[sonny]

What are the biggest differences in todays middle class versus the middle class of 50 yrs ago.

[HABU]

Todays middle class makes 5X what the middle class of 50 years ago did?

[sonny]

Yea.....and the cost of living went up 10 times!:what:

[BenW]

The liberal definition of the modern Middle Class is "the wealthiest Americans." These "wealthiest Americans" are then taxed to provide services for the welfare class, which in the liberal lexicon are defined as the "middle class" or more often and ironically, as the "working class."

Sorry -- I get this way every April. The mood peaks around the 15th, and it generally takes the rest of the month for it to wear off.

[JohnBT]

I was born in 1950. Is that close enough for an eyewitness account?

My mother had worked in a factory during WWII and for a few years afterward. She did not work from the time I was born until I started the 8th grade. We had a small house, one new car every 4 years or so(they wouldn't run more than 60,000 miles back then) and no air conditioning in the car or the house. The tv got 3 channels and you had to get up to change the channel. All through my childhood I was allowed to roam the neighborhood pretty much at will and walk with friends downtown to see a movie and buy candy and baseball cards. I lived in Baltimore. It was really nice back then. Then we moved to Rockville Maryland - about 15 miles north of D.C. - and I started the 8th grade.

Now? Both spouses work to make 2 car payments and a mortgage payment. Credit card payments, too. Bigger houses with 2 or 3 bathrooms that one income can't support. Nobody wants to be thrifty and live simply. AC - house and cars. Multiple televisions with HBO. Big televisions. Electronics. Did I mention credit card payments?

Oh well, times change.

John

[ACP230]

Back then it was easier for a family to make it into the middle class, and stay there, with only the father working.

I think most middle class families had no credit card and hence no credit card debt. The only debt they may have carried was a mortgage on a home.

Guns could be bought without any Federal paperwork. Machine guns were affordable for middle class shooters with that much of an itch to scratch. (If you find some old MG ads don't read the prices, they'll make you sick!)

[Cactus]

As for economic conditions, the middle class today are MUCH better off than 50 years ago.

Home ownership among Americans is at an all time high. The average home today averages around 2000 sf compared to around 1000 sf 50 years ago.

The average middle class family today has 2 or more cars compared to only one, or none, 50 years ago. The modern cars are more comfortable, safer, faster, last longer and get better gas mileage. The cost of gas, adjusted for inflation, is lower now than 50 years ago.

Virtually every family (including the poor) today has at least one color television whereas fifty years ago a b/w television was a luxury enjoyed by few in the middle class. Most middle class families today have a washer and dryer in their homes whereas 50 years ago they went to the laundrymat or used a wringer washer and hung their clothes out to dry.

Today, many middle class family can afford to take their vacations in Disneyland, Mexico or other exotic places. Fifty years ago, air travel was out of the question for all but the wealthy. A week at a local campground, sleeping in a tent, was a common vacation.

Today, we pay less for food, as a percentage of our income, than a family did 50 years ago. We also have a much greater selection of what we can eat. Frozen food (and home freezers) has become common and we are able to have fresh fruit and vegetables year round. We also spend much more time eating out than 50 years ago, fast food joints have made it cheaper to do so.

Our economy provides many more jobs today than it did 50 years ago. It was uncommon for married women to work then, today it is typical. Without our expanded economy, this would not be possible.

It is still possible for only one parent to work and still provide for their family. Many of the comforts of today are still possible with one parent working that were either unavailable or economically out of reach 50 years ago.

The main BAD point economically today versus 50 years ago? Taxes! We pay a much greater percentage of our income in taxes today than we ever did 50 years ago.

[Monkeyleg]

I also was born in 1950, and into a middle-class family. My dad didn't get a new car until the 1960's. He built his own TV--the first one on our block--and the whole neighborhood would come over to watch the few hours of broadcasting. There were five boys in our family, and our mother didn't work; she was a full-time mom.

The biggest difference between the middle class of the 50's and now is that today we have more "stuff." Most middle-class folks don't have just one TV, they have several, including some of the monster 42" models. They don't have just one car, they have two or three or more. In 1950 a 3000 square-foot house would have been considered a mansion by most; today it's quite common.

All of this, of course, requires both parents to work, which leaves the kids on their own. In 1950, a kid whose parents were never around would be one that other parents would warn against.

Just my own observations and .02.

