"In order not to repeat history we must understand history.

We can ignore inequality, hide our heads in the sand, but the consequence is dire."

You seem to be drawn to clichés and platitudes.They shed no light or insights and are mostly off-topic. You also seem to like word matches that lead you to links to mostly off-topic pieces.

I fully accept and recognize the many socio-economic problems in the US that aren't being addressed. Tears, conferences, mass statistics and research pieces from cloistered academics do nothing.

Like so many things in the US, I think little will ever be done on an overall basis to improve the problems alluded to above because of a lack of cooperation between the extremists of both parties. Kinda reminds me of the ridiculous impasse in the Middle East - common suffering on each of two sides because of a shared problem and NO willingness to cooperate for a resolution.

To get back to sofas, the reality is that although there have always been expensive sofas and inexpensive sofas, you used to be able to buy middle of the road sofa or a sort of inexpensive sofa that was not a cheaply put together POS. Although those existed too. Back then the middle of the road sofas were not as high style as the high end sofas, they looked less expensive, I think.

Now cheap and middle of the road sofas have had a style upgrade and you can get some real junk that looks stylish, but it's junk.

The problem is that middle of the road used to have some quality to it, and now I think that's gone, so even middle range is poorly made. So people who can only afford middle range goods are getting more junk than they used to for their money.

" even middle range is poorly made. So people who can only afford middle range goods are getting more junk than they used to for their money. "

I think that's it exactly.

This whole discourse started with your comment in rebuttal to the OPs comment:

" Wages have been stagnant for most folks for decades now, "

Source?

This comment conflicts with what I see and read. People at the bottom of the earnings ladder, those working at minimum wage or just above, of course struggle with rising prices and the unaffordability (for them) of leading normal lives because of their meager income. Others who have employable skills, whether college educated, working in trades or other services, and the like, seem to be doing fine."

There are hundreds of sources that show that wages for everyone except the highest income brackets have stagnated. Your just cherry picking data to convince yourself of some alternate truth.

Who is doing fine? How many people do you know who are truly in the middle of income brackets? They do not have an easy time of things. They are not doing fine. They are not saving toward retirement because there isn't enough left over to save. They are not saving toward their kids college education because there is not enough left over to save.

Do you consider a computer programmer as one of those people with employable skills.

How do you feel about companies off shoring all the programming jobs to India?

Why pay Elmer Fudd $8k a month when I can pay Mohammad $237 a month.

If you have a job that can be outsourced you are at risk, and fewer and fewer jobs are safe.

You have put the blame on unions, on the poor, and those who are unskilled or uneducated.

There has never been and will never be a society where everyone is exceptionally intelligent, well educated and where their is no need for unskilled or a mid level skilled workforce.

Imagine a hospital with only Doctors to do everything. Yes doctors are an important piece of the picture, but the people doing the laundry and cleaning the facility also perform important functions and ensure that disease isn't spread from room to room.

But you are fine with those people continually having less and less so that you can somehow justify the top 5% getting more and more.

In 1970 the average CEO earned 20 times what the average worker earned.

Now the average CEO earns 350 times what the average worker earns.

Was 20 times too little? Was 100 times fair? Is 350 times fair? At what point do the rich and powerful have a big enough portion of the pie?

Toronto Veterinarian

" even middle range is poorly made. So people who can only afford middle range goods are getting more junk than they used to for their money. "

I think that's it exactly.

I also agree with this statement, but just saying that the middle range is junk doesn't explain the why and isn't looking at the fate of the skilled workers in this country that were both building and buying the mid range, much higher quality furniture.

https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/econ_focus/2020/q4/economic_history

The last couple of pieces we bought, a cabinet, a dining table and leather chairs with nailhead accents were custom made by the Amish in OH or PA. we waited a long time, maybe 5 months, but they are excellent quality. The leather chairs (4) actually were more expensive than the table which was costl. Entire set was just over $6,00o, not bragging, that’s a lot of money for my husband and I. We are retired teachers with our social security. Not rich. It’s excellent quality and I won’ be buying another set in my lifetime. (I’m 70). When I am ready to buy a new couch, I will buy Amish made again.

debra

" This whole discourse started with your comment "

Look again. This wasn't my comment, I was quoting someone else's comment that preceded mine.

