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'm fascinated by this...I have two kids who are millenials -- have always worked -- never been without a job......constantly getting recruited for jobs. And all of their friends -- all working. Some aren't working in wht they THOUGHT they WANTED to do but they are all working.
I've asked this question a bunch of times and nobody has ever responded, but do any of you know of, or are or have kids...that are unemployed millenials.
This question is not specific to the US, but if capitalism brings so much wealth (and it does) why can´t families survive on a single income anymore like in the past when usually only men worked and women were not in the workforce?
Jobs are up but salaries and pay are down, thanks to the Republicans who won't deal with the economic divide we have in the US.
Back when most people lived on a single income was through the 1980's, not the friggin 20's.
"Making dresses". Get a grip.
That was about the time the USA lost its post WWII monopoly over the rest of the developed world, and they caught up to US industry and manufacturing.
We finally had to become competitive, and that meant putting more money into automation, R&D, actually manufacturing automobiles with more than cheap parts and a 12,000 mile or 12 month warranty.
Once that happened, wages were not able to keep up, and allow an affordable competition. It's only getting more strict today, with third world manufacturing, which are inflicting an even harder squeeze on profits and wages.
That was about the time the USA lost its post WWII monopoly over the rest of the developed world, and they caught up to US industry and manufacturing.
We finally had to become competitive, and that meant putting more money into automation, R&D, actually manufacturing automobiles with more than cheap parts and a 12,000 mile or 12 month warranty.
Once that happened, wages were not able to keep up, and allow an affordable competition. It's only getting more strict today, with third world manufacturing, which are inflicting an even harder squeeze on profits and wages.
Wait, so you're saying the issue isn't cell phones?
I agree that costs for the things you mentioned have gone up dramatically. However, I'm not so sure exactly how disproportionate it is to incomes.
People with a college degree have substantially higher lifetime earnings than people without one. Especially, if you graduate with a degree in high-paying fields such as engineering.
Housing costs have skyrocketed, but this is mostly in metro areas on the east and west coasts where incomes are also much higher. Plus, there are much greater population pressures since the country's population has increased by 120 million since 1970. We live in a very different country from what it used to be.
And that means problems. Because we are losing the working and middle class. Even in coastal metro areas you need service workers and semi-skilled workers, where those salaries are not keeping up.
Jobs are up but salaries and pay are down, thanks to the Republicans who won't deal with the economic divide we have in the US.
This is silly rhetoric.
Of course politicians do not control wages, anymore than they determine the numbers of employees hired, the wages paid, or the products and services the tens of thousands of private businesses provide.
San Francisco,CA is completely controlled by Democrats, and the vast majority of its voters are Democrats, and yet it's a place where only the very wealthy and the homeless can reside. The people who work in San Fran cannot afford to live there. The Republicans have absolutely no control or influence on that city, or the state. Trump cannot even get them to observe federal law, much less control what wages and salaries are paid to employees.
If Democrats have all the answers, why isn't San Fran a shining example of Utopia, instead of the opposite?
When women joined the workforce in the 1960s the workers pool doubled. Ans to make it worse women were willing to work for less. It si a supply and demand issue. Furthermore in the days on one salary the family had much smaller expectations such as a one bathroom small home with no garage or air conditioning. LAstly as poverty continues to go down those that are in the middle have to work harder to redistribute their income to the less fortunate.
Despite all the imperfections capitalism is the most successful economic system in world history. Socialism has never worked.
No, women were not willing to work for less. In the late 1960s, I put myself through college by working in a paper mill. Boring repetitive work. Women had certain jobs and men had certain jobs. They each had a different pay scale; women were paid less. I certainly was capable of driving a forklift (and, I did later at an oil refinery) or working on the machines with training but management didn’t see it that way. In 1970, women were finally able to do the same jobs as men for equal pay.
Because they are breeding before they can afford to feed them.
This is a crude way of saying it, but speaking as a liberal I agree with you.
I see this all the time. And I absolutely hate this part of the liberal movement even though I'm al liberal myself. I've had many arguments with my liberal friends on this. They say there is nothing wrong with being a single mom. And I say but single-motherhood is the biggest predictor of poverty! And there is nothing right about that.
I also see a lot of young couples pumping out kids at very young age and then the struggle begins. It is disheartening knowing chances are they are destined to be poor forever.
Look, my husband and I was a single-income family for a long time. We did just fine. In fact, we did more than fine because he was able to go to college and study abroad in Europe. I was the only income earner for years and with the right budgeting we lived a comfortable life. We never skipped a vacation.
But whatever. No one ever listens to me anyway. They will keep pumping out kids without any planning whatsoever.
i'm fascinated by this...I have two kids who are millenials -- have always worked -- never been without a job......constantly getting recruited for jobs. And all of their friends -- all working. Some aren't working in wht they THOUGHT they WANTED to do but they are all working.
I've asked this question a bunch of times and nobody has ever responded, but do any of you know of, or are or have kids...that are unemployed millenials.
And that means problems. Because we are losing the working and middle class. Even in coastal metro areas you need service workers and semi-skilled workers, where those salaries are not keeping up.
San Francisco, the liberal mecca of the left, is a perfect example. The haves, versus the have nots, is expressed in the extreme by San Fran.
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.