[TimH]

Gosh my wife & I still live in the fifties :rolleyes: No car payments, small 800sf house no cable, one 19" color tv & no credit card debt. I better get in the 21st centry

[Sodbuster]

You beat me to that thought, Tim. Does the middle class having more "stuff" mean they have more disposable income, or more debt? BTW An interesting and mostly insightful book on class in the US is "Class: A Guide Through the American Status System" by Paul Fussell, even though it was published twenty years ago.

[TimH]

Well we do have a mortgage. Hopefully will pay house off this summer. I guess what gets me is when we were looking to buy a house the bank approved a loan for 4X what we ended up spending. I am very fortunate that my wife sees accumulation of "things" the same way I do. BTW guns aren't things, they're tools!

[CZ-75]

Did I mention credit card payments?

If there is any reason why the middle class aren't better off, this is it.

They get this way through buying too much stuff; I'm one of them.


As others have alluded, though, the standard of living has gone up through innovation and creature comforts. Air conditioning, microwaves, washers, dryers, and dishwashers have aided this. Big screen TVs, home theater stereos, etc. haven't.

My mom grew up in the '50s and her family had to take boarders to help with the bills, had one USED car every 3-4 years, spent the summer sweating, and never went more than 100 miles from home for a vacation, so the "good old days" weren't quite as good as they seemed.

[Standing Wolf]

Did I mention credit card payments?

My father was in his sixties before he got a credit card, and then it was an American Express card he acquired just to take my mother to Europe. He paid off the balance as soon as they returned from their two-week vacation of a lifetime, tossed it in a drawer, and never used it again.

I got my first credit card at 24 or 25 or 26. It took me until two years ago to pay off all my credit card debt—and I'm 54 now.

[wingman]

As for economic conditions, the middle class today are MUCH better off than 50 years ago."


HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, I am sorry
that is funny., :barf:

[Sisco]

Yea.....and the cost of living went up 10 times!

I remember clearly in 1970 I was a freshman in high school and the local Plymouth dealer got a new Road Runner in. We went in to check it out and saw the $4000 price sticker. My heart fell. I would NEVER be able to afford one of those! Four grand for a car? No way!
Just spent more than that on my daughters school car. :scrutiny:

[JohnBT]

Yeah, I remember those days, too. Along about 1966 or so I looked at an SS396 convertible. It was $3300 or $3600. I was making $1.15 an hour at McDonalds humping 100-pound bags of spuds up out of the basement and turning them into fries.

Of course, when I finished grad school the end of 1973 I started out in 1974 making $9600 a year and that was more than enough to live on. Bought a new Datsun, a new bike and new...you get the idea....life was good. That same job, with an M.S., starts at $26,700 now.

I agree that we have more conveniences these days, I'm just not convinced that the quality of life is better with so many people working so much to afford everything that they want.

I have seen too many of my younger coworkers struggling to make ends meet over the years to believe it is a better way of life.

One that is typical is making about $35k and her husband is making over $60k with overtime. They bought one of those 2700 sq.ft. homes, used, and have 2 decent cars. Of course if they'd quit trading them in every 2 or 3 years they'd have more money.

After paying daycare bills for 5 years and now private school tuition and aftercare for one a year...she is pregnant again. For vacations they do one week in Myrtle Beach and one at Disney World.

She doesn't have lunch and gas money a lot of days and I don't understand where it's all going. I've asked her and she doesn't know either. Sad.

This is only one example of many I've seen just this morning at work.

I must be un-American - I paid off my home in less than 20 years, paid cash for a $24k '02 Forester, and don't have any outstanding debts. I'm only 52 and have worked for the same place(different jobs, but the same place) since 1974. And I've never suscribed to HBO or Cinemax :)

I use my Visa card for on-line purchases and stuff like hotel reservations. I never carry a balance - ever - they hate me. I see now they've raised my limit to $15,000. Why? To tempt me I suppose.