@ Elmer J Fudd

I assumed you would recognize that I simply copied your statement, which included the OP's comment and provided context for your comment..

I edited my comment below to clarify.

To be perfectly clear - I had no issues with the OP's comment, just with your degradation of the working class.

There are several problems with measuring class by income. One factor is inherited wealth.

When 2008 hit, a surprising number of 'home owners' in my town washed out of town. They could no longer afford the 'nut' of living beyond their salaries. Others were not mortgaged beyond the hilt. Many had deeper wealth, not infrequently family wealth that went back generations. This ability to accumulate wealth over time has resulted in an Upper Class independent of salaries, and has been almost exclusively white privilege in the US.

You are absolutely correct - wealth distribution is more out of control than income distribution.

Both are out of control and the change over the past few decades is sickening.

I recognize that I was born with some level of privilege and that I have had a successful career, but I am not in that top 10% and far too many of the people I know are very close to that 50% mark and some are below.

I worry about the future generations and where this country is headed.

I can't understand how people don't see that there is an issue.

Notice when the income gain stopped being equal among all tiers. It stopped being equal with the trickle down snake oil. And when the top tier was the biggest piece of the pie.

" You are absolutely correct - wealth distribution is more out of control than income distribution. "

In most countries, wealth distribution and income distribution are not under any control. Is that something you'd like to do?

Comparing the US to Sweden is laughable. Do you have any knowledge of Swedish politics and socio/economic policies over the last 100 years? Yes, last 100 years. The vast majority of European countries that pay more attention to public social welfare than the US does have looked at Sweden and chosen not to follow its example.

A small infor insight to help you understand why the stats don't tell the story - a high percentage of Swedes who find themselves with the opportunity to make a lot of money leave the country. Facts give insights, stats often don't.

But I thought we were talking about all the people who don't have the opportunity to make a lot of money.

I feel like I started the ball rolling by countering the notion that it's all about choice - as if everybody has equal means to buy the highest quality furniture and simply chooses otherwise - or is clamoring for cheap crappiness from manufacturers. I see and hear that false assumption in any number of contexts, and it bugs me, as it seems very out of touch, IMO.

It's evidently very easy for some who exist in privilege to convince themselves that they deserve it, and therefore those without such privilege do not.

I think it's significant that $3K for a couch doesn't seem like a lot of money for some people, when for many people it is.

as if everybody has equal means to buy the highest quality furniture and simply chooses otherwise .

Of course not. But just like fast fashion, it is also true that a lot of people who might otherwise "invest" in furniture buy cheap stuff and get rid of it when they tire of it.

By contrast many of us here might still have our first sofa, or know where it is (my sister has mine).

Everything seems like a lot of money to me today, I think it is partly about getting older since I can recall spending much less on so many things, and it seems not that long ago.

Well 40 years ago I think the people who wanted their expensive -to -them $1000 sofa ($3000 today) to last for forty years may have been able to see that through. The problem seems to be that that is less likely if your forty years started ticking down after 2000 AD. $3000 is a lot of money for a sofa for a lot of people. Most people I know would think it is too much, whether they could actually afford it or not, but why spend it if it's not going to last anyway, just spend half that and don't feel so bad about replacing it. This becomes a cycle of course, but it's not necessarily one you can break if you don't have the discretionary income to spend for whatever "quality" is these days.

" to last for forty years "

Most people don't really want furniture to last for 40 years, at least large pieces.......it sounds good and they might even think they want it, but most people's tastes and needs change, and most people's families don't want to inherit it.

I really think that this depends upon what you buy.

You could buy a sofa today that looks like any of the five 50 year-old sofas that got parceled out in my family when my dad sold his house.

I don't think needs have changed so much that a sofa is a completely different thing than it was 50 years ago, unless you like sofas with cupholders.

And the thing about inheriting something, is that you have the option to get rid of it. I don't know why people think getting rid of their parents things is such an onerous task. I suppose pretty soon we will have to plan on dying in an empty house on a bare mattress to avoid inconveniencing our offspring.

Sorry - have to interject on some more misconceptions

Free Market Economies are a theoretical economy - every country has some level of government control over their economy and the distribution of wealth and income.

Economic Freedom Index -

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/economic_freedom/

Definition: The Overall index of economic freedom has ten components grouped into four broad categories: Rule of Law; Limited Government; Regulatory Efficiency and Open Markets.

