American Middle Class is Disappearing

[quote name='onetrackmind']I have an issue when rich people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, etc. make the choice to ship jobs overseas or lay people off when they could easily take a pay cut to keep these people working. Bill Gates could give away 1 Billion dollars a year for the rest of his life and still die a multi-billionaire. That's a problem when people are losing their jobs or not being paid a decent wage while the super rich get richer. You can talk about basic economics all you want but in order for our economy to exist and flourish, the more people that have good paying jobs means the more $$ people pour into the economy which in turn keeps the machine running.

The rich have been systematically destroying the middle class for over 30 years. It's a problem regardless of whether you want to admit it or not.[/QUOTE]

They ship the jobs overseas because it is cheaper. They can then produce more computers at a lower cost which means they can sell the computers at a lower price. More people, more Americans, are then able to afford the new, cheaper computer. Their lives just got better. The people overseas making the product just got better. You have more money which you saved on the computer and can spend it somewhere else in the economy.

Now in your scenario, you just want people with good paying jobs. That sounds a lot like the luddites back in the 1800s who were opposed to new technologies in fear that it was taking jobs away from people and hurting the economy. They were like a labor union in today's times. Of course they were wrong, and so are the labor unions. They hurt the progression of societal advancement. (you might disregard this by thinking outsourcing isn't like new technologies but it is. It couldn't be done with advancements which made the world flat)

Now, I know you think you can just tax the rich some more or pose restrictions on how much money they make. It might sound like a good idea but what happens when they are fed up with the taxes. Microsoft just opened a new branch in Canada because taxes were too high here. People and companies are moving to countries like Dubai and have off shore bank accounts. THAT does not help the US at all. It makes us weaker. And it starts with ideas from coming from you.

You can't ignore basic economics or human characteristics. Read a book on economics and put down that archaic communist-like BS.

Remember:
You can not build up the weak by tearing down the strong.
 
[quote name='tivo']They ship the jobs overseas because it is cheaper. They can then produce more computers at a lower cost which means they can sell the computers at a lower price. More people, more Americans, are then able to afford the new, cheaper computer. Their lives just got better. The people overseas making the product just got better. You have more money which you saved on the computer and can spend it somewhere else in the economy. [/QUOTE]

Are you kidding me? If you're not, then where is the $1 decrease for every DVD and video game I buy because they're using less plastic in the cases by putting those ridiculous recycle symbol cutouts in them?

Oh wait, it's going right into the CEO's pocket.

You know, it wouldn't piss me off if the companies themselves had an emergency backup bank account instead of pissing it away on the CEO's bloated salary. That way the company could take care of their employees should it face hard financial times like we're facing now.

And I would totally recommend making it illegal for companies to fire their already underpaid employees to hire even more egregiously underpaid temps so they can skimp on benefits and taxes. And the companies that fire their own workforce and then rehire them as egregiously underpaid temps should have their CEO's balls chewed off by a pit bull.
 
1) tivo is a perfect example of a right wing true believer.

2) When right wing true believers say "economics" they mean what rich people like.

3) What tivo wants and basically all right wing true believers want is a return to the gilded age.
 
[quote name='tivo']They ship the jobs overseas because it is cheaper. They can then produce more computers at a lower cost which means they can sell the computers at a lower price. More people, more Americans, are then able to afford the new, cheaper computer. Their lives just got better. The people overseas making the product just got better. You have more money which you saved on the computer and can spend it somewhere else in the economy.

Now in your scenario, you just want people with good paying jobs. That sounds a lot like the luddites back in the 1800s who were opposed to new technologies in fear that it was taking jobs away from people and hurting the economy. They were like a labor union in today's times. Of course they were wrong, and so are the labor unions. They hurt the progression of societal advancement. (you might disregard this by thinking outsourcing isn't like new technologies but it is. It couldn't be done with advancements which made the world flat)

Now, I know you think you can just tax the rich some more or pose restrictions on how much money they make. It might sound like a good idea but what happens when they are fed up with the taxes. Microsoft just opened a new branch in Canada because taxes were too high here. People and companies are moving to countries like Dubai and have off shore bank accounts. THAT does not help the US at all. It makes us weaker. And it starts with ideas from coming from you.

