluminum block/iron head engine design. Overall it wasn't that much worse than any other domestic subcompact. As for the Chevette? I drove a 1981 for several hours and concluded that I'd rather drive mmy y father's 1972 International Cub 154 lawn tractor, as it had an equivalent level of sophistication(and it's four cylinder engine had better driveability as well) and could also mow my lawn. In any event, by 1981 Detroit had thoroughly solidified my preference for import sport sedans and sports cars, and since then I have only owned two domestic cars- my 1984 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe(which WAS a fine work beater) and my 1999 Wrangler(a vehicle of such simple design that even UAW members could assemble it farly well).
That said, now that Chrysler is owned by Fiat I may actually buy a new Alfa- or maybe even an Abarth. Just as long as the UAW isn't screwing it together.

gagrice

But you were a good worker who recommended good workers.

Absolutely. I knew from my 10 years with these guys which were lazy and which enjoyed working and were good at it. Also I was being selfish wanting people I liked and people that I would not have to carry. A couple others wanted the job as it was a peach of a job. I told the manager what I thought of them. He wanted me to take a supervisor job. I wanted to continue in the Teamsters and my retirement. That was a smart move. Plus they wanted a college degree for the second level. That would have left me sitting behind a desk making less money and not nearly the retirement I now have. I have no regrets looking back at my 46 years working.

I am only interested in buying cars from companies with a workforce that is interested in making the best cars for the money. Hopefully they are made in America.

roadburner

By the end of the Vega's production life cycle, most of the problems had been worked out.

I think one issue that hurt Detroit until very recently was the persistent idea that small cars needed to spartan and dull in order to encourage customers to move up the food chain. The suits just couldn't believe that some people actually liked small cars and didn't want to drive a softly suspended boat, no matter how good the fuel economy.
My uncle was a white collar employee at the Ford Truck Plant in Louisville, and he used to give me his auto industry magazines when he was through with them. I remember one particular letter to the editor where the writer explained how much he liked his European sedan(I think it was an Audi or a Volvo). The next month a GM suit replied-with a straight face, incredibly-that the import owner didn't need to suffer in such a spartan car because GM sold several full size luxury sedans that returned similar fuel economy.
Much like a neutered dog, the suit just didn't get it...

tlong

Were you actually around to have ever driven in one, yet ridden in one? Yeah, I didn't think so.

I was, as I've posted before. My friend's 1974 Vega GT, hatchback, metallic dark blue, 4 speed. I actually liked the styling and the way it rode inside. Too bad about the holes that developed around the windshield and rear hatch window. And too bad about the failed engine block before 75K miles, too.

tlong

Funny though, I wasn't only talking about suits in my workplace, but outside people I've dealt with. Not seeing all of the smartness some seem to suggest exists out there in the middle and upper echelons of the corporate mirage. Just random claims and "simplistic" accusations by those who themselves never ante up any details.

I'm so sorry for your reality. I'm not seeing any more concrete evidence in your comments that I'm providing. Yet I'm sure each of us believes what we've seen through our own experiences. Yet even with negative and cynical perspectives, some have big cars and international trips. Pretty good how our dysfunctional society has provided for us in spite of it all.

Safe to say not everybody shared your views. Thank goodness for some diversity.

gagrice

I wonder what the proportional labor expenses are in management vs workers are today vs when the country had a healthy middle class, say 50 years ago. I bet it has risen.

Good question. I see more wasted management in our school districts and government agencies than most of the Private sector.

No place is more money wasted on consulting than Government. Projects that were being studied when I moved to Alaska in 1970 are still being studied and nothing done.

I don't really see anything tangible showing a full on BK would have cleaned out the 74 layers of management and cronyism

At least it would not have cost US as much. Unless we gave the UAW $billions to protect their cushy pension plan that was underfunded. It would have forced GM to either cut back and produce or go out of business. It would have allowed them to negotiate a fair contract with ALL UAW members. Not screw the Newbies and let the old timers slide.

gagrice

What, not every Vega owner had to buy new fenders and doors in ten months? Or had to replace the engine in 10K miles?

