Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I did "focus on that" by putting in a plug for education.
The reality is that the poor have always and will always exist.
I reject this argument. If not in whole then at least to any large degree.
The economic model of constant growth that existed in the past and which allowed for
(and even required) an ever expanding population and had jobs for them... stopped working.
We have and will continue to have fewer and fewer jobs and especially at the bottom end.
Quote:
The only way to not inflate the number of poor individuals is to give them the ability to
seize upon opportunities for growth, namely through said education.
And they haven't had that? And plenty more of other opportunities not available in the past?
Surely there is plenty of evidence of those who *have* used those opportunities...
Even to the degree that the poor even want to put out the effort required...
there simply aren't the raw number of decently paying low/no skill jobs needed for them.
(Which is where this discussion started if you've been following along.)
The "upper classes" by means of accumulated wealth and other skills can afford to produce
a larger number of young than are needed by their group. The "middle classes" by means of their
skills and lesser accumulation can also afford to produce a larger number of young than are needed
by their group or that they can afford to house, clothe, house, doctor and educate.
But neither of these groups have done this (even if some portions of them might).
With few exceptions both the "upper" and "middle" classes have restrained themselves
(by various means) from producing more than a marginal number beyond replacement.
The "lower classes" have not. Why? And what measures might change that pattern?
Last edited by MrRational; 12-14-2012 at 02:36 PM..
The old story, "when I grew up, things were different". I grew up when this country was coming out of the Korean War. Families flocked to California, that is where the jobs were going. Families owned one car. You wore school clothes and shoes, came home changed into street clothes. We didn't eat junk food, we ate fruits and veggies. We rode our bicycles everywhere. We made do. No such thing as credit cards, you paid cash for everything. I worked in a factory, after high school, jobs were plentiful back then. My family had ONE television set, ONE telephone, ONE car. Going out to eat was a treat. No fast food chains. We ate real wholesome food.
Now it is a consumer nation, we are willing to go into debt. Our garages are filled up with junk so most people can't even park their car in their garage. We eat many of our meals out...we are buying into the concept MORE is good. We eat more, we own more junk, we owe more.
We bought into the concept of the advertisers.
The rich are becoming richer and the poor are becoming poorer.
There was a black woman in Los Angeles who died in her 80's, this was in the 80's and her wealth was 25 million dollars and no one had any idea she had money. She moved from Alabama to Los Angeles in the early 20's and she became a maid to a wealthy Hollywood family. She rented a apartment on Wilshire Bl and she said to herself, "one day I am going to own this apartment building". She saved all of her money and one day she bought that apartment building and at the time of her death she owned half a dozen apartment buildings, she still lived in the same apartment. She told people it is not how much money you earn, it is how much you save. I learned from that dear woman. A penny saved is a penny earned. People do not know how to save money anymore. They are conditioned by the media to spend, spend, spend and that is the reason why the average American is in debt of ten thousand dollars and why half of the popullation is obese.
So, when that friendly foreign government turns a blind eye to reverse engineering while refusing to acknowledge your patent, I guess you'll be down with that too. When they are selling away your millions in R&D expenses for pennies on the dollar, that won't be any worry.
When your foreign laborers screw up a batch of widgets that took 4 months for you to receive, that won't be any problem. No problem with your multi million dollar (all financed and accruing interest) line sitting idle and waiting for them to get it right.
Surely it won't be a problem when labor and energy costs continue to sky rocket in foreign countries. Just pass worry about tallying the expenses tomorrow, no need for accountability today.
I assume you don't quite understand the full nature of manufacturing. It goes far above simply having the product made. Lot's of little in betweens and down the roads that have to be considered and accounted for. Labor costs, while significant, are just one component in the equation.
If you were having something made, that doesn't necessarily mean you have to be the one making it. Plenty of job shops in America that manufacture other people's ideas. How many Apple employees actually manufacture Apple products? Many large companies simply design the intended product, and then decide who to outsource the actual manufacturing of the product to.
The argument I make is that cheaper energy and continuous improvements in automated manufacturing products will continue to make America a better option for many products. Labor intensive work like clothing will likely never return to America in a big way. Anything that can be done by a robot is another matter entirely. This is what will be continuing to pull work back home.
No, I am not familiar with manufacturing and don't think I claimed to be. I form opinions on the matter from what I read and from what I understand from friends who are in the business. It appears that labor costs and frustrations with labor make up a huge part of the manufacturing world. If it were not, I should imagine more companies would be doing their manufacturing here which they are not.
I live in the south and see myriads of former clothing, fabric factories closed. The problem with that is far too many American workers are cut out for that level of work. What happens to them? And if a plant is built, how many older workers (50 and above) are likely to be hired? And with an HR department, what about quotas for females and minorities? Sorry, starting up here is too hard on the labor front. But I hope I'm wrong and you turn out to be right.
As for the protection of patents and copyrights, those are pretty much ignored already.
People keep saying there will be more jobs "when the economy gets better". But in the last 10 years so many jobs were offshored/oursourced, and they're not coming back. Especially manufacturing, software, phone call centers. In this sense, the economy is not going to go back to the way it was in 2000.
American software people are going to have to shift into new fields of work and that's not just temporary.
