Elimination of The Middle Class?

[NouveauBanjo]

I recently read an editorial in my local newspaper, and it completely went along with what I've been thinking about in the last few years. (Now before I say any of this, I wish to make it known that I am not a racist nor a bigot). The Republican Party under the head of George W. Bush have turned a blind eye towards the amount of illegal immigrants in this country. Many americans are angered about this, and the fact that they can seek employment with much more ease under Social Security. Where do these americans get hurt the most by this? Their wallets, of course. You have a man who is college educated and wants twelve dollars an hour, and then you have 3 men of ethnic origin who are willing to work for 5 dollars an hour and more hours per day. It is only logical that employers are going to hire those willing to work longer for a smaller amount of money and a larger number of employees.

Herein lies my question: Do you think this will eventually eliminate the middle class in america, making the poor poorer and the rich exponentially richer leaving no middle ground for the working educated american?

DISCUSS...........................now!

[dcookcan]

I doubt it.

The person with a college education is not likely going to pick cotton for $5 and long hours. This may not be enough to pay for the huge student loans they acquired during their education.

Nor is the uneducated person going to be designing structural members for a high rise building for $20.

Land of opportunity. If the uneducated is intelligent and business savvy, he/she may develop a business that nets more income than the educated structural engineer without the huge burden of student loans. (Mine will be paid off this year, after nine years of payments.) :thumbs: :alcoholic

[Conservative Front]

Brilliantly said Dcook.

[A Lone Voice]

I recently read an editorial in my local newspaper, and it completely went along with what I've been thinking about in the last few years. (Now before I say any of this, I wish to make it known that I am not a racist nor a bigot). The Republican Party under the head of George W. Bush have turned a blind eye towards the amount of illegal immigrants in this country. Many americans are angered about this, and the fact that they can seek employment with much more ease under Social Security. Where do these americans get hurt the most by this? Their wallets, of course. You have a man who is college educated and wants twelve dollars an hour, and then you have 3 men of ethnic origin who are willing to work for 5 dollars an hour and more hours per day. It is only logical that employers are going to hire those willing to work longer for a smaller amount of money and a larger number of employees.

Herein lies my question: Do you think this will eventually eliminate the middle class in america, making the poor poorer and the rich exponentially richer leaving no middle ground for the working educated american?

DISCUSS...........................now!


I'm not sure where you live, but I'll bet its not in California.

When the Republicans tried to inact laws that challenged the rights of illegal aliens to free medical care and free education, they were demonized by the Democrats and the left-wing media out here. When they tried to strengthen the border with Mexico, forcing illegal aliens to take back-country routes into the US, they were called Nazis.

The Democrats recognized that the Hispanic population is the fastest growing group in California, and are doing their best to bring them into the liberal fold. Ironic, since Hispanics as a group are more religious and family-orientated then liberals.

But it is working for them. The Democrats are selling out national security in their attempt to gain even more power. They are even trying to pass a law that allows illegal aliens to vote in school board elections!

You are right about one thing, NouveauBanjo: There is a growing gap between rich and poor, and the middle class is shrinking year after year. Which is just the way the Democrats want it....

[stewey]

I am for illegal immigrants having the same "employment rights" as legal citizens. You know why? That will give employers no real benefit (unless its over minimum wage) to employing them over legal citizens.

[DontBeAfraid]

Im sleepy right now, but that makes some sense stewey....

[DarkAce]

Possibly, but if the alien would work longer hours and do a better job than say average Joe who would find a way to screw off for 5 hours and go on breaks every half hour, I'd think they'd hire the aliens.

[lotrfan55345]

I doubt it.

The person with a college education is not likely going to pick cotton for $5 and long hours. This may not be enough to pay for the huge student loans they acquired during their education.

Nor is the uneducated person going to be designing structural members for a high rise building for $20.

Land of opportunity. If the uneducated is intelligent and business savvy, he/she may develop a business that nets more income than the educated structural engineer without the huge burden of student loans. (Mine will be paid off this year, after nine years of payments.) :thumbs: :alcoholic

Why do people in Indian and China work IT for 1/4 of the wage of US workers doing the same thing?

:alien:

If there are enough imigrants, and no "minimum wage" laws, most/all jobs in the US will pay minimum wage/lower-than minimum wage.

Also, not everyone can have a buisness, be hired by non-big-buisness buisness. What would happen to the economy then, when all of big-buisness dissapears. That wouln't be attractive for foreign investments.


Possibly, but if the alien would work longer hours and do a better job than say average Joe who would find a way to screw off for 5 hours and go on breaks every half hour, I'd think they'd hire the aliens.

Specially the Asians...

(Not all of them ofcourse, but they do seem to be more hardworking)

[dcookcan]

Why do people in Indian and China work IT for 1/4 of the wage of US workers doing the same thing?

Probably because the cost of living is 1/4 of that of the US.

[lotrfan55345]

Probably because the cost of living is 1/4 of that of the US.

No, it's not. In most 3rd world countries, cost of raw food is actually more expensive, medicines are more expensive, electricity is more expensive, fuel is more expensive, transport is expensive. I know a lot of people who have been to quite a few of them.