John

[BigG]

I just asked this question of my economist buddy and he said to if you could transport your late 1960s lifestyle (prolly your parents') to today it would be a four-fold increase. IOW, if your dad was making $10,000 then he would have to make $40,000 now to have the same life. The rub is, as others have noted, the lifestyle today is a lot bigger than it was then. People's expectations have grown larger so the life costs more than 4X more. :eek:

[Cal4D4]

Biggest difference I see is that families need the 2 incomes. Balance point out here was in the mid '70s when NOW or some such organization made the financial institutes consider both wage earners equally for loan qualification. Over the next few years the cost of housing doubled. 2X more dollars chasing the same relative amount of product. When you pay 3K a month in mortgage and 4K a year in property tax, what's a few thou in consumer electronics every year or so? And so it goes (the money, that is!). A '50s gun afficionado would probably not have the volume of gun/reloading stuff some here have accumulated. We've learned how to leverage our assets/earning ability to lower our future security, but increase our current buying power.

[hawk0484]

I was born in 1953. Our family was an oddity in that both parents worked...Dad was a loom-fixer and mom was a nurse. I grew up beig watched after by various people, knowing that was not the way I wanted it to be.

After 7 yrs. of marriage & my teaching public school, our 1st child came along, and I quit working outside the home. For many years, we have lived in a very modest older home, have hand-me-down furniture, driven clunkers, eaten nutritious (though not fancy) home-cooked meals, shopped for kids clothes at flea markets, etc. We did all this with no debt except a mortgage which we paid off 7 years early. It was not easy, and it was never "fun", but it allowed me to be home with my sons and even to homeschool them. I made a sort of game of "doing without". Our family learned to differentiate between wants and needs, and to set priorities.

My husband's business has grown and things are much easier financially. I can spend more money on food (less rice and beans meals), buy new clothing occasionally, and we have done some home remodeling. I have bought 2 guns in the past year. But, I still ask myself if something is a "need" or a "want".

I guess my point is to say that things can still be somewhat the way they were 50 years ago. The things that matter, realtionships and family, can still be strong if they are priorities.

Just my opinion!

[Sisco]

was born in 1953. Our family was an oddity in that both parents worked...Dad was a loom-fixer and mom was a nurse. I grew up beig watched after by various people, knowing that was not the way I wanted it to be.

Sounds like me! Only Dad was a mechanic & Mom was a waitress.
I was a latch-key kid and didn't even know it, the term hadn't been invented yet.
At Mom & Dad's 50th wedding anniversary party I made a toast. I said
"Growing up I did not have everything I wanted, but I did have everything I needed".

[cuchulainn]

I think perhaps that everyone is filtering this question through their own experiences. From my own family's experiences, things get better off with every generation to a breathtaking degree.

Great grandparents = most were dirt poor farmers or dirt poor miners.

Grandparents = professional blue collar with steady income -- mechanics, factory workers, truck drivers etc.

Parents, aunts, uncles = blue-to-white collar transition careers -- nurse, teacher, bank clerk, military

My generation = well paid professionals, business owners

Next generation = I have strong confidence that they'll go up further, maybe even break into "rich."

[TarpleyG]

I hear a lot of conversation about "wants" vs. "needs". I do not know why I (or anyone for that matter) exist on this planet, although I tend to believe we are some sort of sick science experiment, but what fun is there in just "existing" with "needs"? None. If you want to enjoy life, it costs money.

GT

[CZ-75]

She doesn't have lunch and gas money a lot of days and I don't understand where it's all going. I've asked her and she doesn't know either. Sad.


I always think of something I read somewhere that I call the "Starbucks Quandry." It is this - how much do you spend over the course of a year if you buy a large coffee (~$4) at a gourmet coffee shop each day before work? I'd reckon that working 250 days a year, roughly, that you've just fittered away a grand on coffee, more when you figure pre-tax income.

[JohnBT]

I spend about a buck for coffee seven days a week at 7-11. Their coffee is better and less expensive than that Starbucks swill :)

As far as my parents' lifestyle in the mid-60s, my father was looking forward to retirement and making $35k to $40k managing a large furniture store. My mother was making about a third of that as the lead secretary in a high school library. Montgomery County MD has always paid their school employees well. Remember, McDonalds started you off at $1.15 an hour. In 1967 I got a tree service job that paid $2.35 plus an average of 30 hours a week of time and a half overtime. Rolling in the bucks.

Of course, when it came time to buy a new house in 1965, my folds had a small brick rancher with a full basement built in Rockville for $23,500. Located less than a mile from the Metro station, they sold it in 3 days for $200,000 in 1990. They could have gotten more.

As far as wants and needs...I know too many couples with 3 or 4 televisions. How many of the dern things can 2 people watch? And they're not even home very much because they're both working second jobs to pay the bills they've run up.

