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.
Huh? Some jobs typically require higher education...but so what? That has always been the case for a rather long time. The important question is whether someone is able to make a decent living without a piece of paper and the answer is yes. Not only are there jobs with decent pay that one can get without having a degree, there are no degree requirements to start a business.
There are few decent jobs that pay well without having a degree, and those usually require some sort of training or advanced licensing or certifications.
Starting a business is a crap shoot, and you know what, people without advanced business knowledge, like the kind obtained in college, are far more likely to fail, especially before they can afford to pay somebody who knows what they are doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
$19/hour is not middle-class.
I see, so, a wage just under the median earnings for full time employed males and inside of the third income quintile for HOUSEHOLD INCOME, which is the very definition of "middle", is NOT middle class. How about you are just a fool with no grasp of reality, and lets leave it at that.
Bottom line is that the "Free trade" BS we have been sold by government and big business is killing us. There is no end to the jobs which can be performed overseas or just a few miles across the border for a fraction of what a worker in the US would be paid. Free trade has been a gold mine for Wall St. and big business and a disaster for the American people. What is needed to create jobs are import duties that level the playing field for the American workers. Of course that will not happen until we have a government in place that works for the people and not for the wealthy. We also need to enact new anti-trust laws to break up the large monopolies that are now powerful enough to dictate their agendas to government un-opposed. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase should be the first to be dealt with. These are not new problems we face today, we faced similar problems with big business at the turn of the 20th century, the difference then is we were lucky enough then to have a man like Teddy Roosevelt in office who actually did what was best for the country. So long as the people continue to vote for the two major parties we will get more of what we are reaping today, unemployment, and run away government spending and corruption. It is time to clean house in Washington and start over.
There are few decent jobs that pay well without having a degree
Perhaps on mars, but here on earth the median income for men is around $45k yet only around 25% of men have bachelors degrees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude
people without advanced business knowledge, like the kind obtained in college, are far more likely to fail
This is false and in fact most start-ups are created by people without formal business training. Instead of following prole-think, see the book "The origin and evolution of new businesses" for actual information on this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude
I see, so, a wage just under the median earnings for full time employed males and inside of the third income quintile for HOUSEHOLD INCOME, which is the very definition of "middle", is NOT middle class.
Right, you apparently have no idea what "middle-class" means. It does not mean "middle income', its a social class:
REALLY? That says it all right there. Like the guy making 250K houshold considers himself "middle class". People have been trying for years to shift the conceptualization of middle class to the top 30% income earning households, that just means most everybody is trying to attain a standard they can't afford and we can't have a definition of middle class that materially looks and feels "working poor". That would be game over.
The one interesting point your assertion highlights is that in america people have ill-conceived notions of what socio-economic standing they really hold, because everything is padded with debt. As I read in another post, if everybody lived under their means this would be one unimpressive wage slaving society with nothing to show for it. And we know that's not the point of toiling 60hr/wk and going into debt for 30-50K+, from the peanut gallery's perspective.
19/hr IS middle class. Problem is our middle class ceased to be affluent a long time ago.Material affluence ceased to be a staple of middle class living, adjusted for debt. In essence, there's the upper class that struggles to keep up but considers itself "middle class", then there's the working poor.
They truly need to come up with a basket of goods that define the material purchasing power of the median "middle class". I bet you if they did and adjusted for debt (meaning no eating more than you make) with a percentage allocated to savings, most people would be SHOCKED at the standard this benchmark would yield. The majority would simply reject the notion as too impoverished to be considered middle class. Housing alone makes the proposition of "walking the part" unattainable to the real middle class, and I bet you "above median housing" is dead smack in the middle of most people's "definition" of what this middle class staple is supposed to contain.
As a collective, we're poorer than we care to admit; your heros will always have the ability to fly, doesn't put YOU any closer to being able to walk on water......
There is no end to the jobs which can be performed overseas or just a few miles across the border for a fraction of what a worker in the US would be paid.
There most certainly is an end, if currencies were freely floated than the amount of work US companies can "out-source" to a foreign country would be directly proportional to the amount US goods/services imported by the country. Now some countries manipulate their currency (ahem...China) and this can cause imbalances. But the problem here is not out-sourcing, but rather currency manipulation.
You guys have an inaccurate understanding of global economics.
Income is only loosely tied to social class and there are many members of say the working class that make more than some members of the middle-class.
Brother please. There's no aristocracy in America today. You're either a capital holder or the proletariat. Even by the above definition GP doctors in this country and the neighborhood plumber are part of the same social class. Let's not be facetious. The reality is that classes in america are fundamentally defined by the material purchasing power of their members, as such income (however defined) is a crucial factor in that definition. People's thoughts on evolution or contemporary literature do not define what class people fall under, income be damned.
I personally love the disparity among the Gilbert model (driven by education) and the Beeghley model (driven by income) in your linked page. There's plenty of upper middle class (I'm upper middle class according to this definition) people who fall under "working class" on the Beeghley model (I'm working class in the latter). Conclusion? Society is the tie breaker. And you know what society says when they look at me? Give me curtain #2 bob, there's your winner. Let's see, graduate degrees, professional certifications, multi-lingual, athletic.....um who cares! What kind of house you got? How much money in the bank you have? How much you make and by proxy where do you live. It's income my brother. Income defines your class in America. The car you can drive, the house you can boast, the trophy wife you can afford (if any, sorry honey) et al. The old money accusing the proverbial roughneck of not having any manners or education as they roll up into the subdivision doesn't matter, material purchasing power = class in this country. Let's quit the semantics, it comes off as disconnected.