I was sent to school for 3 months in TN back in 1971. I rented a brand new Vega wagon that I thought looked pretty cool at the time. I put 13k miles on that rental car and the only issue was the brakes were making a lot of scraping noises by the end of the 13 weeks. Never worried about the mileage. It was all on the company CC. I was used to driving a 1970 Datsun PU so the Vega seemed pretty nice. I drove about every road in East TN and Western North Carolina with that Vega. I also bought a lot of antiques to ship back to Alaska. So it was handy for that. It was more reliable than the 1973 Subaru and 1978 Honda Accord I bought new in that decade.

gagrice

Pretty good how our dysfunctional society has provided for us in spite of it all.

You pointed out some interesting facts. When I was a teenager, NO ONE I knew had ever been to Europe even with their folks. In the 1950s and 60s a trip to the Grand Canyon or Yosemite was a BIG deal. Now kids are traveling all over the World for fun. It was a big deal when our whole class went to visit the zoo. Now they take the whole class for a week in Washington DC. No way the middle class was better off in the 50s, 60s or 70s. Unless of course you dad worked for GM in the UAW.

uplanderguy

All the comparisons to Europe remind me of a story I heard just last week from our financial advisor (retired college professor and PhD. who enjoys what he does). He was telling us about his German exchange student some time back. The kid drank alcohol in his teens, and his Dad called to say he was OK with that. After getting in other trouble, they sent the kid packing. I guess drinking in Germany at the time, anyway, was less frowned-upon for a teen than it is here. I guess there are some aspects of culture that 'the other side' will never understand.

dieselone

No way the middle class was better off in the 50s, 60s or 70s. Unless of course you dad worked for GM in the UAW.

I agree, it seems some see those times through rose colored glasses or cherry picked statistics;)

I had a grandpa who had to work 2 low paying jobs to provide for my dad and his siblings. He never owned a house and the only time he had new cars was when he was selling them. The idea that everyone had a good paying job, a house, and a new car every 2-3 years wasn't reality then anymore than today IMHO.

andre1969

Even in the Vega's final year, 1977, it sold about 100,000 units. And by then the Monza and Sunbird offshoots were doing pretty well.

The basic design ran from 1971-1980, and even the final Sunbirds and Monza sold well, so because of that, I couldn't call the Vega a total failure.

In those days, people expected small cars to be cheap and throwaway, so the Vega probably didn't do as much damage to GM's reputation as we might think.

IMO it was the Citation and its variants that really shot GM in the foot. They were more of a mainstream, bread-and-butter car, and seemed like the family car of the future when they debuted in a bleak, recession weary America that was becoming crippled by ever more expensive, ever more scarce gasoline.

People flocked to those X-cars in droves. Over 800,000 people bought Citations. The Skylark was a hot seller as well. The Omega/Phoenix didn't really live up to their sales expectations, but were still fairly strong sellers initially. Overall, probably somewhere around 1.3 to 1.4 million customers bought 1980 X-bodies. And, when they took the crown of most recalled car in history away from the Aspen/Volare, that was a lot of customers to piss off!

uplanderguy

I agree, Andre. It seems like the X-cars' big thing was the automatic trans and steering racks. I know a person or two who had stick shift X's and got high mileage and years out of them. GM finally started reimbursing for the racks. I know the locking rear brakes was a recall.

About Vegas returning 'scrap value' as trade-ins, I'd like to thumb through a NADA book, the kind you see at Carlisle and Hershey for sale by vendors, to see just how bad they were. I do seem to remember some resale 'backlash', but I have to wonder how worse they were as trade-ins than Pintos or Gremlins, the cars they were most sold against.

The Vega had a feature where if oil got too low, the car would stop running. I've heard/read more than once where people gave a Vega away, practically, just to find it was low on oil and ran OK after topping off.

uplanderguy

No way the middle class was better off in the 50s, 60s or 70s. Unless of course you dad worked for GM in the UAW.

I'm far better off financially than my parents were, and my wife has a good job too. However, for a guy who didn't have a college education, my Dad did well by starting out low and working his way up. I do believe there is less of that today.

In our town (less than 10K population and not a suburb of anything), there were a few factories/mills where a good number of guys made a pretty good living. Most people today have wives working as well, which was rare where I was from even into the '70's.

The loss of manufacturing in this country is the thing that makes it so hard for someone without a college degree to maintain a decent living. My Studebaker dealer friend said that guys in the mills could buy a new car every three or four years. Try telling that to someone who works at WalMart today.

