Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-17-2014, 09:45 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,727,592 times
Reputation: 14745

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1 View Post
the professional/managerial class is thriving.
how did you arrive at this conclusion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2014, 09:46 AM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,727,592 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heidi60 View Post
One of the local public broadcasting stations was bought by foreigners and their new programming does not reflect American culture.
how does someone buy a public broadcasting station?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
5,751 posts, read 10,376,172 times
Reputation: 7010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ram2 View Post
America is the land of paper pushers.
In business, they can be paper-pushing as long as their contribution is: 1) cutting costs/potential costs or 2) increasing profits. That is what matters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 10:13 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
5,751 posts, read 10,376,172 times
Reputation: 7010
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
how did you arrive at this conclusion?
Various readings on the subject and some personal experience. I define professional/managerial class as the top 10%, which is distinctive from the middle class. The top 10% (not just the top 1%) are thriving as compared to the middle class. Of course, the top 1% are thriving even more. These top groups will continue to buy from U.S. businesses. They are a newly expanding market and businesses are restructuring to capture their $. E.g. High-end grocers (e.g. Whole Foods competitors) seem to be popping up all over the place.

The gap between the top 10% and the middle class is over 1,000%; that increases another 1000% for the top 1%. Wealth inequality in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 10:28 AM
 
7,846 posts, read 6,403,886 times
Reputation: 4025
Quote:
Originally Posted by believe007 View Post
It's nonexistent, french.
Honestly, where I am, it's
the haves & have nots....
And truthfully, the freeloaders who
get public assistance have more " luxuries"
than the hard working people.
So it's pretty disturbing-
maybe I should try
another country entirely lol
You should get out more. Public Assistance folks do not get more luxury than the middle class.

Quote:
Originally Posted by griffon652 View Post
The middle class is completely dead if you compare it to what middle class was back in the 50's. Its still survives but has declined severely since the 90's.

In the 50's a typical family could have the father work, and the mother be a stay at home parent. Yet the would be able to support 2 kids and a house in a decent neighborhood. And since pensions were still the norm, the parents could also expect a comfortable retirement. Especially when you account for SS and Medicare benefits.

Today median wage for a working individual is 27K, with a ok 401K (if they are lucky). In comparison the official poverty level is $23,850 for a family of 4. So essentially if you tried the above scenario from the 50's in this day and age, it would be mathematically impossible to live comfortably, much less have any hope of any type of decent retirement.
The middle class is dead in that sense because they have to compete with the global middle class now. America is no longer "exceptional" in the middle class. The middle class is being carved out. Unskilled workers (previously who had a good middle class life in manufacturing) are becoming synonymous with the working poor, and white collar professionals / management have actually seen their middle class lifestyle skyrocket.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jm1982 View Post
That is true there are many parts of the country where owning a home in a decent area is possible for most middle class people, but in places like Southern CA or the Bay Area it's very difficult.

You are also seeing a lot of new development being rental apartments versus condos.

I see this as a big issue because if people continue to rent longterm there won't be an change for them to gain equity.

Many elderly people today have a lot of their 'wealth' in their home equity.

Of course most people don't HAVE to live in CA , but a lot of people do and will continue to so it is an issue.
Exactly, you don't have to live in California. We are fortunate enough to have such a diverse nation. The middle class in America does horribly in the Northeast and California, but does very well in the midwest (Houston, Dallas, Chicago, Rust Belt, etc.)

Homes a poor investment anyway.. they should not be considered "wealth."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 10:32 AM
 
Location: Florida
23,795 posts, read 13,257,063 times
Reputation: 19952
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heidi60 View Post
Exactly!