You can't ignore basic economics or human characteristics. Read a book on economics and put down that archaic communist-like BS.

Remember:
You can not build up the weak by tearing down the strong.[/QUOTE]

Record breaking profits beg to differ with your assessment. Yes its true that in theory paying people lower wages means you can get a product out for cheaper, problem is that you can also not pass along the savings or only pass along a very small portion of those savings. If every company followed what you claim to be true we would see prices dropping like crazy on things since they are saving $10-$30 an hour per worker(some cases more when you take into acount benefits). We would also see prices on products jump through the roof when jobs return to America(which is happening for some major companies)which has also not happened. Finally we would see companies profits stay roughly the same vs sky rocketing higher then their inflated stocks.

Face it...your not just wrong...your being an insulting dick in your responses like your a teacher talking to a student...when you yourself can not back up your wrong minded views. Economists are not perfect and we can state numerous examples of this fact, if anything economists are often out of touch and the economy unpredictable so following it to a tee is stupid.

One last thing, saying companies ship jobs over seas to avoid taxes when they get high is a riot as well. Truth is that yes the company itself may move over seas but guess where its employees live....yep the good old US of A. That means they can still be taxed....less of course all these rich bastards want to move to India or China.....which just aint happening.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:rofl:

you fucking *can't* be for real.[/QUOTE]

You seriously need to start making it clear who you are talking to. Even when I am not posting it can be hard to tell who you are talking to sometimes if you do not quote someones post. Is it the person above you? Probaly not since you tend to agree with him, person above that? Again probaly not.. I would assume Tivo...but it could be to someone 2 posts ago that you were responding directly to.
 
Like Bill Maher said, "The money gets to live in the Caymans - the executives still live in New Jersey."
 
[quote name='mykevermin']tivo, dude. get over yourself.[/QUOTE]

Has nothing to do with being hung up on myself(though I am a sexy beast)and everything to do with the fact that even if you were not typing to me it could have been Tivo or some other crazy person your in contrast to two pages back. If you want to talk about getting over yourself think about the fact that someone is offering a simple suggestion and not even in a rude way and your wigging out. Ego much?
 
[quote name='tivo']They ship the jobs overseas because it is cheaper. They can then produce more computers at a lower cost which means they can sell the computers at a lower price. More people, more Americans, are then able to afford the new, cheaper computer. Their lives just got better. The people overseas making the product just got better. You have more money which you saved on the computer and can spend it somewhere else in the economy.

Now in your scenario, you just want people with good paying jobs. That sounds a lot like the luddites back in the 1800s who were opposed to new technologies in fear that it was taking jobs away from people and hurting the economy. They were like a labor union in today's times. Of course they were wrong, and so are the labor unions. They hurt the progression of societal advancement. (you might disregard this by thinking outsourcing isn't like new technologies but it is. It couldn't be done with advancements which made the world flat)

Now, I know you think you can just tax the rich some more or pose restrictions on how much money they make. It might sound like a good idea but what happens when they are fed up with the taxes. Microsoft just opened a new branch in Canada because taxes were too high here. People and companies are moving to countries like Dubai and have off shore bank accounts. THAT does not help the US at all. It makes us weaker. And it starts with ideas from coming from you.

You can't ignore basic economics or human characteristics. Read a book on economics and put down that archaic communist-like BS.

