Average income of the average Mormon?

[_DonBradley]

I don't know.

However, two things that I have read come to mind:

First, studies show that Mormons are statistically much less likely to live in poverty than are members of the non-Mormon population. (Indeed, the sociologists who wrote On Being Poor in Utah concluded that Mormonism as a whole functioned on the economic level as "an anti-poverty program.)

Second, Utah is the most economically egalitarian state in the Union. Variations in wealth are less extreme here in Zion than they are anywhere else.

Together, these observations lead to another, which should be quite uncontroversial: Mormonism tends to make its adherents middle class, not poor, not truly wealthy, but solidly middle class.

Don

Except for the bankruptcies. Can one be solidly middle class and be bankrupt?

I think there's plenty of poverty in Mormonism, and not just in third-world countries. There's plenty of wealth, including great wealth, in Mormonism, too. I think that the latter has a tendency to offset the former when trying to determine an "average" LDS household income.

I didn't say there wasn't "plenty" of either, but your cherry-picking of this term refuses to engage what I did say: that, statistically, Latter-day Saints have less poverty than non-Latter-day Saints, and that Utah is the most economically egalitarian state in the Union. I'll adduce my data if you'll promise to adduce your data to the contrary.

As to bankruptcies, Harmony, actually, yes, someone could go bankrupt and remain very much middle class. The comment suggests an naïvété about what "middle class" means and what "bankruptcy" means. Persons going bankrupt can quite easily continue to live in their suburban homes, receive their middle class salaries, and pursue middle class lifestyles.

But this does bring up another question. Why is bankruptcy so common in Utah? Go to RfM, and you'll learn that it's because of tithing and a host of other evils of Mormonism. Go to the research data on who goes bankrupt and why, and you'll find that the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing is having children. Need I say more?

Don

[_asbestosman]

Go to the research data on who goes bankrupt and why, and you'll find that the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing is having children. Need I say more?

Out of curiousity, does it also correlate with unexpected medical expenses or other such things that are perhaps correlated with having children (perhaps purchasing a home or having a stay-at-home parent)?

[_DonBradley]

Hey Asbestos,

I don't know. I used to know more about this than I can now recall.

There are two sociologists who set out to determine what the causes of bankruptcy were, expecting that the problem was too much materialism, consumer spending, and the like. They were shocked to find, instead, that the most important factor was having children. People with children spend significantly more on average than those without children on finding a home in a good location, so their children will have good friends and good schools. This and related things for their children's education and development basically push parents to have both work and to live near the edge of their means, with little reserve. So, when setbacks do strike, they go under. It's much more complicated than this, of course.

But this pair of sociologists (a mother and daughter, I believe) published a book about five-ish years ago on their research. I believe it's titled The Two-Income Trap.

Don

[_DonBradley]

I should add that what pushes parents to have two incomes and live at the edge of their means is competition with other parents for scarce locational and educational resources. Not every place is a "good area" or has good neighborhoods and schools for kids. So parents are willing to pay, and have to pay, a premium to live in such areas or have their kids attend such schools (if not schools in a good area, then private schools). But since many, many other parents are willing to do the same, and have both parents work in order to provide this, parents are stuck competing with a two-income family, who can bid the prices for these goods higher than a one-income family can generally afford. So, parents in general must have a two-income situation in order to have a chance to buy their way into these good areas and good schools.

Or, in any case, this is one of the factors explaining why parents live closer to bankruptcy than do non-parents.

Don

[_SatanWasSetUp]

Go to the research data on who goes bankrupt and why, and you'll find that the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing is having children.

I always assumed the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing was buying things you can't afford.

[_DonBradley]

Go to the research data on who goes bankrupt and why, and you'll find that the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing is having children.

I always assumed the strongest predictor of a bankruptcy filing was buying things you can't afford.

People who go bankrupt are usually buying things they can afford at the time--like a good place for their children--but can no longer afford after they experience a significant financial setback.

And, between you and me, SWSU, I can think of few things less flattering to one's intelligence than responding to data that challenge a popular assumption by merely repeating the assumption.

Don