The one interesting point your assertion highlights is that in america people have ill-conceived notions of what socio-economic standing they really hold, because everything is padded with debt.
I agree with the first part of this, but not the other. The people in a social class are usually fairly ignorant of the people in social classes beyond them. That is because our society is very much divided along socio-economic lines. As a result a prole (working class guy) will often mistake someone for "upper-class", etc if they are driving around in a BMW when in fact the person is just middle-class.
The lower classes tend to try to mimic the visible aspects of the higher classes. But of course they do not have the means to really do it so they often utilize debt and purchase knockoffs that are targeted towards their demographic.
$19/hour is well below what is considered (by sociologists) normal for the middle-class. That is a typical middle working class wage.
The whole traditional image of "middle-class America" was and is Propaganda, it never existed. America has always been a very socially stratified society. If anything the Propaganda is starting to wear off, but many actually believe that the "good old days" were different.
The reality is that classes in america are fundamentally defined by the material purchasing power of their members...
No they aren't, differences in purchasing power are more so an effect of the different characteristics rather than a defining characteristic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hindsight2020
And you know what society says when they look at me? Give me curtain #2 bob, there's your winner. Let's see, graduate degrees, professional certifications, multi-lingual, athletic.....um who cares! What kind of house you got? How much money in the bank you have? How much you make and by proxy where do you live. It's income my brother.
You appear to be deeply entrenched in your prole-hood. What people value depends on a lot on their ahem...social class. What you are suggesting is largely true of the working class, the primarily indicator of success is income and the status symbols such buys. But this is much less the case in the higher classes.
Anyhow this is just my point though, people in the lower classes rarely are aware of the other classes. They are deeply entrenched in their particular social class and everything is understood in this context.
Perhaps on mars, but here on earth the median income for men is around $45k yet only around 25% of men have bachelors degrees.
Many of those men have been in careers for DECADES. In addition, that is only income calculated for men in full time jobs. Its convenient to discount all the men not working and in part time jobs, who are largely made up of people without degrees.
By the way, what is the unemployment rate for people without degrees again? About 15%? Guess those 15% just didnt find those great jobs available to people without degrees, along with all of them who are flipping burgers part time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
This is false and in fact most start-ups are created by people without formal business training. Instead of following prole-think, see the book "The origin and evolution of new businesses" for actual information on this topic.
Why dont you give me some stats on what percent of companies fail that are started up by people with a high school degree or less, compared with businesses that fail that are started by a person with a bachelors degree or more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
Right, you apparently have no idea what "middle-class" means. It does not mean "middle income', its a social class:
Income is only loosely tied to social class and there are many members of say the working class that make more than some members of the middle-class.
Good thing that you, yourself, categorized class purely by income, stating that $19 is not middle class. You never once tried to say that "manufacturing jobs in general, are considered working class by the sociological definition". Dont try to play that card now.
We both know I was using the vernacular definition of "middle class", and that was supported by my statements. Since you acknowledged that fact by attacking the base of the monetary argument, you are now trying to derail by fallacy.
You appear to be deeply entrenched in your prole-hood. What people value depends on a lot on their ahem...social class. What you are suggesting is largely true of the working class, the primarily indicator of success is income and the status symbols such buys. But this is much less the case in the higher classes.
Anyhow this is just my point though, people in the lower classes rarely are aware of the other classes. They are deeply entrenched in their particular social class and everything is understood in this context.
That's more semantics. If the people on the so-called higher classes didn't have the pre-requisite of above median income earning power, they would be shut out from the upper classes. Furthermore, I'm not myopic to the idiosyncrasies of the capital holding class just because I'm part of the proletariat, that's an elitist jab and an unfounded one at that since I have more cumulative education and language skills than many upper class members. To suggest I merely need to shift the valuation of my social standing by a metric other than wealth and income, at my discretion nilly willy mind you, and all of a sudden I'll be accepted and relish on the benefits of the upper class, is crazy talk. This is more of the "attitude determines your altitude" garbage mantra that seeks to adjudicate poverty as a moral choice and a mental state. Come on, let's tackle the issue, not deflect it.
Upper classes value wealth and power, and power is driven by wealth, which gains access to education and luxury consumption. They are no different than the proletariat in human desires. To suggest otherwise is to put the so-called upper classes in a pedestal of "enlightenment" they neither possess nor desire. One doesn't have to touch the hot stove to know it burns you. The truly intelligent are capable of this external observation. Your point is valid in that most can't make this leap, but I can, so let's not make it an absolute condition. Thence, being part of the club is not a requisite to understanding the psychology of the club. Classes in this country are driven my monetary purchasing power.
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.
Like the guy making 250K houshold considers himself "middle class". People have been trying for years to shift the conceptualization of middle class to the top 30% income earning households, that just means most everybody is trying to attain a standard they can't afford and we can't have a definition of middle class that materially looks and feels "working poor". That would be game over.