I guess my real concern is that too many people don't really know what they 'want' and they're just trying to keep up with the folks next door and buy every new thing that comes along.

John

[Soap]

Most people simply cannot handle their finances due to lack of discipline or a lack of financial knowledge. Many people do things that they simply do not need to, CZ-75's Starbuck's example is excellent. And many people do not do things that they should financially. For example, most people have no clue how to invest their money for the long term. If you know how to manage your leverage and invest at rates higher than your leverage, you'll be money. Also, credit card companies want you to become their indentured servant. And many people are...

At age 21 I've already bought a Benz, have no debt beyond my deferred student loans and my car loan (the car payment is insignificantly small). I pay all of my bills just fine and I am accumulating a decent amount of savings. By the time January rolls around, I'm planning on investing in short term 1%, 32 day CDs. Why? Because if you have enough money, that little 1% can pay off some bill every month. Just saving and investing in ultra-secure investments like CDs can eliminate a single bill. It almost feels like that bill is free...pretty sweet! I come from a middle class family that has helped me along in my first year or two of college, now, I'm on my own. I owe it to them for helping me get started. I am starting to manage my money to the point that my parents are asking me for financial advice. The opportunity for financial freedom is there, you just have to keep your eyes open.

I actually have a ridiculous plan: I have student loans which I have to pay off. My wife is paying for her schooling in cash so no loans there. My loans include a stipend each semester. Since my wife's job and my 30 hour/week banking job cover all of our bills, I'm simply going to put this stipend away in some sort of fund account. Then when the time comes to pay off my loans, I'll invest the stipends that I've collected into some sort of fund which will hopefully earn 3-6%. The interest alone will be enough to pay off my student loan each month. I plan on dragging my loan payments out as long as humanly possible and just paying for it with the money that I got in my loan in the first place. In short, a single part of the loan (the stipends), will end up paying 100% of the loan through smart investing. How much of my schooling will come out of my pocket? Zero.

JohnBT- Think of inflation. Say the $1.15 you made was comparable to minimum wage today of about $5.15. The ratio of the car to your wage would be: 3400/1.15=2956.5. Now if you multiply that factor x minimum wage now you would get: 5.15x2956.5=$15226. You can get a convertible today for that amount of money. I don't know if the one you looked at was new or used though.

[Mikul]

The median income in 2001 in the United States was $26,800. While the median house costs $134,100. Minimum wage: $5.85. A car costs $21,012. Bread $0.98.

In 1950, the average income was $3,815 and the average home was $14,500. Minimum wage: $0.75. A car costs $1,750. Bread: $0.14.

Adjusted for inflation, the average income would be: $26,130. The average house would cost $99,315 and the minimum wage would be $5.13. A car would cost $12,000. Bread: $0.95.

We don't appear to be making out in this deal. While the income is generally dead on, houses cost 34% more, while cars cost 90% more.

While I cannot find the data for the tax rate in 1950, you can be sure that it was substantially lower which would make for a much higher effective salary.

[CZ-75]

While I cannot find the data for the tax rate in 1950, you can be sure that it was substantially lower which would make for a much higher effective salary.


I don't know what it was either, but I believe I heard someone like Neal Boortz mention that it was ~5%.

It would be fair to mention that the taxes on the "wealthy" were extraordinarily high above a certain income threshhold. The example of Ronald Reagan comes to mind. I remember watching a bio on him that gave an anecdote about him paying 90% income tax on his income. His solution? Work only up to the point where the 90% bracket kicked in, then play golf the rest of the year.

[JPM70535]

I am a child of the fifties. My dad was manager of a department store commonly called a "five and dime". My mother did not work until my6 sister and I were in school and then she worked as a clerk in the same store my dad managed. We lived in the apartment above the store and by the standards of the day I guess we were considered Middle Class. We never had a fancy car or a big house, but always had clothes to wear and food to eat and oh yes, a B&W TV that caught the obligatory 3 channels.

I could walk the streets of my small town at any hour day or night in safety and could but all the guns I could afford. Bought my first one at age 13, No background check, no 3 day wait. All the gunshop owner did was call dad to verify he said it was OK for me to have it. BTW, I earned the money for the guns by working as a stock clerk and delivery boy at the local grocery for thew princely sum of $1.00 per hour. I never had a car while I was in school and never felt deprived. Had the use of the family car for dates and considered myself normal. I knew that the possession of material goods was a slow process and that you didn't start off at the top.