Remember:
You can not build up the weak by tearing down the strong.[/QUOTE]

What kind of fucking Peter Pan fantasyland do you live in? First off, my point was Bill Gates has enough money to keep the jobs here and offset the difference in cost by taking less money per year. People's lives don't get better because they can buy non-essential goods at a cheaper price. People who are paid good wages are able to save more money and spend more money on non-essential goods like vacations and computers. Which in turn creates more jobs as long as they are domestic products. Which makes people's lives less stressful and more enjoyable. When was the last time a robot used in an assembly line bought something?? Oh thats right never. People working in shit conditions for pennies a day haven't had their lives enhanced, they have been taken advantage of by the world capitalist system. They deserve to make a good wages just like anyone else.

Ah another anti-union right winger... save that tired anti-labor talking points on someone else. I find it hilarious when average Americans who belong to a union are made to be the scapegoat on why a business can't be profitable. Workers making 50k a year + benefits doing a job that will physically break them down before they even get old enough to retire are the problem and not the CEO's or upper white collar management making insane amount of money.

You are fucking delusional and you've obviously never held a labor intensive job. My old man is a union carpenter and because of that he was paid a decent wage where i enjoyed a middle class childhood. At now 50 years old is so broken down from what he has been doing for the past 32 years that he can't even do things a normal person can do at 50. But according to you he's overpaid from being in a union and didnt deserve the wages he made, he should instead be at the mercy of the employer. Keep wishing away unions, eventually they will be broken up and the threat of one will then be gone. Think wages are going to stay the same without the threat of a union? Nope, they will fall across the board in all areas.

And lets be honest here, you don't care about societal advancement because if you did you wouldn't be trying to argue for the poor downtrodden rich, who have it so awful in this country. I get so tired of the threats coming from the rich and the right claiming that if we tax the rich too much they'll stop creating jobs and leave. If americans were smart they would just stop supporting the companies that do this and they would be fucked because no one would buy their goods. Your plan to make America stronger is to turn us into a third word country with no middle class whatsoever. The rich will continue to get richer while we become the serfs making the cheap material for the rest of the world (which will happen in the future as soon as the rest of the world has substantial middle classes and isn't reliant on the US to buy all their goods)

You claim to know so much about economics but don't have enough insight to see what's really damaging to our economy. You just repeat bullshit talking points you've heard from people who are rich. The entire monetary system needs to go bye bye, by now in our existence human beings should have moved past this greed centered mentality and created a better system. But we just can't seem to learn from histories mistakes.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']if you think your suggestion is simply stated or not rude then it's quite evident why you're on SSI.[/QUOTE]

/shrug ill say this then drop it since its a waste of time, and I will keep this simple as possible since apparently thats the way you like it.

I would rather be a guy living on SSI and trying to be a decent person in every aspect on or offline then a dick who seems to live for nothing more then arguing with the same people online every day, taking cheap pot shots at people you do not agree with and getting a rise out of those too stupid to realize you are just trying to piss them off.

There did I do it right ;) Either way have a nice day Myke!
 
[quote name='onetrackmind'] First off, my point was Bill Gates has enough money to keep the jobs here and offset the difference in cost by taking less money per year. [/Quote]

you're right, he does. but is it your or Bill Mahr's or Obama's decision to decide "when people have made enough money." I say that its an attack on their freedom, on their pursuit of happiness. Them making money doesn't affect you. It doesn't come out of your paycheck or pocketbook and I'd love to see a flow diagram of $ if you disagree.

People's lives don't get better because they can buy non-essential goods at a cheaper price. People who are paid good wages are able to save more money and spend more money on non-essential goods like vacations and computers. Which in turn creates more jobs as long as they are domestic products. Which makes people's lives less stressful and more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this. A computer makes almost everything more efficient and easier. You need to read more about how sealing up our borders to keep jobs and goods purely american would hurt us. See isolationism and free trade.


When was the last time a robot used in an assembly line bought something?? Oh thats right never.
Click to expand...

Who researched, designed, and built the robot?