USA ranks 28th out of 127 countries

Sweden ranks 10th out of 127 countries

Inequality Index -

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/gini_inequality_index/

Definition: Gini index measures the extent to which the distribution of income among individuals or households within an economy deviates from a perfectly equal distribution.

USA ranks 3rd out of 27 countries (24 countries have more equal distribution then the USA)

Sweden ranks 21st out of 27 countries (6 countries have more equal distribution then Sweden)

Brain Drain Index -

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/human_flight_brain_drain_index/

Definition: The Human flight and brain drain indicator considers the economic impact of human displacement and the consequences this may have on a country’s development

Sweden has the second lowest brain drain ranking out of 177 countries

USA has the 14th lowest brain drain ranking.

The Brain Drain That Is Killing America’s Economy

https://time.com/6140707/americas-brain-drain-economy/

Do you know anything or can you support your views without random internet searches with off-topic finds? Your charts and stats (that I doubt you understand) have nothing to do with the comment I made.

Have a nice day - do a few regression analyses and have fun!

" I don't think needs have changed "

Your needs might have not have changed, but some people's have, and will. I didn't mean sociologically changed, but personally: Changes in someone's home size, or physical abilities. Or changes in their family number, or maybe even a cross country move. And that doesn't even get into changes in taste with respect to aesthetics.

I suppose pretty soon we will have to plan on dying in an empty house on a bare mattress to avoid inconveniencing our offspring.

Toucheˊ

Sorry I didn't feel like looking up how to do the accent.

Is dismissing another member's detailed posts as worthless and insulting them personally just an obnoxious tactic to elicit further argument - a.k.a. trolling?

Because it's certainly not honest debate.

Take a break, you're repeated failed tries to insult fall flat.

Elmer J Fudd - you can't have it both ways = you stated that you didn't believe other posts because they couldn't provide a source, but if I find a source to back up what I know to be true and contradict your views you say that I am just searching the internet for sources.

The government does have a great deal of control over how income is distributed. Economic policies, regulations, taxation, minimum wage limits, interstate and international trade rules and regulations all have an impact on how the wealth and income is distributed. As long as elections are bought and sold by the highest bidders we will see that the top consistently win.

You said that a comparison to Sweden is laughable and listed brain drain as one of the major issues, but that is not a problem in Sweden today, nor has it been a problem over the past decade. They had an issue with brain drain years ago, but it was largely inflated and they addressed the problems they did have and now have one of the lowest brain drains in the world. Much lower than we have.

You want to spew words on the page and because Elmer Fudd says so, we should just blindly believe you.

Yeah - NO!

Just want to note that those $3K couches aren't breaking after a few years - the ones described in the article broke down in less than a year. That just seems crazy.

And I did not know about the business of repairing couches under warranty. I thought that was interesting.

FWIW, I've never bought a new couch or sofa. Mine have been from family, like Ally De, and we had a couple that were vintage frames I bought and furnished with new cushions - one rattan, the other Danish modern.

When my sister and her husband moved from their home to a senior community apartment there was only one piece of furniture that we ended up selling. Everything else was wanted by one or more family members. In fact, some of the things we set aside to go to the landfill because they were old and worn were snagged off the pile.

The only reason no one wanted the one piece we sold was that it was an 8' tall, massive piece of furniture.

I had a massive piece of furniture just like that, though with less bas relief carvings on the doors.....It took a long time to sell, but I did eventually get rid of it.

Back to sofas. I went to look at the one that is on the way to me from C&B, because I wanted to check the msmts for my mockup. It is not a 3k sofa. It sells for $1399. Mine was $3000 because I chose a sleeper sofa, and I chose velvet. So that makes a C&B seem a lot closer to Wayfair etc.

Our fr couch is about four years old and cost less then 2,000. we opted for the extra-firm cushions; the sales guy called the sofa a ’wooden bench’, and not to most people’s comfort level. I have a bad back and I love it. when my kids visit, they mostly choose the chairs for sitting. (Dh always sits in one chair, ala Archie Bunker.) So far the couch is holding up well.

Good to know, sjerin. What's the name of the manufacturer?

Thank you for sharing the article. I forwarded it to my brother who has been considering replacing his 1940’s inherited classic heirloom quality sofa with a West Elm sofa; his girlfriend thinks a basic West Elm sofa would be so cute in his house.