I can be sure of one thing, IT workers in 3rd world countries have a much lower standard of living than 1st world IT workers.

[dcookcan]

No, it's not. In most 3rd world countries, cost of raw food is actually more expensive, medicines are more expensive, electricity is more expensive, fuel is more expensive, transport is expensive. I know a lot of people who have been to quite a few of them.

I can be sure of one thing, IT workers in 3rd world countries have a much lower standard of living than 1st world IT workers.

Good point. However, that is the difference between 1st and 3rd world countries - the standard of living. By those countries' standards, the IT guy may have a pretty good standard of living. However, IT is not a great example. I do know a few people that could not get IT jobs after the schooling.

[lotrfan55345]

Good point. However, that is the difference between 1st and 3rd world countries - the standard of living. By those countries' standards, the IT guy may have a pretty good standard of living. However, IT is not a great example. I do know a few people that could not get IT jobs after the schooling.

Well, I main point I have is that people will have no choice if said scenario happens...

[lazserus]

Good point. However, that is the difference between 1st and 3rd world countries - the standard of living. By those countries' standards, the IT guy may have a pretty good standard of living. However, IT is not a great example. I do know a few people that could not get IT jobs after the schooling.
I work in the IT field and I can tell you the market for it in the US is crap. I work with a fellow who got offered a job in China for $400 a month. There, he would live like a king because it only costs about $0.50 a day to live in China. You look at $400 dollars a month in the US and you coul barely afford to own a cardboard box. Just as you say, it all boils down to the standard and cost of living.

The cost of living in the US is relatively cheap compared to Europe and Asia. In China the cost of living is high relative to their economical scheme. Yet, if you try to look at it relative to our living styles then you'd think of it as garbage. That standard of living makes a huge difference.

[Marajadex]

I have been working in the IT industry for many years. I was making an OK wage yet nothing to afford me to purchase a house or take a real vacation. It did keep the bills paid, food on the table and allowed for a computer upgrade every now and then. Then I got laid off. Now to find a job similar to the one I had I am looking at a 6 to 8 dollar an hour cut in pay. The classes I have taken to allow me to get a better paying job in IT havn't helped.

When my parents were my age making they could easily make a living with 1 person working and the other home raising us kids. We could take a nice vacation each summer, afford to have 2 cars and still my parents could put money away for retirement. They would have been considered middle class.

Today... A family needs to have 2 full time workers to make ends meet. 2 cars is the norm but not a luxury any more. Family vacations are camping trips to the local camp area, that is if they take a vacation at all.

The division between upper and lower class is getting bigger every day and woe to thoes in the middle class. Either they will be lucky and earn their way to the upper class lever. Or.. more likley they will be relegated to live in the lower class level.

Me... I guess I an in the second catagory right now. Maybe when I finally find a job that will change.

[lotrfan55345]

My mom was lucky to find a job in IT when she got layed of a couple of years ago, but the company she is working for now has layed off so many people, the "standard" workday goes from 8am to 5~8pm, with the 30m to 1hr commute, she can come home real late. Overtime seems "standard", it suxxx, specially since it's summer. :po:

How can we "change" this? :no:

[VegasRonin]

Our Techs make a killing. I know cause a few of them are my friends.

[substand]

Republican Party under the head of George W. Bush have turned a blind eye towards the amount of illegal immigrants in this country.

Perhaps republicans have "turned a blind eye" (though i might dispute that because of Bush's desire to offer amnesty) but for sure democrats (if not reps too) have EMBRACED illegals.


No, it's not. In most 3rd world countries, cost of raw food is actually more expensive, medicines are more expensive, electricity is more expensive, fuel is more expensive, transport is expensive. I know a lot of people who have been to quite a few of them.

please dont ever try to make the argument that it costs more to subsist in 3rd world countries than in "1st world" ones... thats just not right...

I've managed to keep my "IT" job and manage a few extra-US programming teams...


If there are enough imigrants, and no "minimum wage" laws, most/all jobs in the US will pay minimum wage/lower-than minimum wage.

there doesnt need to be enough migrants... if there were no minimum wage laws the US wouldnt have to worry much about "exporting" jobs.

[substand]

Our Techs make a killing. I know cause a few of them are my friends.

and VR is right... techs made tiny money back in the day after ev1 and their dog had certs for it, but the good ones separated from the bad ones... and now the good ones make uber money, and the bad ones cant find jobs.

[lotrfan55345]

> "please dont ever try to make the argument that it costs more to subsist in 3rd world countries than in "1st world" ones... thats just not right... "

What is "subsist"?

It is chaper to live in 3rd world. but things we consider to "need", like medicine, dairy products, imported food, electricity, phone, but we don't "need" those, right?

[substand]

> "please dont ever try to make the argument that it costs more to subsist in 3rd world countries than in "1st world" ones... thats just not right... "

What is "subsist"?

It is chaper to live in 3rd world. but things we consider to "need", like medicine, dairy products, imported food, electricity, phone, but we don't "need" those, right?

What is subsist?

