As an economist I can appreciate the halfbaked scientific argument your putting across but even in those terms its hard to shake off the ideological diarrhea. If humans were robots then the facts you point out would amount to something but if you factor in the socio-political importance of the middle class then your argument turns out to be complete BS, and just a really lame attempt at jumbling some statistics to throw pot shots at the president.

I suggest you read Fareed Zakaria' s the future of freedom... Get your facts and notions straight

yea, i agree the ideological diarrhea. If humans were robots then the facts you point out would amount to something but if you factor in the socio-political importance of the middle class then your argument turns out to be complete BS...Thanks!
Ar Condicionado Imoveis Acompanhantes Massagistas

This was an extremely poorly thought out and written piece. Middle class is different in every culture and economy, and rather than trying to nail down an economic standard, go with a more subjective standard.

My definition of the 'Middle Class' would be more along the lines of 'getting by comfortably though not ostentatiously'. A large enough income to allow for the basics needs of life, some luxuries, and enough to set aside as a cushion against bad times and to allow for the upward advancement of your progeny. For the most part, they're not looking to become 'Wealthy', they want to do 'Well'. Most if not all of the 'Middle Class' are not so much devoted to the acquisition of wealth as they are the fulfillment and quality of their lives, and those of their families.

But the poor are neither defeated or listless. they have the same desire to improve their lot as anyone else. The 'Poor' are those who are facing true hardship, who must choose between which necessities they must forgo in order to survive. Where I mark the break between the poor and the middle class is when even though both must budget their resources, the poor must husband even the smallest amount in order to survive whereas the middle class has (no matter how small) resources that can be expended on things other than sheer necessity.

The Middle class doesn't have to choose between food or shelter . . . they have to choose between chicken and steak, a house or an apartment, if you will. That frees them from the 'grind of poverty', and allows the resources of their minds and spirits to express themselves.

There is nothing wrong with being a shopkeeper or an employee. But that's merely a stepping stone - you should realistically expect that your children should do better than you. They may take over your shop eventually, but they now have the option of opening another, or expanding, or going to school and becoming something better than you. The 'Middle Class' is the yeast whose fermentation allows societies and economies to rise. Kill off the yeast and the bread stays flat . . .

Personally I think middle class should be defined by amount of assets/networth compared to rest of the population, let say 50-90 percentile. So in India if you make over 1000 a month and worth 20k USD you would definitely fall into middle class because on average people make and worth a lot less. Whereas in the US the middle class would cover a much bigger range of salaries.

That said, the whole "middle class" concept is used as a political concept to rally supporters more than anything else. Since most people think they are part of the middle class it's easily to use this concept to unite people into some kind of common cause. This is why so few people bothered to create a good definition for "middle class", doing so would create division among the population and more importantly the message.

I have a hard time understanding what CHARLES KENNY is trying to tell us or to prove to us. I don't always ascribe entrepreneurship or innovation to middle class. Entrepreneur comes from all classes. I descry that upper middle class seem to be more innovative because of education and resources more lavishly available to them. Innovation takes time. When you work 3 jobs, it is a little harder to innovate.

Middle class is the bedrock of a stable society and productive economy for numerous reasons. It is vexatiously puzzling to be ricocheted with a fable under the guise of scientific findings that middle class "is no more economically productive and civic-minded than anyone else".

If CHARLES KENNY is trying to convince us that a society or an economy with few or no middle class is as good as a society with dominant middle class, he is doing a poor job. "The Myth of the Middle Class" is no more mysterious than a reporter trying to come out with something just to meet a deadline or to keep the conversation going at an Irish bar. It is not well thought.

FP should be ashamed for putting this article online. This article is not only a defecation on the reputation of SAIS, but is just stunning in the low quality level of its argument and analysis. As a conservative, or from any ideological standpoint, this kind of writing is just incredibly isolated, embarrassing, and revolting to read as a student.

The only "optimistic" thing about this author is that he inspires me to have faith in our C+ business students; particularly, that they might someday be able to become seniors fellows at the Center for Global Development. The only thing that we surmise about Charles Kenny is that along with masturbating with $100 bills in front of his vanity mirror, he also enjoys verbally pissing on those "below" him.

I would rather throw up into my hands and blind myself then read another article by such a detached and distanced "professional." Absolutely embarrassing.

Nobody seems to be addressing the one good point I believe the author made concerning the overwhelming role of the poor in the Arab Spring. The reluctance of business owners in Syria, for instance, to join in the opposition against their privileged position in society as a result of Assad's regime seems to confirm this theory. Similarly, one cannot ignore the facts Mr. Kenny raises as regards the primary actors of the revolution in Tunisia.