It does seem that quailty has really declined over the last few years. Thankfully my C&B sofas I bought 7 years ago still look and feel new. We use them daily, one was $19XX ready to ship velvet, the other we chose a ”custom” tweed fabric and it was $3k something. Both purchased during the annual sale so we saved a tad. I understand the sofa’s are middle of the road in quality. I don’t need an heirloom quality sofa, but I am hoping for them to last at 15 years or more. Also, still love my semi-custom Rowe sofa purchased over 20 years ago, I think it was around $2k at the time. Perfect other than the fabric fading due to our failure to buy sun resistant window coverings for our current living room. After always living in house with dark interiors, we moved into a home with large windows and no window coverings, soon learned how quickly the sun fades fabric This sofa will be recovered, will still use same cushions materials as my picky back is happy sitting on this sofa, even prefer this sofa our C & B sofas.

Interesting article, Carol. Our current family room sofa came from Bassett BUT it was 11 years ago. I think it was $3,200 and has held up beautifully. The back and seat cushions are detachable but don’t shift around. I also like being able to flip/rotate them (a suggestion from the designer who helped us at Bassett). We’ve been very happy with it, but I’m not sure about the quality you’d get today from them.

I was just looking through some old photos and thought about my parents home.

It is an unusual home, MCM with sofas that were built in. Couldn't move them. (Beds and dressers were also all built in.) The sofas were slabs of wood with back and bottom cushions. They were not at all uncomfortable. They weren't like the recliners of today, but there were never any lumpy or sagging cushions. They were great for laying on and taking a nap and comfortable to sit on every evening to watch TV. There were two sofas in the living room and a longer single sofa in the family room. Over the years my mom made different covers for the cushions, but the foam was natural latex and lasted with our family 40+ years without needing to be replaced.

I live in a home in the same neighborhood as my parents home (one home and a street between our two houses, so I can see the back yard of their home from my back yard.) The last time I spoke to the new owners they told me they had not changed anything since they bought the home except for getting new carpet, so I think the sofas are still in daily use. 1963 to 2024.

That wood looks beautiful, Jennifer.

P.S. I was just listening to Planet Money's Indicator and I realized there's another factor here that I don't believe the WSJ mentioned in that article - the high tariffs on so many goods coming from China now, and how that has caused a number of manufacturers of various goods to seek alternative suppliers or even discontinue products.

Wow, Jennifer, that’s amazing! Our living room sofa’s got to be about 42 years old. For anyone in SoCal who might remember, I bought it at Bullock’s in Pasadena. It’s a basic 3-cushion, rolled arm sofa (maybe ”tuxedo” style?) in a very neutral cream color. It still looks great, although I have to admit we’ve rarely used the living rooms in the homes we’ve had.

Although these cushions have seen better days--not the pristine cushions Jennifer shows the upholstery here is allegedly original to 1955. The same fabric covers almost everything in the house. This Usonian Automatic was in the same family until it was sold to a museum about 5 years ago.

That's cool pal.

I was telling my son about Jennifer's parents' built-in furniture, and showed him the photo, and he'd never heard of built in furniture before(!)

But then he's not a home design aficionado like me.

He liked the idea - I'm thinking I should show him those FLW rooms too.

That is why i hesitate to get rid of my 17 year old Flexsteel sofas. Yes, i am tired of the color, but i dont even think Flexsteel makes em like they used too.

I'm not sure about what makes it a build in couch instead of a built in bench, but I had some built into my kitchen eating area, in a corner formation (with chairs on the opposite side of the table). I think it's a great idea for smaller spaces, but you can't rearrange the room in the future.

but you can't rearrange the room in the future.

Well Frank Lloyd Wright, for one, did not want people to be able to rearrange the room at any time.

" Well Frank Lloyd Wright, for one, did not want people to be able to rearrange the room at any time. "

Right, which is why I wouldn't buy a house designed by someone who thinks their houses are their artistic creations.

The architect that designed our home studied under FLW and built a home that was designed specifically to meet our families needs. Every piece of furniture was designed and built for the home. The trim on the dining room table, end tables and coffee tables matched the design of the trim on the exterior of the home.

If you build a home that is meant to perfectly fit your needs and furniture placement is part of the design process their really isn't any need to move anything.