One of the local public broadcasting stations was bought by foreigners and their new programming does not reflect American culture. Other foreigners are buying up the property driving up prices for U.S. citizens, making homeownership out of reach for the average worker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
how does someone buy a public broadcasting station?
In the past non-US citizens were not allowed to own stations in the US. Rupert Murdoch had to obtain US citizenship to acquire Fox. In November, the FCC voted to relax the rules that foreigners could only own 25% of a company that owned a station and consider it on a case by case basis, but I wasn't aware any of that had gone into effect yet. Due to the bureaucracy involved it would seem that it would take longer. This decision was a move to encourage foreign investment in the the US, and many stations are struggling economically. I don't think it is move by the government to destroy our culture. Back in the 80s, the Japanese and other foreigners began buying up real estate in NYC and everyone freaked out, but as we can see, the NYC culture is alive and well.

In SE Fla, foreign investment is fueling a boom in that economy--and there are more jobs because of it. Foreign investment will not kill our economy, it will help it.

FCC relaxes rule limiting foreign ownership of media stations

China as number one? Remember Japan in the ’80s | Gregg Easterbrook
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 12:57 PM
 
Location: West Paris
10,261 posts, read 12,509,300 times
Reputation: 24470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
In the past non-US citizens were not allowed to own stations in the US. Rupert Murdoch had to obtain US citizenship to acquire Fox. In November, the FCC voted to relax the rules that foreigners could only own 25% of a company that owned a station and consider it on a case by case basis, but I wasn't aware any of that had gone into effect yet. Due to the bureaucracy involved it would seem that it would take longer. This decision was a move to encourage foreign investment in the the US, and many stations are struggling economically. I don't think it is move by the government to destroy our culture. Back in the 80s, the Japanese and other foreigners began buying up real estate in NYC and everyone freaked out, but as we can see, the NYC culture is alive and well.

In SE Fla, foreign investment is fueling a boom in that economy--and there are more jobs because of it. Foreign investment will not kill our economy, it will help it.

FCC relaxes rule limiting foreign ownership of media stations

China as number one? Remember Japan in the ’80s | Gregg Easterbrook
The real estate investment is a pension.It very often does not create jobs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 01:19 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,727,592 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1 View Post
I define professional/managerial class as the top 10%, which is distinctive from the middle class.
i guess that explains my confusion: equating the word "managerial" with the 10% strikes me as ... off.

"executive" seems more apt, since a "managerial" position could be the manager of a burger king, or a middle manager somewhere whose earnings were solidly middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 01:21 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,727,592 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
In the past non-US citizens were not allowed to own stations in the US. Rupert Murdoch had to obtain US citizenship to acquire Fox.
yes, but fox is not a public broadcaster.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_broadcasting
Public broadcasting includes radio, television and other electronic media outlets whose primary mission is public service.

Quote:
In November, the FCC voted to relax the rules that foreigners could only own 25% of a company that owned a station and consider it on a case by case basis, but I wasn't aware any of that had gone into effect yet. Due to the bureaucracy involved it would seem that it would take longer. This decision was a move to encourage foreign investment in the the US, and many stations are struggling economically. I don't think it is move by the government to destroy our culture. Back in the 80s, the Japanese and other foreigners began buying up real estate in NYC and everyone freaked out, but as we can see, the NYC culture is alive and well.

In SE Fla, foreign investment is fueling a boom in that economy--and there are more jobs because of it. Foreign investment will not kill our economy, it will help it.
ok .. ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2014, 02:09 PM
 
12,573 posts, read 15,560,619 times
Reputation: 8960
Quote:
Originally Posted by griffon652 View Post
The middle class is completely dead if you compare it to what middle class was back in the 50's. Its still survives but has declined severely since the 90's.

In the 50's a typical family could have the father work, and the mother be a stay at home parent. Yet the would be able to support 2 kids and a house in a decent neighborhood. And since pensions were still the norm, the parents could also expect a comfortable retirement. Especially when you account for SS and Medicare benefits.

Today median wage for a working individual is 27K, with a ok 401K (if they are lucky). In comparison the official poverty level is $23,850 for a family of 4. So essentially if you tried the above scenario from the 50's in this day and age, it would be mathematically impossible to live comfortably, much less have any hope of any type of decent retirement.
I would like to see where you pulled that number from.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top