The "American dream" isn't coming back (radical, economic, state)
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.
Inequality has grown pretty much since the mid 60s and shows no sign of abating...and Trump will likely make it worse.
Trumps tax cuts will give the following benefits,
-Raise the poorest 20% of households after-tax income by 0.8%.
-Raise Middle-income households after tax income by 1.5%.
-Raise the richest 0.1% of Americans after tax income by 14.2%
Nonsense. The trends are crystal clear. The one nice thing about off shoring is that a lot of the oncoming loss of employment will hit China and the far East instead of the US.
We are going to see a million or more truck drivers lose their jobs in the next 15 years. Virtually no way around it. While cars will require turning over the fleet trucks will be retrofitted so it will go quite fast. The economics are overpowering.
And that will continue in less obvious ways in industry after industry. You and I may be in one of the few safe professions...the selling of houses still appears to require the human touch. But that may be about it...only the jobs requiring that will be left.
50 years ago we used model makers for prototype parts. Now many are simply printed without a skilled tradesman in the act. And the NC tools have also gotten to the point where the skilled guys are no more. The engineer and designers enter the design into a screen and parts pop out of a machine. Used to layout Printed Wiring Boards by hand...now you input the logic devices and hookup and the results pop out.
And all this will continue.
Yes, it will continue as it always has. Old jobs disappear, new jobs appear. The same nonsense about cataclysms following job shifts took place with the original industrial assembly lines. It was silly then, it is silly now. It is everyone's responsibility to keep multiple skills in play throughout their lives, and to never get complacent about one's job. I sell homes, but I also appraise them. I also play poker semi professionally. I have recently added video editing, DJing and lighting, a former hobby, to the list of things that I can charge money to do. ALL JOBS disappear sooner or later, and any rational adult should realize that their job is a temporary creature and that one always needs backup plans. Life is a continuous process of learning how to do new things. To think you are entitled to a job for life is fantasy. That's not how it works, and it really never did.
However, the answer is not guaranteed income, which is a euphemism for stealing money from someone to give to someone else. Because money does not appear out of thin air. Someone has to earn it. And having earned it, he should be able to keep it. Not give it away to someone in the form of guaranteed income. In fact, the concept of "guaranteed income" is not only absurd, but inherently evil. Nobody has a right to steal the property of others because he "needs it". Guaranteed income is guaranteed theft.
Yes, it will continue as it always has. Old jobs disappear, new jobs appear. The same nonsense about cataclysms following job shifts took place with the original industrial assembly lines. It was silly then, it is silly now. It is everyone's responsibility to keep multiple skills in play throughout their lives, and to never get complacent about one's job. I sell homes, but I also appraise them. I also play poker semi professionally. I have recently added video editing, DJing and lighting, a former hobby, to the list of things that I can charge money to do. ALL JOBS disappear sooner or later, and any rational adult should realize that their job is a temporary creature and that one always needs backup plans. Life is a continuous process of learning how to do new things. To think you are entitled to a job for life is fantasy. That's not how it works, and it really never did.
However, the answer is not guaranteed income, which is a euphemism for stealing money from someone to give to someone else. Because money does not appear out of thin air. Someone has to earn it. And having earned it, he should be able to keep it. Not give it away to someone in the form of guaranteed income. In fact, the concept of "guaranteed income" is not only absurd, but inherently evil. Nobody has a right to steal the property of others because he "needs it". Guaranteed income is guaranteed theft.
Just compounded libertarian nonsense. We provide aid to those in need and will continue to do so.
Three year olds have no capability to provide for themselves so we assist.
Let us see what has happened with Manufacturing jobs since the 1950s...
Bottom line...manufacturing jobs have simply gone away while manufacturing production increases.
Welcome to the modern world. And as I pointed out it will continue to get worse. Truckers are a good example. There go another couple of million jobs.
And I am glad you enjoy disk jockeying...But that is pretty much an entertainer skill. It is where a very small number of people may be able to run and hide. I have a few of those too. Though I don't think at this point in my life I wish to bring them to the fore.
The outcome is actually quite clear. If we wish to keep everyone adequately fed we need some means of doing so. And we will not allow people to starve...even if we offend you by taking form those who have to cover those who don't. I would be glad to pry a piece of your income to help the bottom survive...and I would enjoy hearing you bi*ch about it.
Just compounded libertarian nonsense. We provide aid to those in need and will continue to do so.
Three year olds have no capability to provide for themselves so we assist.