Forty years later, I am retired, (not by choice) and my wife is not far behind me. We own our own home with no mortgage, drive paid for vehicles and owe nothing. We started off with a 59 Desoto and a 19" B&W portable TV and thought we were normal.

Today, my son owns 2 cars, neither of which runs, makes$500.00 a week at age 21, and owes over $2000.00. He has every electronic device known to man and says he can't afford to get out on his own because apartments are too expensive.

The main difference between the middle class 50 years ago and the middle class today is that 50 years age we were content to acquire middle class status in the traditional way, work and save and buy only what you could afford. Today's generation wants it all NOW and if they have to go in hock up to their eyeballs, so be it. Small wonder they can't afford to buy homes, and complain about how much easier things were for our generation.

[Ebbtide]

Just to play the devils advocate, Mikul makes some great comparisons, but a new car in 1950 is nowhere near the same new car today. Tech cost money in cars and houses, and even toasters. I'm sure a new house in 1950 (right after the war) had less than 1000 sq. feet. I recall reading that the average new home todays has over 2100 sq. feet. Someone also mentioned earlier that a new car was only good for about 60k miles in 1950, I would bet I could spend $3,815 on a used honda and expect the same results.

Reverse Inflation: Computers cost over a billion dollars in 1950, I can get an watch at the drug store that perfoms more operations than a 50's computer for less than a buck.

I figure it is all relative. We (in general) buy more stuff, want to live better, and make up for these difference by sending both parents out to work, and taking an easier road in education and employment. We all know what it takes not to be "middle class" or any "class" at that, we just need to get off out butts and do it. Individual people make their quality of life, not sociotal figures and averages. I think JPM has it right too.

Ehenz

[Soap]

What is everyone's obsession with paying everything in cash? Feels good, yeah. Smart, no.

[Cal4D4]

All of this is well and good, but how do you figure in a progressive income tax and the different wage rates thruout the country. Here in sunny SoCal, mean or median or some such household income for family of four in L.A. county has been announced by L.A. Times as being approx. $125K. It is very easy to spend $500K for a small house in a lower white collar, upper blue collar neighborhood. Even with every tax break for mortgage interest and kids your Fed tax bill alone can run over $30K.
Local school board is thinking of getting rid of the superintendent of schools in our town of 60K people to save $180K. Principal of a 700 student grade school makes 6 figures, as does the chief of police. Plus perks.

[CZ-75]

I don't think the cost of living is figured in on a per region basis when the fedgov figures tax rates. You are getting screwed when you live in an area with a high cost of living, consequently. To the IRS, you look rich when you haul in a six-figure income, never mind that you can only afford to buy a used car or rat-trap house on that figure.

You'll also be penalized when you send your kids to college, since you won't qualify for "need-based" grants and loans.

[JohnBT]

Of course I wanted the Super Sport muscle car for $3500 when a plain Chevelle was more than a grand less.

http://chevelles.com/feature/june99.html

Here's a 1967 Chevelle SS396 convertible.

"This Chevelle was well optioned and came with:

396-325Hp Matching number engine
TH-400 3 speed Auto Transmission
12 bolt 3.08 differential
Air Conditioning
Power Steering
Power Disc Brakes
Ralley Wheels
Power Windows
Power Top
Power 4 way seat
Tilt Steering
Bumper Guards
Courtesy Lighting package
Tachometer
Gauge package: Oil, Amp, Temp
Clock (had to be floor mounted)
H.D. 4 core radiator
AM/FM Radio with "Multiplex" Stereo"


Where can I get a ragtop like this today for $15,000 with a 396 cubic inch engine cranking out what was probably an honest 350 h.p. or more? They used to rate them low to keep the insurance rates down.

John

[Soap]

Was the $3500 for a new or used Chevelle John? I would agree that the adjusted price of automobiles has risen. If you adjust for inflation from '67 to '02, $3500 is $18,817. You can get a nice used ragtop for this much. Even though it probably won't have the character of the Chevelle :)

[Monkeyleg]

Fellow motorheads: when I was 11 years old (1961), Jaguar introduced the E-Type (colloquially known as the XKE) to America. Its price tage was $6000. That was four times what my father paid for his new Chevrolet that same year. Of course, a Ferrarri cost $16,000, so that Jag was a bargain.

