The U.S. Middle Class Is Being Wiped Out

[Acanthus]

Watch this space!
Remember the lawlessness that occurred during the new Orleans hurricane?
What happens when there is no cavalry- anarchy!
Monkeys feed peanuts with never any bananas' start throwing the shits!

Has anyone even really been as far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

 

[gingermeggs]

If we look back in history before outsourcing into low wage countries was possible how did our country reach an equilibrium on prices and pay?

If it worked then, why can't we institute regulations to return to that equilibrium?

Because it's not "we" anymore it's all "me" and fuck you jack!
Just look at some of the greedy fucks here that are doing good for coin and their attitudes(1 for me and none for you!)......like they are something of the golden breed, not just monkeys to be fiddled with ad hock, like the rest are!

Been bombing the wrong targets, should of done Monaco(on new years eve!) and all the other rich "get away" enclaves.
If you trickle it down!
Then you can make it flood also!

 

[gingermeggs]

Has anyone even really been as far as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Delete one "e" in feed grammar nazi!
Thanks!

 

[SammyJr]

Don't drop OSHA, but please drop minimum wage. I am pissed off every day that I cannot legally compete with foreigners.

LOL. Compete? If you worked for a Chinese wage, you couldn't afford the gas or bus ticket to get to work, let alone food or shelter. You'd be on public aid for need of survival and the taxpayer would subsidise your employer's profit.

 

[SammyJr]

Because this is more of a utopian ideal than an Ayn Rand novel. It's not possible. It will never be possible.

There is no possible way we will ever be 100% self sufficient. Hell, even back in the time of subsistence farming and tallow candles we were not self sufficient as a country.

Nor should we want to be.

He didn't say self sufficient, he said zero trade debt. That means if we import $1 trillion then we have to export $1 trillion at a minimum. If we can't export that much then we have to import less.

 

[SammyJr]

They don't have the kind of money we require for simple day to day operations of our current government. You can raise their taxes as high as you want and we will still be short (forgetting the small fact that the rich generally write the tax code).

I know, but the idea is to discourage insane 9 figure compensation packages. If someone is going to lose 75%+ of their $150 million package, then that package isn't so tempting. They'll choose a smaller package and the money will end up being reinvested in the company and reduce the temptation to lay off Americans. These employed Americans will not use social services, thus reducing Government spending. They will also pay taxes on all levels and spend more money.

Money circulating through the Middle Class is better for all and it won't hurt the wealthy one bit.

 

[SammyJr]

To some extent, yes, though not for the same reasons as you do. You view executives as profiting off the backs of their employees in a vindictive nature. I don't.

Why does a mosquito bite? Why does a scorpian sting? Why do executives lay off workers for personal gain? Its what they do. There's no motive beyond instinct.

Remove the personal gain and the executive won't lay off the workers unless the company situation demands it.

 

[SammyJr]

In many countries that is considered above middle class to upper class.

Maybe it is time to work harder and be more efficient.

3 Car's and a big house, usually 3 plasma screens as well...
3 computers. Too fat to walk or take a bicycle. What poor folks...

I can understand that the larger distances and erratic bus times can be annoying. But there is one thing obvious, you are rich.

You really believe that this is a poor American? LOL. You're describing a Middle Class family, well in the upper 50% if not 30%.

 

[SammyJr]

Right...because someone from India is capable of sitting down at one of my customers' sites to figure out that a switch port isn't working because some moron bridged two network ports together with his own unauthorized equipment.

My job is plenty skilled and will never go away. The same is true of many jobs.

Which is completely beside the point in relation to the argument. If labor costs were brought down to true market rates, outsourcing would not be anywhere near as viable in most industries.

Have fun training your H1-B replacement. That's your free market in action, buddy.

Even if you own your own business, what happens when your customers don't have any customers and can't afford to hire your services? You think a population of Wal-mart greeters is going to pay a network tech, let alone at the rate to which you think you're entitled?

 

[ebaycj]

Personally I think the US Gov't should heavily subsidize (50% or so) science and engineering degrees from state universities for US Citizens. These universities should be required to have fairly strict admissions policies to these degrees for their students to recieve the subsidy.

Political science degrees can be left to be paid for in full by the student.

We need way more (good) engineers and less politicians and marketing folks.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

We need way more (good) engineers and less politicians and marketing folks.

But who will hire them? That's the problem. Engineering functions are also being outsourced to companies overseas. Did you read the thread a few weeks ago about the fact that the US produces more than enough science and engineering graduates, particularly the ones with advanced degrees?

I graduated with an engineering degree and I agree that science and engineering are what advance humanity and therefore, should be highly prized. However, that's not the way it works in the US unfortunately. We reward people who push money around and "create wealth." We reward people who make their money by filing frivilous lawsuits. We reward smooth talkers who BS and tell you what you want to hear (IE, politicians or salespeople). Yes, I'm cynical.

