NY Times Story on Pilot Population Decline

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/26/fa...=1&oref=slogin

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:53:18 -0400, "Marco Leon"
wrote in :

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/26/fa...=1&oref=slogin

The number of student pilots is down by about a third since 1990,
from 129,000 to 88,000. The number of private pilots is down from
299,000 to 236,000, according to statistics kept by the Federal
Aviation Administration. And they are aging.

Some longtime private pilots fear that an industry is withering,
and a bit of Americana is slipping away, along with a bit of
freedom and joy. And it is happening in part because of lack of
interest; Walter Mitty doesn’t want to fly anymore.



Could it be that Americans are working longer hours?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/.../30/ilo.study/
CNN) -- You're not imagining it. The United Nations' International
Labor Organization (ILO) has the proof: "Workers in the United
States are putting in more hours than anyone else in the
industrialized world."



And is it possible that the increase in hours worked don't equate to
more disposable income?

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/workhours.html
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, though the average
work week has increased by just over an hour and a half a week,
the proportion of people who work much longer weeks (48 hours and
more) has risen greatly. The occupations which saw the greatest
increase in the percentage of workers averaging 48 hours per week
or more were professionals and managers (who are most often not
paid overtime though they are among the highest-paid workers) and
sales and transportation workers (who are among the lowest-paid
workers and earn more as they log more hours). The Bureau of Labor
Statistics also notes that high unemployment numbers also
stimulate salaried workers who are employed to put in more hours
each week to safeguard their positions.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

Could it be that Americans are working longer hours?

And is it possible that the increase in hours worked don't equate to
more disposable income?

Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are the
primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed higher but
so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long Island, NY for example
is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage while bringing up a family leaves
little room to blow $7K on a year's worth of flight training.

The article mentions a number of factors and it's interesting in that they
are all for the most part true and all contribute to the problem.

Marco

Marco Leon writes:

Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are the
primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed higher but
so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long Island, NY for example
is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage while bringing up a family leaves
little room to blow $7K on a year's worth of flight training.

Forty years ago, a "starter" house might cost 1.5 times the annual salary of a
person in the middle class. Now it may cost ten times the annual salary of
such a person (although the middle class is disappearing).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Marco Leon writes:

Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are the
primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed higher
but
so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long Island, NY for
example
is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage while bringing up a family
leaves
little room to blow $7K on a year's worth of flight training.

Forty years ago, a "starter" house might cost 1.5 times the annual salary
of a
person in the middle class. Now it may cost ten times the annual salary
of
such a person (although the middle class is disappearing).


Then someone is buying way too much house!

Maxwell writes:

Then someone is buying way too much house!

How much house can you get for $60,000 (1.5 times the average salary in the
U.S.)?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Maxwell wrote:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

Marco Leon writes:


Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are the
primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed higher
but
so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long Island, NY for
example
is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage while bringing up a family
leaves
little room to blow $7K on a year's worth of flight training.

Forty years ago, a "starter" house might cost 1.5 times the annual salary
of a
person in the middle class. Now it may cost ten times the annual salary
of
such a person (although the middle class is disappearing).



Then someone is buying way too much house!



I like to watch these "Flip this House". I would call them entry level
homes (1100 sq ft) and they can go for $400,000 in LA, SFO area. I am
not sure saleries are up there for the young starting out. My kids
bought 40+ year old homes in the Fayetteville, AR area and I was amazed
how much they had to spend - getting close to $100K and these were in
the 1300 sq ft range. They are not lawyers or engineers.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Marco Leon writes:

Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are
the primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed
higher but so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long
Island, NY for example is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage
while bringing up a family leaves little room to blow $7K on a year's
worth of flight training.

Forty years ago, a "starter" house might cost 1.5 times the annual
salary of a person in the middle class. Now it may cost ten times the
annual salary of such a person (although the middle class is
disappearing).

Good thing you live in a dumpster then huh?

bertei

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 03:32:26 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Marco Leon writes:

Yes, and yes. While I don't think that the reasons you mentioned are the
primary reasons, I do think they play a part. Salaries are indeed higher but
so are the housing prices. A "starter" house in Long Island, NY for example
is around $450K. Paying for that mortgage while bringing up a family leaves
little room to blow $7K on a year's worth of flight training.

Forty years ago, a "starter" house might cost 1.5 times the annual salary of a
person in the middle class.

40 years ago a "starter home" was a small, quiet two bedroom home. For
the last 20 years a "starter home" was more than what most of us ever
hoped ever achieve 40 yerars ago. 20 years ago young professionals
would move out of their apartment into their first home that ran more
than a quarter million at least in this area. HOwever that home would
be gaining equity due to inflation far faster than they were making
payments. Now starter homes are becoming much more modest around here.

such a person (although the middle class is disappearing).
No it's not.
It's just becoming more isolated from the upper and lower classes.

Roger (K8RI) writes:

No it's not.
It's just becoming more isolated from the upper and lower classes.

It's actually disappearing, not just becoming isolated. The distribution of
wealth is moving back to the way it was in the nineteenth century, with a very
small minority of very wealthy people and a very vast underclass that just
manages to squeak by--and almost no real middle class at all.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.