People working in shit conditions for pennies a day haven't had their lives enhanced, they have been taken advantage of by the world capitalist system. They deserve to make a good wages just like anyone else.
Click to expand...

they take the job because it is good for them or their family. if they didn't want it they could choose to work somewhere else or start their own business or live off the grid. comparing the lives of the Amish with a carpenter should show you your statement is false. Electricity, entertainment, etc. Capitalism isn't great but its the best system ever to exist.

you posted other stuff but it was more anecdotal and I couldn't find a quote of yours worth refuting. In any case, I'm sure you've heard the problems surrounding unions (or should have) and I think there's a thread about teacher tenure (but I didnt read it). Someone posted that interns need to be paid which is stupid and I can explain if needed. But I will say that if people truly wanted better paying jobs, lower unemployment, etc. we would get rid of the employment healthcare and added benefits to jobs and just pay the individual more. This would reduce the current company solutions of paying part time employees or paying current workers overtime which is cheaper than hiring new full time employees (because they don't have to add all the benefits).

The entire monetary system needs to go bye bye, by now in our existence human beings should have moved past this greed centered mentality and created a better system. But we just can't seem to learn from histories mistakes.
Click to expand...

Do the rest of you believe this? Come on now. someone else correct this mistaken kid.


P.S. Thrust is right about how present economic thought doesn't yield 100% understanding of the market. Thats why any policy made by the government restricting or capping the free market should be weary as they're just guessing. But some truths exist like subsidizing X produces more X, where X can be corn, hybrids, unemployment etc.
 
you've aligned yourself with thrustbucket in staking a claim to knowledge of markets.

thrustbucket has advocated a federal default.

neither him, nor you and your atheoretical ideal universe nonsense, have a bloody clue what you're talking about. you can ape right wing rhetoric all you want, pepper it with "read a book" to make it appear like you're learned (which book, now? Hop on Pop? It's more enlightening than Friedman's "The World is Flat" nonsense) - but at the end of the day, you're a conclusion in search of a rationale.

All this is aside from the point that this argument isn't about capitalism vs not-capitalism; it's about the growing class dichotomies in the United States, stagnant wages, lesser earning power, anti-unionist policies, and the kind of monopsony exercised by corporations like Wal-Mart that fill your stomach with more chemicals than god knows what because using chemically engineered oil solids instead of by-god-from-a-fucking-tree cocoa beans in your chocolate bar saves them 4 hundredths of a cent on the price they pay per bar.

It's also about corporations trying to get laws changed so they can use 0 cacao at ALL and still call it "chocolate," in the end hiding from you, mister-informed-consumer-of-the-free-market, that you're eating a chocolate-flavored chemical bar and not anything that came from nature.

you justify unequal outcomes of capitalism as sensible by pointing out that they are the outcomes of capitalism. which a childishly absurd kind of tautological thinking that you and your ilk embody. there are presents under the christmas tree, ergo Santa Claus is real.
 
Looks like someone watched the O'Reilly factor on friday (jejune was the word of the day).

The 'jobs will trickle down' argument is being used right now to justify extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Isn't that argument kind of discredited right now, considering the pathetic job creation under Bush?
 
Was it? I didn't catch the factor (left around 5pm for a weekend fly fishing trip).

Anyway, addressing myke, I am free to veer off on any tangent I want, just like you can add your ridiculous hyperboles. But if anything, your anecdotes are really non sequiturs under the guise of verisimilitude. But don't compare me with thrustbucket. Right wingers don't believe in ideals. I'll admit that the World is Flat is pretty basic but its a decent introduction to economics. I'd say there is an apparent hierarchy here of education and knowledge among posters and I can tell when I'm addressing some idiot, someone somewhat intelligent, or some blow hard posting pretentious comments to make themselves feel like they're king of the nerds
 
[quote name='tivo']blow hard posting pretentious comments to make themselves feel like they're king of the nerds[/QUOTE]

Pretty strong relationship b/w that and people who use words like "verisimilitude" on the interbutt.

You've closed your eyes to the US economy since 1980 if you think that trickle-down is even a remotely sensible possibility.
 