 

[SammyJr]

To the first part. Umm, You are correct. Not everyone is going to come out on top. I know he's was just a comedian, but it is still one of my favorite quotes for Carlin. But statistically speaking half of any given population is below average. As such, not everyone can or should make it to the top. Why should every American household be a "middle class?" Not to say I wouldn't love to live in a utopian world, and I do what I can to help out others. However, I don't think every American should own a house, a car, a big screen TV, a cell phone PDA, or some other frivolous piece of junk that is not needed for life. If they can work for it and afford it then great. If not you won't find me shedding a tear.

Why shouldn't someone willing to work hard not acheive a lower middle class lifestyle? Are you saying that its impossible or are you just unwilling to stop the billionaire from throwing another $100 million on the pile? Why do you support the Government subsidizing the profits of employers unwilling to pay a living wage?

As for your second point... wow, just wow. I am all for trying to better the "plight" of my fellow man. But I'm not doing so with a romantic notion about it. I realize some people are unskilled. If they want more from life, they need to figure out how to get it and not have it handed to them.

How's life in the bubble?

It really must be part of the Free Trade faith. Why is it so hard for you guys to grasp that you are not insulated from the plight of your fellow Americans? If people have no money, who are your customers?

 

[jackace]

But who will hire them? That's the problem. Engineering functions are also being outsourced to companies overseas. Did you read the thread a few weeks ago about the fact that the US produces more than enough science and engineering graduates, particularly the ones with advanced degrees?

I graduated with an engineering degree and I agree that science and engineering are what advance humanity and therefore, should be highly prized. However, that's not the way it works in the US unfortunately. We reward people who push money around and "create wealth." We reward people who make their money by filing frivilous lawsuits. We reward smooth talkers who BS and tell you what you want to hear (IE, politicians or salespeople). Yes, I'm cynical.

Exactly, There is actually a surplus of engineers in many fields, in the US at least.

 

[Trianon]

Exactly, There is actually a surplus of engineers in many fields, in the US at least.

well, this is also partially caused by outsourcing, entry level positions left the country and it's hard to find engineers with experience in specialized fields that are still around, because they can't get on the job training and most of that stuff is not taught in school anyway.

 

[theeedude]

Lots of engineering grads go to business and consulting. For less than the amount of effort it takes to obtain advanced engineering degrees, you can get much higher paying degrees, so unless you really want to do engineering, it's not worth it.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Lots of engineering grads go to business and consulting. For less than the amount of effort it takes to obtain advanced engineering degrees, you can get much higher paying degrees, so unless you really want to do engineering, it's not worth it.

I think that's the point, and that's what is sad. When did we, as a country, start valuing money movers and lawyers above all else? As I mentioned above, engineering and science will advance humanity -- financial advisors and lawyers won't. Engineering and science keep a nation on the forefront of technology and create entire new industries -- financial advisors and lawyers won't.

It is extremely arrogant for people to think that "We're Americans, we'll do all the 'design' or 'creative thinking' and then farm out the manufacturing to the Chinese!" Guess what? The Chinese and folks in India are turning out engineers and scientists in huge numbers and they're going to be the ones doing the design before long. They're going to be the ones coming up with new ideas and cutting edge technologies, not us. They're going to be the ones cashing in and creating whole new industries -- not us.

This whole short-term, "How do my numbers look this quarter?" management philosophy is killing our country. What is going to be left in our country? Are we going to be a nation of Wal Mart greeters, paper pushers (aka, Project Managers), and CEOs? Heck, if we're going to be all about the bottom line, my question is -- when do we start outsourcing the CEOs? You can get guys in India or China to do the same job for far less money.

 

[Jhhnn]

When did we, as a country, start valuing money movers and lawyers above all else?

About the time RR was elected on the theme that greed is good and that we *can* have it all, if we just have faith in the idea that the rich getting richer is really good for us all... which was pretty much the sentiment in the 1920's, too...

Most of the posters here were raised on that... some even learned their first words from Rush on the radio, I'm sure...

 

[borosp1]

Compare our standard of living to that of 30 years ago and get back to me.

Houses are significantly larger.

The one car family is gone and was replaced by the two car family and that is being replaced by the 3+ car family.

damn near everything is cheaper today( health care and education being exceptions)

the good old days are today.

The difference now to what it was 30 yrs ago is that now most are living on debt(credit cards) and not living on there true income. While 30 yrs ago people did not have the debt lvl the average American has today. So the true reality is that the middle class is getting poorer and not richer.

 

[ebaycj]

But who will hire them? That's the problem. Engineering functions are also being outsourced to companies overseas. Did you read the thread a few weeks ago about the fact that the US produces more than enough science and engineering graduates, particularly the ones with advanced degrees?