I believe that the middle-class is worse off today, overall, than forty or fifty years ago. There are no decent-paying manufacturing jobs--at least compared to what used to be out there.

ateixeira

in the 80's with Subarus and it's hard to imagine any car that suffered more rusted fenders

True, but:

* they were the only cars out there when it snowed
* they sold in snow belt states that treated roads with salt/chemicals
* at least they were still running!

Even with the body panels falling off those things would just go forever.

ateixeira

No way the middle class was better off in the 50s, 60s or 70s

I can comment on the latter portion - in the 70s I remember dad brought home a 25" color TV and it was sort of a big deal.

Other kids in the neighborhood would come over to our house to watch TV at our place because we had the "big screen".

Today, my 13 year old is the only one in her class that doesn't have the latest smart phone, and our 58" screen could be bigger.

I could get a 70-80" screen for what my dad paid for that 25"er adjusted for inflation. Maybe 90".

dieselone

I wasn't judging the people as humans, but as useful overhead expenses. Seems a lot of the corporate world has too many chiefs.

I agree with that. It seems many companies see business growth as a reason to create another department and/or create new positions at the corporate office that aren't related to the core business. Which can lead to staffs of various departments competing against each other in order to justify their existence among other problems. It's my opinion this a big reason some companies lose sight of what made them successful to begin, plus change can be tough to embrace, particularly for older more established companies.

gagrice

IMO it was the Citation and its variants that really shot GM in the foot.

The GEO Metro did nothing to make me like GM cars. I flew into Kona in 1990 and went to pick up my midsize car at Budget. All they had was a GEO Metro hatch thing. It was very small but I took it. Loaded up my luggage and headed to my condo. That car would not track straight and the brakes made a horrible sound every time you stepped on them. I got to the condo, unloaded my luggage and drove back to the airport. I said if this is all you have forget it. They did not charge me. I caught a shuttle to my storage that is half way to Kailua where my bikes were stored. Ended up riding my bike the whole 3 weeks of that trip. I was healthier for it and saved the cost of a rental car.

stever

Ah, but VW Bugs would go places even Subarus wouldn't. And they didn't rust away. And they ran.

Unfortunately you couldn't see out the windows below 40 degrees. :sick:

My FWD '82 Tercel would almost keep up with my friends' Subarus too, except I'd have to walk up their driveways.

(Didn't everyone my age spring the $200 for a ticket on Icelandair in the 70s to go hosteling around Europe?)

dieselone

I could get a 70-80" screen for what my dad paid for that 25"er adjusted for inflation. Maybe 90".


I have a 65" Panasonic plasma that cost less this year than the 32" Sony LCD I have in a bedroom purchased in 2006.

But yeah, when I was kid in the 70's and 80's, I thought anyone who took a family trip to Florida for spring break was rich. If they had two new cars in the driveway, they were loaded;)

We weren't poor, but my mom never worked, my dad made a decent living, but certainly not enough to support a family of 5 in any kind of extravagance. My parents rarely owned more than one car as my mom never learned to drive. If I went on vacation it was because my grandpa took me. If my dad were to take a week off work, it was to do something around the house. We rarely took family vacations.

gagrice

(Didn't everyone my age spring the $200 for a ticket on Icelandair in the 70s to go hosteling around Europe?)

Only the rich kids. $200 was a lot of money back then. I bought a new 70 Datsun PU truck in Anchorage for $2000. You are showing your affluence. I had a good job back then and could not even think about a vacation in Europe. Lucky to be able to fly back to CA and stay with family every couple years.

gagrice

If my dad were to take a week off work, it was to do something around the house. We rarely took family vacations.

I only remember one family vacation through high school. And we camped out and stayed with family. I was gone from home several years before I ever stayed in a motel. In fact it was my honeymoon when I was 21. Young people today are clueless about the 50s, 60s and 70s.

stever

lol, yeah, growing up in North Mississippi in the 50s and 60s was just a hotbed of country club parties and Cadillac cruising (my old man did become a druggist on the GI bill and my mom worked as a RN, so we did get new Buicks every 3 to 5 years - at least during "good" flu years. :shades: ).

gagrice

You grew up in a 1% family. RN is an even better job today than back then. My mom did not work. My dad worked two jobs. Different culture than today. He did go to school on the GI bill. That may have helped if he wanted to be a teacher instead of a carpenter.

dieselone

I'm far better off financially than my parents were, and my wife has a good job too. However, for a guy who didn't have a college education, my Dad did well by starting out low and working his way up. I do believe there is less of that today.