But what about factory workers whose jobs were sent to other countries? I mean a lot of unemployed people are "waiting for the economy to get better" - but is this the wrong viewpoint?
Somebody wrote a book called "Death of the American Middle Class" - I haven't read it but I know what it's about.
This may be an overstatement, but it's almost like America lost some fingers or even a limb, and people are waiting for it to grow back so we can go and play ball again, but it's not going to. We have to learn a new game.
I have mixed feelings about the manufacturing sector. Those jobs started to leave in the 60s. People have had 5 decades to prepare for it.
I'm not sure where you're at, but there are still plenty of jobs left in the call centers, and expect more to return since Americans do not like talking to foreigners on the phone.
I don't want clothing made by robots. I prefer that my clothing is made by hand; but how many of us are willing to pay the extra money for clothing made by Americans? Too many want that cheap stuff they sell at discount stores.
I prefer that my clothing is made by hand...
but how many of us are willing to pay the extra money for clothing made by Americans?
The stores stock what people will buy whether it's made by Americans or not.
But I don't see anyone paying $30 for handmade tighty-whities.
Quote:
Too many want that cheap stuff they sell at discount stores.
Too many have been sold a bill of goods about values.
The values of having a productive and employed neighbor being just one.
(This is the one that gets better goods stocked into the stores btw)
But it's really not that simple... is it?
There is also a value in having the people of those 3rd world countries come into their own.
The issue is striking a balance between their needs (and capacity) and our needs (and capacity).
It's tough.
Meh. If anything "those foundations" been responding too much.
The "middle class" has shrunk because at the same time the "upper class" has drawn ever more
wealth to their relatively static number... the "lower class" has been allowed and even encouraged
to expand their number by orders of magnitude beyond their capacity to pay their own way.
Once upon a time poorly educated and minimally trained people could still count on decent
enough wages and pretty good benefits to support themselves and their families on from the
industrial and labor employment that was the first category of US employment offshored.
The problem is in the math: Too many forks poised over the pie tin looking for a bite.
Who is going to pay to feed and clothe and house and doctor these people?
Nonsense;eduatio has gotten more funding compared to other countires;its the results that have gotten worse.Wealth sharing strated i teh mid 60's and as result plainly in less people actually taking opportuniyt and goig to the bottom becaue they don't see the use in work ;so often.basically the effort i their opino is worth the odds verus the possible gains. the dropout rate alone is alarming especially i ninner cties. one can ;t just not dropout early in life and expect to have much of a chance by starting later as the effort and odds are just greater then.I a world that is more technical turing a cresdriver as little value when a chinese peasant can do it how that they have the facities to do it.
I reject this argument. If not in whole then at least to any large degree.
The economic model of constant growth that existed in the past and which allowed for
(and even required) an ever expanding population and had jobs for them... stopped working.
We have and will continue to have fewer and fewer jobs and especially at the bottom end.
And they haven't had that? And plenty more of other opportunities not available in the past?
Surely there is plenty of evidence of those who *have* used those opportunities...
Even to the degree that the poor even want to put out the effort required...
there simply aren't the raw number of decently paying low/no skill jobs needed for them.
(Which is where this discussion started if you've been following along.)
The "upper classes" by means of accumulated wealth and other skills can afford to produce
a larger number of young than are needed by their group. The "middle classes" by means of their
skills and lesser accumulation can also afford to produce a larger number of young than are needed
by their group or that they can afford to house, clothe, house, doctor and educate.
But neither of these groups have done this (even if some portions of them might).
With few exceptions both the "upper" and "middle" classes have restrained themselves
(by various means) from producing more than a marginal number beyond replacement.
The "lower classes" have not. Why? And what measures might change that pattern?
You may reject whatever you like. At the same time, descriptors of wealth being a gradation, there will always be people at the top and people at the bottom.
The best way to move out of the bottom quint is to acquire the same skills and/or abilities of those in a higher quint. The most common way to acquire new skills is through formal education.
-
As to the "restraint" of any given class in procreation, restraint suggests an active, thoughtful process. That's not the case. The number of children is a function of the net value of a child to that family and of the availablility of birth control methods.
In middle and upper strata, children are expensive to rear: health care, sports, education, etc. At the same time, children of that strata do little for the family: they don't take jobs to support the family; the family supports the child (generally, let's not get in to anecdotes on this point). Finally, for members of these groups, birth control is more readily available ($$$).
In the lower strata, the parents' internal calculus (still not suggesting it's intentional) yields different results. Children are cheap-er, but can, and probably will, work to support the family. Meanwhile, birth control methods are less readily available.
Any way we can steer this back toward the original topic?
I don't want clothing made by robots. I prefer that my clothing is made by hand; but how many of us are willing to pay the extra money for clothing made by Americans? Too many want that cheap stuff they sell at discount stores.
I'm with Mr. Rational, here. The stores stock what's demanded. Why would people demand to pay more for something that is ultimately the same quality? Sure, people will pay more for "green" or "fair trade," but within limits based on the price and type of good. Common goods, there's less wiggle room. Socks, for instance. Luxury goods, people will do stupid things. Paying for a wooden car (ie, Morgan) or buying vegan leather upholstery (eh, what?), for examples.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
