Amazing the self delusion some will commit to cling to their (failed) political belief system.
In 1981 people were already complaining that it was no longer feasible to raise a family on a single income. The term "latchkey children", which was coined during WWII to describe the phenomenon of children coming home from school to an empty house due to one parent fighting the war and the other parent working, returned for a while in the late 70s.
But the why of it all escapes us. It escapes us because we are, without a doubt, the most willfully spoiled bunch of silver-spooners society in all history. To understand why the middle class has shrunk so much, we need to look at our definition of middle class.
In the 1950s, we were riding an economic high. Production (thus employment) was up because the Cold War started before the economic downturn from our WWII debts could be felt. But middle class was far different than what we view as middle class today. In the 1950s, middle class included a family living in a 2-3 bedroom, usually single bath (hence all the sit-coms showing fights over bathroom times). Less than 50% had any garage, less than 20% had attached garages. Children often slept in a single room. Those considered toward the upper levels of middle class could afford to separate the children by gender. The average middle class family had a single car, mostly driven by the adult with the full time job. Children rode bikes, even into their late teens and up.
Come the 60s and things start changing. by the mid 60s it was becoming more and more common for older teens to attain (usually through working in some fashion) their own vehicle. With feminism working (still mostly in the background, but still prevalent) more women were entering the workforce creating the two-income family. Expectations were shifting. The view of the average middle income family is starting to add rooms to the typical middle-class house, and add cars to the driveways and garages.
By the 70s, the 50s view of middle class was considered "quaint". No longer was it acceptable for 2-3 children share a single bedroom. Now its expected that some, if not all children get their own room. Sitcoms pounce on the phenomenon showing older children fighting over whose turn it is to get their own room. Older teens were almost expected to attain their own cars during high school, which mostly meant barely-running "clunkers" from the 50s, purchased via wages from after-school jobs at McDonald's. The transition of what we call middle class continues, with the definition being based on higher and higher levels of wealth.
Come the 80's, two-income households are now the standard instead of the exception. And, no, it was NOT because Reagan refused to let a few thousand people hold the entire country hostage. It was simply the continuation of a trend started 30 (some say 40) years prior. By 1980 the middle class home included a room for each child (minimum) and several bathrooms. And now each child's room often includes their own television. The percentage of garages not only went way up, but the typical size increased from single-car to two. Upper middle class would have 3-car garages. And, yes, they would be filled, and with nicer cars.
In the 90s the trend continues, but there are cracks showing. The definition of middle class of the 90's would more evenly match the definition of upper-class of the 50s. Then the tech bubble hit, and the definition of middle class derives and even higher level of wealth.
Comes the turn of the millennium (but actually began with the tech bubble bursting in late 1998), and it is more and more readily apparent that the numbers of families in the U.S. able to achieve the status of middle class is shrinking. However, more families than in the 1950s are living in their own homes, more families than ever own more than a single car, the idea of going without color cable TV is considered ludicrous, and even lower class households commonly have one or more household computers with high speed internet access.
So I ask: is the "failing" of the economy to sustain a "middle class" due to the economic policies the last 30 years, or could it possibly be due to our spoiled, silver-spoon attitudes having redefined middle class to a level of wealth that would have been envied in the 50s?