Let us see what has happened with Manufacturing jobs since the 1950s...
Bottom line...manufacturing jobs have simply gone away while manufacturing production increases.
Welcome to the modern world. And as I pointed out it will continue to get worse. Truckers are a good example. There go another couple of million jobs.
And I am glad you enjoy disk jockeying...But that is pretty much an entertainer skill. It is where a very small number of people may be able to run and hide. I have a few of those too. Though I don't think at this point in my life I wish to bring them to the fore.
The outcome is actually quite clear. If we wish to keep everyone adequately fed we need some means of doing so. And we will not allow people to starve...even if we offend you by taking form those who have to cover those who don't. I would be glad to pry a piece of your income to help the bottom survive...and I would enjoy hearing you bi*ch about it.
Most collectivists spend their rhetorical lives indulging their envy and hatred of their own lives and existence at large by window dressing their fondness for theft and tyranny as "compassion". It is always edifying when one steps from behind the soiled and tattered curtain and proclaims that motivation honestly. Collectivism is, of course, a philosophy of envy and hatred, but I must caution you it is much easier to fight you when you are honest. You might consider the conventional, and cowardly, but time honored method, of keeping that envy hidden safely beneath the surface.
Most collectivists spend their rhetorical lives indulging their envy and hatred of their own lives and existence at large by window dressing their fondness for theft and tyranny as "compassion". It is always edifying when one steps from behind the soiled and tattered curtain and proclaims that motivation honestly. Collectivism is, of course, a philosophy of envy and hatred, but I must caution you it is much easier to fight you when you are honest. You might consider the conventional, and cowardly, but time honored method, of keeping that envy hidden safely beneath the surface.
OMG in English please!
Aren't most of us "collectivists" or don't you end up like the Unabomber...
Ok back to topic- the American dream needs to evolve, thats all- Darwinism at its best right?
Evolve or die.
(Pretty darn happy and unenvious over here, life is good, and its not all about money, but we are fine in that department too.....
Just compounded libertarian nonsense. We provide aid to those in need and will continue to do so.
Three year olds have no capability to provide for themselves so we assist.
Let us see what has happened with Manufacturing jobs since the 1950s...
Bottom line...manufacturing jobs have simply gone away while manufacturing production increases.
Welcome to the modern world. And as I pointed out it will continue to get worse. Truckers are a good example. There go another couple of million jobs.
And I am glad you enjoy disk jockeying...But that is pretty much an entertainer skill. It is where a very small number of people may be able to run and hide. I have a few of those too. Though I don't think at this point in my life I wish to bring them to the fore.
The outcome is actually quite clear. If we wish to keep everyone adequately fed we need some means of doing so. And we will not allow people to starve...even if we offend you by taking form those who have to cover those who don't. I would be glad to pry a piece of your income to help the bottom survive...and I would enjoy hearing you bi*ch about it.
And perhaps, since you provided this graph by Brian Wesbury, you might want to delve more deeply into his thinking, and even go so far as to understand what he predicts for our future. Perhaps he has written a book. Oh look. He has:
The only practical way to stabilize or lower income inequality would be by redistribution of income via the tax system. That was not in the realm of possibility in an Obama administration with a hostile legislature.
The most effective redistribution only happens within the context of a regressive tax system and a highly progressive social programs system.
Read and learn. Pay close attention to the charts:
How likely is it Obama would have advocated implementing the necessary regressive tax system? He was strongly favoring moving in the opposite/wrong direction.
Last edited by InformedConsent; 01-07-2017 at 12:09 AM..
How likely is it Obama would have advocated implementing the necessary regressive tax system? He was strongly favoring moving in the opposite/wrong direction.
So you want to go to a VAT and such? OK. But that is really a simple veneer. You collect the money broadly but give it all and then some back to the low end.
It is a practical approach that is easy to collect particularly when tax avoidance both legal and illegal is common. Not sure that it is a good idea in the US when tax paying is an accepted duty.
Here is a chart that shows the problem...we simply refuse to transfer enough between high and low. Pick your poison but we will have to do much better as the economy changes.
How likely is it Obama would have advocated implementing the necessary regressive tax system? He was strongly favoring moving in the opposite/wrong direction.
Except that redistribution is immoral and we do not want to base an economic system on inherent injustice. Equality should not be a goal. The basis for complaining about income inequality is entirely emotional and envy-based. Basing economic policy on envy is unsound and evil.
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.
....