I graduated with an engineering degree and I agree that science and engineering are what advance humanity and therefore, should be highly prized. However, that's not the way it works in the US unfortunately. We reward people who push money around and "create wealth." We reward people who make their money by filing frivilous lawsuits. We reward smooth talkers who BS and tell you what you want to hear (IE, politicians or salespeople). Yes, I'm cynical.

Yeah. I've always particularly hated marketing.

Just yesterday, I had a call from my sister and her friend. They were looking to buy a wireless router. I recommended a cisco/linksys 300n router. Her friend was worried/apprehensive because on the back of the package, describing the "features" of this router, it had the "surfing" box checked, but left unchecked the options for "e-mail" and "online video". Really? A 300N router that won't do email or online video? Give me a break! I told them that it was fine, and it was a load of marketing BS, of course.

Also, I agree it's ridiculous with US demand for these positions. Though, good engineers/scientists can usually make jobs for themselves (build something, patent it and sell it).

 

[Trianon]

I think that's the point, and that's what is sad. When did we, as a country, start valuing money movers and lawyers above all else? As I mentioned above, engineering and science will advance humanity -- financial advisors and lawyers won't. Engineering and science keep a nation on the forefront of technology and create entire new industries -- financial advisors and lawyers won't.

Right on, people choose to ignore the fact that accounting, management and legal departments are called "overhead" in any producing company for a reason.

 

[sao123]

Quick question here.

Why is everyone going off the assumption that services are not the way to grow and distribute wealth? Why is so many people I've seen so focused on manufacturing primarily?

Anyhow, back to my original question. Why must the economy of a society be based on tangible products only? The point of a healthy economy isn't what the supply is, but that there is a supply of something and that it has a demand so things get exchanged. A perfectly healthy economy can subsist on services only.

I will state that people need and want "things" that are tangible goods. Demand for goods doesn't go down. It just changes over time of what goods are in demand.

You answered you very own question, and yet you failed to see it.

Its not a matter of manufacturing vs services. The reason a services only economy doesnt work, is SUSTAINABILITY through necessity.

Let me relate to you a simple example about the middle and lower classes, which make up about 80-85% of the population. When times get tough, (for whatever reason) what is the first thing which gets cut from consumption? Services.

A man who works 60 hours a week for a decent salary, when faced with car repairs, take it to a local garage, pay for the parts and the labor for the garage to make repairs.

This same man, when overtime is cut off, and has less money, will buy the parts and make the repair himself. Same manufactured parts, same costs. Service eliminated.

This same pattern can be found through ALL aspects of a services economy. There really are very few sustainable services industries (healthcare, emergency services, travel/transportation, communications, utilities, etc).

Not all manufacturing is sustainable either, but the majority of it is, becaus ethe majority of it is in conumables. Clothes wear out, and will always be in demand. (and your analogy is bad, because companies diversiy their product line, so unless people suddenly stop wearing shirts, the company is safe.) Foods, detergents, fuels, Office Supplies are all consumables and have daily demand. Other items such as clothes, appliances, vehicles, toys, computers, have a limited lifecycle and therefore also have consistant demand.

our workforce needs sustainability for our lower classes to be able to function and prosper long term.

Protectionism will not work. People are accustomed to a certain lifestyle where cheap prices of goods has contributed to a significant part of that. Would you want to pay $5k for a TV? Or $300 for a pair of Nike's?

protectionism does work, otherwise we wouldnt need a system of patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Unless you are advocating only protecting the rich.

 

[BoberFett]

protectionism does work, otherwise we wouldnt need a system of patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Unless you are advocating only protecting the rich.

In case you hadn't noticed, patents, trademarks and copyrights help those at the top more than those at the bottom. Seems as though you yourself advocate protecting the rich and their "intellectual property."

 

[sao123]

In case you hadn't noticed, patents, trademarks and copyrights help those at the top more than those at the bottom. Seems as though you yourself advocate protecting the rich and their "intellectual property."

not at all. My point was protectionism seems to work at the top, and should be applied at the bottom as well.

 

[BoberFett]

not at all. My point was protectionism seems to work at the top, and should be applied at the bottom as well.

Ah, I guess I misunderstood your point.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Because this is more of a utopian ideal than an Ayn Rand novel. It's not possible. It will never be possible.

There is no possible way we will ever be 100% self sufficient. Hell, even back in the time of subsistence farming and tallow candles we were not self sufficient as a country.

Nor should we want to be.

I'm not saying that trade shouldn't occur. I'm saying that we should export at least as much as we import. Why do you regard that as a utopian ideal? What makes you think we are doomed and destined to have a trade deficit? Why do you think it is metaphysically impossible to have balanced trade?