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)
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:04 PM
 
Location: California side of the Sierras
11,162 posts, read 7,637,791 times
Reputation: 12523

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
But that is only at the margins. More broadly? Nope.

Most of what increasing "job skills" will do is to diminish wage values at the next level up.
Those who did pay attention and already have those skills don't need the competition
for the still limited number of work hours available for those skills.

We need to find something else for these millions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK78 View Post
In your two posts I've read in this thread you've hit the crux of the matter closer than I have.

And what you've said above is also 100% correct. While if only a handful increased their "skills"at "the margins" that would indeed help them. But if large swaths of people take this advice then you're merely creating the problem the bottom level wage earners have towards the top and their wages would go down or stagnate which is actually happening right now with every years graduating classes from the nations colleges.

Only the true elite and owners are immune to this stuff.
Jobs aren't the only way people can earn a good living. Look for a need and fill it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:10 PM
 
Location: California side of the Sierras
11,162 posts, read 7,637,791 times
Reputation: 12523
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK78 View Post
They ARE the middle class now. The lower 80% of the population is now working class and poor. I've discussed this many times on C.D.

Except for the top half of 10% or maybe the top 1-4% you've done nothing to refute my point.

THAT is what's left of our middle class. That is why they pay all the taxes.

My point rests and is not refuted.
You know, I don't feel poor. I have a pretty cushy life, and I don't pay enough in taxes to cover my fair share of costs. And yet I'm in that lower 80%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia Area
1,720 posts, read 1,316,554 times
Reputation: 1353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petunia 100 View Post
You know, I don't feel poor. I have a pretty cushy life, and I don't pay enough in taxes to cover my fair share of costs. And yet I'm in that lower 80%.
Working class people don't necessarily need to feel poor but it does not make you middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia Area
1,720 posts, read 1,316,554 times
Reputation: 1353
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
Which is awful ...and just the way they like it.


Don't mistake the mathematical with the underlying principles.

Middle Class is about being able to afford to pay your own way in life...
including taxes and NOT just what raw number is the top line on your 1040.
This distinction is not just the semantics.
I think what you're describing is more the working class which can be considered part of the middle class but not exactly what I meant when I said middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:20 PM
 
Location: California side of the Sierras
11,162 posts, read 7,637,791 times
Reputation: 12523
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK78 View Post
Working class people don't necessarily need to feel poor but it does not make you middle class.
I'm not middle class because I work for a living or because I don't feel poor; I'm middle class because my income puts me there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Corvallis, Oregon
653 posts, read 1,794,769 times
Reputation: 276
Part of the problem is that the standard of living has gotten too high.

I believe that minimum wage, full time, should support a person (meaning that a single person, working full time, after some reasonable initial training period, does not need any tax funded subsidies).
However, the standard of living I consider acceptable, is likely lower than what society has decided people should have.


I do not believe that anyone has a right to the fruits of another person's labor.
However, I believe we are a wealthy enough society to provide some basics for those who can not provide for themselves, and that it is the right thing to do.


What is needed is more access to affordable housing, that is made affordable not through tax subsidies, but through minimizing how much each person is getting.


There are ways to eat cheaply, and still eat healthy. One may not like the food that is cheap (and healthy), but one can live on it.

The "poor" people I know (who are poor enough to qualify for various subsidies) have more luxuries than my great grandparents had.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia Area
1,720 posts, read 1,316,554 times
Reputation: 1353
Quote:
Originally Posted by eileenkeeney View Post
Part of the problem is that the standard of living has gotten too high.

I believe that minimum wage, full time, should support a person (meaning that a single person, working full time, after some reasonable initial training period, does not need any tax funded subsidies).
However, the standard of living I consider acceptable, is likely lower than what society has decided people should have.


I do not believe that anyone has a right to the fruits of another person's labor.
However, I believe we are a wealthy enough society to provide some basics for those who can not provide for themselves, and that it is the right thing to do.


What is needed is more access to affordable housing, that is made affordable not through tax subsidies, but through minimizing how much each person is getting.


There are ways to eat cheaply, and still eat healthy. One may not like the food that is cheap (and healthy), but one can live on it.

The "poor" people I know (who are poor enough to qualify for various subsidies) have more luxuries than my great grandparents had.
Part of the problem is that the standard of living has gotten too high.

Not really. This guy will explain what's happening and how to combat it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy5Bw_7jgds
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 03:11 PM
 
18,548 posts, read 15,590,462 times
Reputation: 16235
Quote:
Originally Posted by eileenkeeney View Post
Part of the problem is that the standard of living has gotten too high.

I believe that minimum wage, full time, should support a person (meaning that a single person, working full time, after some reasonable initial training period, does not need any tax funded subsidies).
However, the standard of living I consider acceptable, is likely lower than what society has decided people should have.


I do not believe that anyone has a right to the fruits of another person's labor.
However, I believe we are a wealthy enough society to provide some basics for those who can not provide for themselves, and that it is the right thing to do.


What is needed is more access to affordable housing, that is made affordable not through tax subsidies, but through minimizing how much each person is getting.


There are ways to eat cheaply, and still eat healthy. One may not like the food that is cheap (and healthy), but one can live on it.

The "poor" people I know (who are poor enough to qualify for various subsidies) have more luxuries than my great grandparents had.
Housing also has to be located close enough to work that private automobile ownership can reasonably be considered a non-necessity.

If you split a house or 3 bedroom apartment 3 or 4 ways, even so-called high-cost areas can be affordable on slightly more than current minimum wage (~$9 or $10/hr.). The key is to not own a car.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas
14,229 posts, read 30,038,208 times
Reputation: 27689
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK78 View Post
You've just touched on the genius of the system from the elites, privileged and or owners perspective without maybe realizing it.

So we hear so much on C.D. that if you pay the workers more than prices will rise and we'll have to pay more which will lead to inflation. Can't have that. Or the owners will fire everyone leading to more unemployed and more taxes, subsidies.

On the other side it's why do we have to pay for these people? They should pay their own way etc... And complain about welfare, food stamps, section 8, Medicaid....

Don't you see it? The privileged, elite and owners have it set up where no matter which way you decide to go they win. Might have something to do with the income disparity we see.

They get to pay people poverty level wages. Then the middle class subsidizes the other portion of their living expenses.

Make them pay enough to cover all their expenses to live on. Then they'll raise their prices so that the middle classes still cover their cost through price increases.

But either way the house slaves are paying for the field slaves and there is no way around it. The winners win either way. That's the way it's always been and probably always will be. That's why it pays to have lots of assets, lots of powerful friends, and lots of money in this world.

And to not have them most certainly does not pay.
Yes I do see it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2014, 03:43 PM
 
3,670 posts, read 7,164,704 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post


That is your responsibility and you do that by prioritizing and discriminating in how your Disposable Income is allocated.

You need to make the determination as to whether living in your own apartment is more important, or having fancy clothes.

If you decide that fancy name-brand designer label clothes are more important, then you need to find a room-mate, or alternative living-style that reduces your costs for shelter, so that you can spend more money on clothing.

If I'm bank-rolling your Standard of Living and Life-Style through taxes, then it's only fair that I get to dictate exactly how you spend the money you are stealing from me, right?

Fairly...

Mircea
I agree with you.

A government is just a group of people.
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. The time now is 03:09 AM.

© 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