Having said that, I do not endorse the overall thesis of the article as regards to the importance of a middle class in a growing society; in fact I believe the example I raised in Syria confirms this hypothesis as the Syrian economy is most certainly not growing. If the opposition can encompass business leaders and gain their support in the revolution - and most importantly maintain their cooperation afterwards! - the aftermath could be a more robust and industrious society.

The primary source of creativity for members in the Middle Class is enough spare time and income to pursue hobbies and other negative cash flow R&D schemes, a very few of which turn out to be extremely valuable in the long run despite merciless censorship and suppression by the rich. Unlike the poor who have little spare time and cash to do this; and the rich too busy waging class war for their short-term gain and to everyone else’s detriment.

Plus Middle Class values of hard work, delayed gratification and the intrinsic value of art, scientific curiosity, civic mindedness, compassion and creativity are better motivators for its young students to excel, than the mere desperation of poverty and smug self-entitlement of the rich.

Finally, the Middle Class serves the rich as a sword and a shield. First, it provides them with a protective corps of teachers, officers, shrinks, lawyers and judges. Second, as a near-to-hand ablative shield of victims for the petty criminality poverty multiplies and wealth insulates against. Third, as an exemplary promise of reward for the hard-working poor and their children, provided they behave.

Of course, this sword and shield can be reversed just as readily in favor of the poor and against the rich, should the latter prove stupid enough to provoke that reversal. Revolutionaries tend to be children of the Middle Class.

All the above should be obvious to you and would be if your critical faculties were not hopelessly atrophied. Out of pure curiosity, please tell me: did you become obtuse because you are well paid to be, or did you become well paid because you are naturally obtuse?

As with your entire class, the jury is still out.

As for the End of the World with good betting odds, based on leadership by the terminally obtuse: read ‘em and weep.

http://www.naturalnews.com/033564_solar_flares_nuclear_power_plants.html

When politicians, economists, academics and journalists try to assess the current economic status of the "American middle class," the debate often begins with a question that some concede is all but impossible to answer: Who, exactly, is middle class in America today?One way to find out is to ask Jerry Orzechowicz, a salesman in the hospitality industry, who lives in Merrillville, Ind., population 30,000, tucked in the northwest corner of the state, about 35 miles outside Chicago.

Orzechowicz and his wife, who also works, earn a combined annual income of between $70,000 and $90,000 and have two kids, one of whom is still in college. They own their own home, four cars and four TVs — including a high-definition widescreen model with surround sound, They can also make use of Affiliate Programs to get benefits for their social awareness programs. Orzechowicz says just about anyone living on $50,000 a year can enjoy a middle-class existence in his neighborhood, which is why he says he’s puzzled when he hears that it’s getting harder to maintain that lifestyle in America.“You can have a house and pay the bills and put food on the table and save a little and take a little vacation once a year," he said. "To me, that’s maybe lower end of the middle class, but it’s better than 98 percent of the people in the world.”

I don't think people are ever going to agree one where exactly the line between classes lay, but anybody who's neither exceptionally poor nor exceptionally wealthy could be considered middle class and I think most people recognize that the "middle class" constitutes the majority of consumers.

A growing economy is largely dependent on a strong middle class, right now we don't have that.

This blog is fantastic.I would like to introduce this nice website to my friends. My products: condizionatori climatizzatori

middle class of course if the largest group
, and the middle class indeed has the great impact on the economy.

I have a hard time understanding what CHARLES KENNY is trying to tell us or to prove to us. I don't always ascribe entrepreneurship or innovation to middle class. Entrepreneur comes from all classes. I descry that upper middle class seem to be more seslichat innovative because of education and resources more lavishly available to them. Innovation takes time. When you work 3 jobs, it is a little harder to innovate.

What the worldwide evidence recommends is that turning into middle class may not suddenly turn you into an entrepreneur or an innovator. Indeed, quite the opposite is true: The reason that many in the middle classes are richer is considering more of them receive constant 9-to-5 careers, with weekly or month-to-month paychecks. By way of contrast, poor folks are more likely to work in casual labor, usually paid by way of the hour, regularly going stretches without employment. We might speak about every brand-new graduate into the middle class as a possible next Invoice Gates, however the certainty is that many more reasonably aspire to be the next Walmart employee.

"Ninety-one percent of Americans self-identify as upper-middle, middle, or lower-middle class."

If $10 a day or $3,650 per year defines middle class then they are right. The United States $10,890 is the line for poverty, with roughly 14% below that level.

forexample he U.S considers lower Middle Class to be from $35,000 per year, which would be Upper class in some countries.

The rest of what he says is also meaningless, and appears just to be an example of meaningless unrelated facts to try and prove his viewpoint.

It's a shame it did not provide a method to test his theories.