I can honestly say myself, my brother, and my sister are all better off than our parents. Same with my wife's siblings, they're all are doing well and better than their parents too.

I believe that the middle-class is worse off today, overall, than forty or fifty years ago. There are no decent-paying manufacturing jobs--at least compared to what used to be out there.

I don't have concrete data to back up my opinion and regardless it can be debated all day long. But what I've noticed in my small view of the world, is wealth, or really the ability to earn an income is more concentrated today.

30+ years ago if a guy went to college or had a valuable skill, he'd get married and have a family. His wife likely didn't work, if she did, she was in a service related job such as a teacher, nurse, or in some type of administrative low paying position.

Today we have more women getting degrees and obtaining higher paying jobs than 30+ years ago. These women generally don't marry someone with a substantially lower earning potential. So you end up with two high earners married, or a situation where the male at least has a good wage.

I see this all the time with my wife's employees. None of them make under $120k/yr and very few have stay home spouses. Many are dual 6 figure earners and we're not talking about NY City or LA, this is podunk Illinois where besides taxes, it's fairly inexpensive to live.

We tend to talk about both parents working as a bad thing, but I think that paints with a broad brush. Trust, me if you're wife or husband has a decent earning potential, they're likely going to work, particularly if they went to school to do so.

My wife started out after she got her degree earning over twice my starting salary, why in the world would we give up that kind of money just so she could stay home. 40 years ago she likely wouldn't have had the same opportunity as in her profession it was 95% male, now it's 50/50.

We tend to look at the 50's as the pinnacle of the family unit, but my grandma was brutally honest. She flat out said she felt miserable being stuck at home with 4 kids all day w/o a car and was jealous of the few mothers around her that worked outside of the house. My grandpa worked two jobs so he was gone 70+ hours a week.

andre1969

I could get a 70-80" screen for what my dad paid for that 25"er adjusted for inflation. Maybe 90".

My grandparents bought a 25" Zenith console in 1972 for around $700. Adjusting for inflation, that's about $3856 today!

I remember my Mom buying a 25" Zenith console in 1979 for around $590. That's "only" around $1871 today.

In 1983 my Granddad helped me buy a 19" Toshiba "portable", which came out to around $400 with tax. I paid half with money I saved up, and he matched it, as a Christmas gift. That would come out to around $925 today.

I think the last tube tv I bought was in 2005. 32" Sharp. With the stand, it came out to around $400. Or $471 today.

Just bought a new tv for Christmas, a 55" LG LCD 3D tv. It came with 4 pairs of 3D glasses (or 8, can't remember now) and I bought an extended warranty. Came to $1265.98.

Backtracking to 1972, when Granddad bought that $700 Zenith, that would've been like spending $229 for a tv.

Funny how when we look back and think about how cheap things were in the "good old days", often they don't look so reasonable when adjusting for inflation.

I think where the big hit has come though, is real estate. My grandparents bought their house in 1950, and paid $8500 for it. Adjusting for inflation, that would be $81,219 today. I'm sure there are places where you can still get a decent house for that, but the DC area isn't one of them!

dieselone

I wonder what the proportional labor expenses are in management vs workers are today vs when the country had a healthy middle class, say 50 years ago. I bet it has risen.

Definitely, it has to do with productivity as much as anything else. Labor is just another commodity in manufacturing and as you know we can produce far more today with far less labor than 30-50 years ago.

stever

You grew up in a 1% family.

With a '53 Buick, a couple of Buick wagons, followed by a push button Valiant and a mid 60s Falcon? The Galaxie 500 was probably the peak for those years. In the 80s my mom moved on from a GMC pickup to an Impala to a Protege that she drove until she quit driving. The 1%'ers in our town were the docs.

Backpacking Europe was "cheap" back then. Hostels, plockwurst at the grocery, postal buses, trains or walking. The only good meal I had was when Icelandair delayed the flight for 8 hours and bused the whole planeload out for dinner.