1085.jpg

It's absolutely possible because Reagan believed it.

Of course, Reagan was also in favor of nonproliferation and he was anti-torture. Facts are annoying though.
 
The "intro to economics:" tivo has been yammering about turns out not to be about economics or by an economist.

Discuss.
 
Do the rest of you believe this? Come on now. someone else correct this mistaken kid.
Click to expand...
I'd like to believe it. Ideally, anarchy would rule this world. The fact humans are such assholes prevents it from working like that.
 
[quote name='dorino']I'd like to believe it. Ideally, anarchy would rule this world. The fact humans are such assholes prevents it from working like that.[/QUOTE]

the fact that humans are such assholes prevents most systems from working like they do on paper.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Beat me to it, Clak.[/QUOTE]
Was the first thing that came to mind. That or Pee-Wee's secret word of the day had become a lot more sophisticated.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']the fact that humans are such assholes prevents most systems from working like they do on paper.[/QUOTE]
Reaganomics included.
 
[quote name='dorino']Reaganomics included.[/QUOTE]
Nope. Because Reganomics (Supply Side Economics) was never intended to work the way it was described anyway. It worked exactly as planned. Let the rich get richer, poor get poorer, and break the back of the unions.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']the fact that humans are such assholes prevents most systems from working like they do on paper.[/QUOTE]

That's wisdom for the ages that I wish every political blog would grasp.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I had to look up this word.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verisimilitude

So, a rough translation would be "under the guise of the guise of truth". Is that correct?[/QUOTE]
Most of the twenty-five cent words in his post didn't mean quite what he thought they meant. He needs to be more careful using the thesaurus.

The literal meaning is close, but the context is all wrong.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I had to look up this word.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verisimilitude

So, a rough translation would be "under the guise of the guise of truth". Is that correct?[/QUOTE]

Thats a rough translation. I would dumb it down by saying "under the guise of appearing to be true or resembling truth or truth-likeness. It isn't that myke's non sequiturs are accurate, but instead they resemble truth, fooling many of you, without any putative evidence or simulacrum of reality.
 
[quote name='tivo']Thats a rough translation. I would dumb it down by saying "under the guise of appearing to be true or resembling truth or truth-likeness. It isn't that myke's non sequiturs are accurate, but instead they resemble truth, fooling many of you, without any putative evidence or simulacrum of reality.[/QUOTE]

Yeah ...

You don't talk like that.
 
[quote name='tivo']Thats a rough translation. I would dumb it down by saying "under the guise of appearing to be true or resembling truth or truth-likeness. It isn't that myke's non sequiturs are accurate, but instead they resemble truth, fooling many of you, without any putative evidence or simulacrum of reality.[/QUOTE]

Hey, wordsmith, you forgot to close your quote. You also missed an apostraphe in your contraction. "Putative" shouldn't be paired with "evidence", its meaning is: commonly accepted as, supposed or reputed.

You're not really helping your case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tivo, what you're saying doesn't make any sense. Adding putative simulacrums doesn't mean you're making a more rational argument.

It's like putting lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig brah.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']So, uh, back on topic, I would like to think a majority of Americans could actually agree on some solutions to this problem.[/QUOTE]

Do you mean tariffs?
 
I'm not sure if a majority of Americans could get behind import tariffs. Partially because its never on the table, its hardly asked about in polls.

A significant portion of the tea party is allegedly behind it, unless its in a bill put forth by Democrats. A ton of the progressive wing of Democratic party are for it, but they are a small bunch.

What you've got left in Congress anyway, are a ton of corporatists and free traders - The entirety of the Republican party and probably a large majority of the Democratic party.

I imagine that most people dont have a particular opinion on it on the grounds of being poorly informed or react to the term tariff in a knee jerk way.
 
Here's how it happens.

Country A outsources to Country B where workers have no rights and work for peanuts (India or China)

Country A has no jobs, and there are only the very rich and very poor.

