American men in their 30s are earning less than their father's generation did, challenging a long-held belief that each generation will be better off than the one that preceded it, according to a new study published Friday.
Relying on Census Bureau figures, the study's authors found that after adjusting for inflation, men in their 30s in 2004 had a median income of about $35,000 per year, for a 12 percent drop compared with $40,000 per year for men in the same age group in 1974.
Interesting question that I am not sure I really know the answer. Of course, I know my family's financial history-we were middle class. Dad a union construction worker who did a lot of extra work and overtime. Mom was a stay at home mom. We went to private Catholic school. Mom didn't start working occasionally until I was in high school and her whole salary went to tuition payments. My parents were fairly frugal and even bought some real estate including a vacation home that they still spend time in.
As for my husband's family, middle class as well. Dad was a cop, Mom was a pretty much a stay at home mom, but occasionally did nursing jobs as well. Both kids went to private Catholic school as well.
As for us, middle class, Husband is in sales, I am a work at home mom. I bring in some income through some online marketing stuff. No Catholic schools here. We couldn't afford the tutition.
Is my husband's salary the same, below or above my Dad's or his own father when they were in their 30s? Who knows? I never asked their salaries. Considering it was 30-40 years ago, I would say we make comparable in today's dollars vs then.
What about you?