We older motorheads also remember having to finely sand the points contacts, routinely check the condensor, and in general just have to screw around with the cars a lot more not just to keep them running, but able to start.

All this is just a statement that it's not entirely fair to compare the cost of a 60's car to one of today (although I'd argue that, except for Chrysler, there isn't a design engineer out there with any sense of style).

At the same time, though, I miss the idea that if my car won't start, I can go out with a simple ohmmeter and figure out what's wrong. Now it costs me $200 for the service tech to tell me which black box he "thinks" might be the problem.

And I also miss the sound of a four-barrel opening up on eight big cylinders. It didn't go "eeeeeeeeee," it went "vaaaaarrroooooom!"

[BigG]

Agree with Dick, the cars back then had a lot more maintenance and less longevity, but, they were b!tchin in their own right! :D And Chrysler is the only automaker today that has any sense of style whatsoever. :o

[winwun]

Born 1932. No father in the family. Mother worked as a maid for "rich" people in the neighborhood and left 3 kids to grow up like wild animals. No other choice. Early memories include waking up one morning and seeing cat tracks beside my bed in the snow that had blown in through a large crack in the wall during the night. The dipper being stuck in the frozen water bucket. You get the idea. The "middle class" had 2 parents, a car, electricity, indoor plumbing, a roof that didn't leak and decent clothes. I wouldn't want to do it again, but I'm no worse off from it. Money doesn't buy happiness, but the lack of ENOUGH money will sure buy misery. My present income is less than $75 K, and probably half of that is saved. Our 1600sf brick house is paid for, nice enough, and we keep a new car for the wife and a new PU for me. There is enough money for a few toys. I suppose being used to not having much makes you apreciate what you DO have instead of wanting more. There is a VERY upscale neighborhood close to the FOP range where I shoot, and I have made friends with more than a few of the "multi-millionaires" from the "Village" and believe me, those guys, for the most part, are walking misery. I wouldn't swap with them for twice their money.

[Sindawe]

I was born in '64, and grew up in typical middle-class neighborhood. Two bedroom house, both parents around around but both worked as professional (father state water qualtiy then EPA, mother psych counseler). Two cars in the driveway. Not always new, but had the things. Had new clothes for school in the fall, health care/dental when I needed it and all the other stuff. We had a 13" B&W TV as the only idot box when others in the neighborhhood has color, but no biggie there.

Now I suppose I could be called middle class. Own my own home (townhouse). My vehicles are paid for, and 33% of the after tax :cuss: income gets squirreled away for a rainy day. I don't drive new cars, don't really care about fashion since I'm partial to black, red and leather. :D I have occasional indulgences in "Gotta have it NOW" but those are rare and are usually things to go BANG!

[JohnBT]

"...a four-barrel..."??????

I want two four-barrels :) And I'll pay cash for it :) I've seen too many people in debt over their heads and I've worked too long to reach the point I can pay cash.

The SS 396 I mentioned was new. Yellow paint with two wide black stripes right down the middle. You've probably seen one around if you're old enough :)

And I agree that there was a certain satisfaction, and money savings, to doing ALL of your own work on your car. So what if they had to be tuned twice a year. It didn't take 30 minutes even if you were all thumbs. Once you figured it out it didn't require a timing light either ;) Replacing an engine was a just a matter of bolting one in - no computers or pollution stuff to worry about. Oh well, old man Usedtobe is dead and gone.

______________

Speaking of E-Types and other cars I could only dream about ever buying...

How about a pic of the sticker from a '65 Buick Riviera 2-door Sport Coupe? Check out the option prices.

www.buickgod.com/images/owners/sawyer65_s.jpg

Air = $430.
425 cu.in. w/ 2 4-bbl. carbs (360 h.p. IIRC), modified trans, limited slip differential, dual exhaust and a bunch of other stuff = $306.
Base price = $4400.
Total price = $6000. (w/tinted power windows, mats, radio, etc.)

Pic of car...

www.buickgod.com/article.html?ID=3479

John

[CZ-75]

And Chrysler is the only automaker today that has any sense of style whatsoever.

Too bad they don't have the reliability to match.

Now it costs me $200 for the service tech to tell me which black box he "thinks" might be the problem.

A service manual and half a paperclip would save you around $150 the first time, and $200 the next time that happens. It would definitely be worthwhile if you drive a Chrysler product.