The Country B wises up, demands better pay and benefits, their jobs dry up so the Country B becomes Country A.

Rinse and repeat.

Pretty soon every country will be like Mexico, where there is only the filthy rich and very poor.
 
I was listening to something on NPR not too long ago about wages in China, and the business owner they interviewed said already that Chinese workers have more and more choice in employment all the time now. So many workers are needed that businesses have had to start competing for employees. It isn't huge yet, but it's the beginnings of the end of cheap Chinese labor.
 
[quote name='Clak']I was listening to something on NPR not too long ago about wages in China, and the business owner they interviewed said already that Chinese workers have more and more choice in employment all the time now. So many workers are needed that businesses have had to start competing for employees. It isn't huge yet, but it's the beginnings of the end of cheap Chinese labor.[/QUOTE]

Very true, and once China can establish a solid middle class, we'll be insignificant when it comes to the world economy. Countries like China will start not accepting our currency or fund our debt which will throw us in a economic depression we can't imagine. We are going to become what China was 15 years ago.
 
[quote name='onetrackmind']Very true, and once China can establish a solid middle class, we'll be insignificant when it comes to the world economy. Countries like China will start not accepting our currency or fund our debt which will throw us in a economic depression we can't imagine. We are going to become what China was 15 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Or ...

Whatever is outsourced to China will move to another third world country.

Most of the continent of Africa hasn't been exploited for cheap labor other than resource gathering.

Then, China's middle class dries up like ours does.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita

China is 98th and India is 130th out of 180 countries. There are plenty of other places for capitalism to trickle down.

If there ever becomes a time where cheap labor is exhausted due to economic expansion or labor contraction, the middle class will pool up.
 
[quote name='onetrackmind']Very true, and once China can establish a solid middle class, we'll be insignificant when it comes to the world economy. Countries like China will start not accepting our currency or fund our debt which will throw us in a economic depression we can't imagine. We are going to become what China was 15 years ago.[/QUOTE]

China still has massive problems with corruption, human rights, and censorship. Industry has even less regulation then the US and China is always one earthquake (see:shoddy construction) or avain flu strain (see:shoddy health regulations) away from the next crisis.

I don't think you can call the majority of Chinese workers "middle class", the censorship guarantees that we never know the full story but the details that leak out aren't pretty (for example Foxconn)

I know the US has it's challenges ahead of it, but let's not downplay the problems that other countries are facing.
 
[quote name='camoor']China still has massive problems with corruption, human rights, and censorship. Industry has even less regulation then the US and China is always one earthquake (see:shoddy construction) or avain flu strain (see:shoddy health regulations) away from the next crisis.

I don't think you can call the majority of Chinese workers "middle class", the censorship guarantees that we never know the full story but the details that leak out aren't pretty (for example Foxconn)

I know the US has it's challenges ahead of it, but let's not downplay the problems that other countries are facing.[/QUOTE]

I didnt say they are mostly middle class but they will slowly build one up eventually and eventually in the future we will be a country that has the cheapest labor, whether thats 10, 50, 100 years from now. China is just the most threatening to us due to their massive population. Where already at a disadvantage when it comes to fair trade policies that would help us, China will cockblock us if we ever try to institute tariffs again.
 
[quote name='onetrackmind']I didnt say they are mostly middle class but they will slowly build one up eventually and eventually in the future we will be a country that has the cheapest labor, whether thats 10, 50, 100 years from now. China is just the most threatening to us due to their massive population. Where already at a disadvantage when it comes to fair trade policies that would help us, China will cockblock us if we ever try to institute tariffs again.[/QUOTE]

This ain't going to happen in ten years, and almost anything could happen 50 to 100 years out.

China is soon going to find out that while they may have gained ground in the industrial sector, those white-collar jobs are a whole different ball of wax. They have one hurdle after another - massive corruption, censorship, non-existent IP protection, brain-drain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top