I honestly think that for most homes that are well designed there aren't a lot of choices on how to place the furniture. Many of the dilemmas we see on Houzz are when a home was built (or sometimes altered) without furniture placement, traffic flow, activities and storage in mind when the design was created. People are searching for ways to make it function instead of designing the spaces to function.

Notice the trim on the end table matches the trim on the exterior.

If you take notice to the address, you will see that even the address was not just left to chance. My parents liked symmetry and since we owned one side of the cul-de-sac we could choose an odd numbered address in the 1500 block. So my parents picked 1551.

" If you build a home that is meant to perfectly fit your needs and furniture placement is part of the design process their really isn't any need to move anything. "

I'm amazed at how often people forget that things change in their lives and circumstances. Sure, there isn't any need to move anything if nothing in your needs or wants change....That's fine, until someone in your family has a mobility problem (permanently or temporarily), or your family size changes unexpectedly, or someone has a different kind of medical problem that requires accommodation for something like respiratory support. Sure, you could move, but it's a lot easier to rearrange the house and furniture to meet new challenges than have to move in the middle of those new challenges.

I can understand your concerns, but planning includes looking into the future and understanding how your family dynamics will most likely change.

Planning for traffic flow and furniture placement when you design the home is always better than leaving it to chance. Thinking about aging in place before you get old is important if you plan on aging in place. If you haven't thought about it, built in furniture or freestanding won't change the fact that the bathroom won't be big enough for a wheelchair or needs a walk in shower instead of a tub/shower combo, that all the bedrooms are on the second floor or the hallways are too narrow.

Our family changed a lot over 40 years. My parents got old. Kids grew up and moved out, got married, had children, some moved back home for various periods of time, some moved out of town and needed a place to stay when they came home with their families to visit or to stay for a stretch while they found a local home when they moved back from wherever. Some of the grandkids moved in and moved out again when they needed a home. After my dad died, my sister and her family moved in to care for my mom.

The fact that our home worked well for over 40 years without ever having to move the built in furniture tells me that the built in furniture didn't cause hardship. If anything, having the sofas built into the alcoves left the centers of the rooms more wide open than freestanding furniture would have and allowed more space for wheelchair turns or using a walker (mom used both before passing away). It also left large expanses of open space to place folding tables and chairs as the family gatherings grew from the original 8 to over 30.

As with most families we did reach a time when the home no longer met our needs. My mom had to go into full nursing care, my sister and her family continued to live in our family home until after after my mom passed away. By then their two sons had both gone off to college and it was just the two of them. 3000 sf, a pool and over 2 acres of land was more than they wanted or needed. We all hated to see the home sold, but it was time.

I think we were all a bit surprised at how quickly and easily it sold. We didn't think anyone would want a home that had such specific details, but the couple who bought the home loved MCM FLW style architecture. They didn't care that there were 2 bedrooms with 3 of everything. They wanted space for their kids and grandkids to come and stay when they visited. It has been 20 years since it was sold and they still own the home, so I guess it is functioning well for them as well.

Looks like it was a lovely place to grow up in, Jennifer 🙂

Speaking from some personal experience, the bigger impediments to being able to stay in a house are the lack of an accessible bathroom with a shower on the main floor of the house, and at least one level entrance into the house.

On another sofa quality note...does anyone have experience with Clad Home sofas in Los Angeles? I am considering them for my next sofa purchases which won't be until probably next year, but I like what I've read about them. If anyone has experience, or knows anyone that does, I'd love to hear about it.

My current sofas are from Pottery Barn. Purchased probably about 7-8 years ago. The fabric is wearing in spots. The last time I looked into recovering a sofa it cost more than I paid for the sofa. I don't love these couches enough to do that.

For the first time ever, I ordered sofas online a year ago, and very inexpensively.

I got two of these (velvet):

We call them The Olives.

They replaced my wonderful and beloved, but claw destroyed, 25+ yr old sofa and loveseat.

So far so good, but they’re still babies. We’ll see how it goes.

We’re empty nesters, and sadly our kitties are both gone now, so they won’t get a lot of wear and tear.

ETA: I did catch the neighbor’s cat, NOC 2 for those of you who know, scratching one of the Olives the other day. I guess the ’Cats won’t scratch velvet’ thing is a myth, or at least in my house.