Imagine the largest orchestra possible. From violins and harps to drums and pianos, each instrument plays its part in creating the sounds that provide us with vivid entertainment. But, for reasons unknown, all the percussion stops making any noise. At that moment, we are left with a baseless, tempo-less collection of sounds that no longer provides the coherence it once did.

At its core, this is how an economy functions. It’s a complex system composed of production, distribution, and consumption, conducted by the government through policies, regulations, and public investments. But in this analogy, what represents our percussion? Enter the middle class, the backbone of all music, keeping the rhythm steady and the melody smooth.

Economic growth is something every nation rightly aspires to. Without consistent growth, a society risks falling behind global standards, becoming increasingly indebted to the thriving nations surrounding it. Creating growth is akin to conducting a symphony. Investment in infrastructure and education sets the tone. Research and development drive innovation – the loud and proud brass section – introducing new products and services. Expanding trade adds an international chime by opening markets and boosting local economies. Sound economic policies, the conductors, ensure that inflation, employment, and business confidence play in time, tune, and harmony.

However, just as there are ways to create beautiful music, there are equally effective ways to produce dissonance. Poor governance can be likened to a conductor who signals the wrong cues, leading to unsettling clashes and chaos. High inflation erodes purchasing power, much like a speeding tempo disrupting the rhythm. Excessive debt can choke an economy, creating financial discord. And like suddenly silencing a section, trade restrictions can stifle economic growth, leaving the audience deflated and unsatisfied. When income disparities widen, the wealth gap becomes a soloist symphony, leading to civil and political unrest.

In this musical metaphor, the middle class acts as the rhythm section of society. With disposable income, they’re the steady beat that keeps the economic tempo, driving demand, supporting consumption, and sparking job creation. A strong and confident middle class provides a significant buffer against economic volatility. Not only do they fuel economic growth through supply and demand, but they also invest in themselves and their communities, purchasing homes and pursuing further education. In doing so, they economically stabilise a nation through taxation, promoting an egalitarian society. For this reason, a prosperous middle class consistently correlates with greater political stability and fewer extremist factions. This community often advocates for moderate, reformist policies rather than dramatic shifts in narrative.

Beyond economics, the middle class embodies values that sustain societal structure. As historical patrons of culture and education, they support the arts, literature, and many culturally relevant activities. This not only enriches society at large but also creates jobs and industries around cultural production.

So, how do we ensure a prosperous middle class – one that isn’t stagnating or deflating?

Firstly, the conductors must invest in education. However, it cannot be randomly allocated; it must align with modern industries, such as technology and finance. This focus on continuous learning and retraining is a hallmark of the middle class. Secondly, we must have tax policies that benefit middle-income earners, such as credits or reductions, to improve their financial situation. This class is likely to reinvest this wealth into the community, redistributing it and encouraging SMEs to innovate.

But the most significant factor in middle-class growth is access to affordable housing and living. In the 1980s, a decade often associated with opportunity, buying a home was within reach. A typical property would cost roughly twice the average salary; fast forward to today, and it is 8.3 times, making homes four times more expensive relative to annual income levels.

Traditionally, home ownership was a primary driver of wealth accumulation among the middle class. As property prices soar, the wealth gap widens, with most of it accruing to the older generations who bought at cheaper prices. Those who purchased before the housing crisis have seen their assets appreciate significantly, while young middle-class families have been locked out, exacerbating inequality.

This has also hindered population mobility. People unable to afford a home are less likely to move for better job opportunities. This stagnation can lead to a mismatch between labour supply and demand, stifling economic fluidity. Consequently, the majority of young families now rent as it is the only viable option. However, with rising property values, rental prices have also escalated, often consuming a substantial portion of income. This leaves little for savings and other expenditures, which dampens economic growth. With less disposable income, middle-class consumption patterns shift towards essential spending. As overall spending on goods and services decreases, businesses reliant on non-essential consumption feel the impact, creating a cycle of stagnation or decline.

Unfortunately, this is not something with a simple fix. No single policy can undo decades of damage to our middle class. However, addressing the housing crisis, inflationary pressures, and education quality is a start.

Correct policy could begin to ease the pressure before it worsens. For example, one reason house prices have risen dramatically is the supply and demand imbalance in populated areas. Economic growth is typically concentrated in a few metropolitan hubs, increasing job creation and housing competition. This leads to gentrification, further intensifying the housing crisis for the middle class. We could either encourage economic investment in less populated areas, create additional metropolitan hubs, or expand existing cities. Any of these options would help, but there is no one-size-fits-all approach; it’s entirely nation-specific.

Another solution is to build more housing. But this presents feasibility challenges. When creating housing contracts, real estate companies seek secure profit margins. Starting new urban areas is risky, especially in the short term, so companies may favour expanding in already densely populated hubs. Thus, increasing public housing investment could be an alternative, though it may affect the middle class in unexpected ways.

Public housing requires public funds, often leading to higher taxes. In a situation where people are already struggling to spend or save, raising taxes is not the answer. Currently, the UK Labour government has sought a workaround by increasing employer National Insurance contributions. Yet, according to the OBR, this cost largely falls on employees, directly impacting the middle and lower classes. Moreover, public housing often reduces nearby property values, whether due to increased supply or social stigma, posing additional issues.

Therefore, we need a strategy that maximises ROI for this demographic. Analysing population density figures makes it clear that our metropolitan hubs are too crowded for average families. Promoting mobility seems the best way to strengthen the middle class. Whether through housing incentives, job creation, or government investment, identifying what yields the highest ROI is essential. Without proper evaluation, we cannot determine the most effective approach.

One thing is certain: if we do not expand the middle class and improve their financial stability, our economy will falter. A struggling economy is also a decaying one. Furthermore, there is a direct correlation between a declining middle class and an inability to reach birth replacement levels. Survey data suggests that cost of living is one of the biggest concerns in deciding to have children, potentially explaining why fewer children are born, fewer couples marry, more ethnically British individuals emigrate, and real wages remain stagnant.