When you can fly to a country like Costa Rica, and stay at a supernice resort for a week, and have every possible thing you could imagine already paid for, for about 150 dollars per night for 2 ppl (that includes the cost of airfare for both, so the longer you stay, the more cost/night goes down) AND the company can still make a profit and pay its workers well enough as they do (including tips), then that is pretty nice. And you try to find a nice tourist resort in the US for that price- I'd end up drinking more than 150/night in a hotel bar, BY MYSELF, and its included at that price... Thats pretty nice subsistence.

If someone can make $2/day and afford the luxuries of our poverty-stricken class, that tells me we need to lower min. wage to be more competitive, not bitch about it and try to raise the wages of "3rd world" workers. If all that stuff is "more expensive," then why do we pay less for all of it when we travel to poor countries?

Obviously, it is not more expensive. It is cheaper. Whether or not the poor can afford all of it is irrelevant- it is cheaper. They may not be able to afford 2 tvs, 2 cars, and a couple of 150 dollar pairs of kicks like our poor seem to, but they can get by, and they could probably get by better and will in the future as their economies become more developed.

[DontBeAfraid]

So you would start with lowering the minimum wage first or lowering the cost of living first?

[substand]

So you would start with lowering the minimum wage first or lowering the cost of living first?

Because of the fact that my original mathematics were longer than need be for understanding of what I am about to say, and the fact that they have been erased due to vbulletin problems, I will not repost them.

However, it is self evident that lowering the minimum wage will lower the cost of living. I suspect you already know this, however, I will offer a quick explaination to those who might need it:

Obviously these numbers are not reflective of reality- but they are such that 1) they are easy to compute, and 2) are replacable with variable "X" and work for any number "X".

Suppose person A has a food business and pays $100/unit of food, and he is able to sell it for $200/unit. He has 10 employees who each make minimum wage, or $5/hour. Each employee works 40 hours/week, and the owner has enough demand to need all of them for 40 hours. The owner needs 4 units of food to feed him and his family each month, plus enough money to buy shelter- call it $1000/month.

So before we talk about profit, this business owner pay his employees $5/hour/employee x 40 hours/week/employee x 10employees x 4 employee weeks/month= $8000/month. He also needs to make 1000 more for shelter, and if he buys food from himself at cost, its another 1600. All totaled, he must have $10,600/month in revenue. To do this, he must sell 53 units of food.

Now, if minimum wage were, say $4/hour, we see the that he must only make $9000/month. And as you can easily see, that does not count the drop in his cost of buying his food from producers or distributors, nor his cost in housing- both of which would also drop due to the lower minimum wage that they would need to pay.

[DontBeAfraid]

Substand the mathematics are QUITE obvious yes.... That is why my question was about how you would impliment it.... Would you screw the companies that depend on the cost of living to turn a profit or would screw the people who can barely afford the cost of living first.... Either way the homeless population will grow. Can you answer my question or will you divert attention like you have been doing recently..... I understand if you do the latter because I dont think its possible to answer the question.

[humanhybrid]

Dontbeafraid, Minimum wage should at "least" be above the poverty level and the poor should have access to affordable healthcare. Let the rich and affluent make profits off eachother, not the poor and disadvantaged. Would you agree??

[substand]

Substand the mathematics are QUITE obvious yes.... That is why my question was about how you would impliment it.... Would you screw the companies that depend on the cost of living to turn a profit or would screw the people who can barely afford the cost of living first.... Either way the homeless population will grow. Can you answer my question or will you divert attention like you have been doing recently..... I understand if you do the latter because I dont think its possible to answer the question.

I see... i thought I had answered the question, but I see now that I had forgot to include that in my 2nd response (the first one being deleted). You are probably right in that it has no answer, but there are many policy questions like that that have no extreme answer (extreme meaning, doing only 1 of 2 options)... I do think it is possible to have a transition period though, where the minimum wage would be lowered, and the COL as well, until it was at competitive levels. I haven't done a full study on this one, but I imagine it would be very possible to phase it along.

[substand]

Minimum wage should at "least" be above the poverty level

For a SINK individual, minimum wage is damn near the poverty level. And why should 16 year old students who live with parents who make 140k/year and work at McDonald's make 12k/year? Why should I have to pay $15 for a bigmac? You raise the minimum wage and all "skilled" jobs' wages will be raised as well. Which then leads to higher prices for goods and services produced by skilled and unskilled workers, which then leads to us being unable to compete in both white and blue collar jobs abroad, which leads to everything being outsourced and we can only stay afloat by being the first to create new economic sectors and then outsourcing them and then creating new ones. Or else the only jobs available will be service jobs that cannot be moved, and even those only the ones that aren't luxuries.

But I suppose thats a good strategy if the point of this thread was to find ways to eliminate the middleclass.

[DontBeAfraid]

Thats inflation subs... It is unstoppable... Lowering the minimum wage wont solve it, it will make it worse.... We are headed to a 2 class system, the slave class and the godly rich class....

[dutchie]

That's what I thought too.. What good can come from lowering wages, when people then can no longer afford the goods you're trying to sell to them?

Bottom line is that prices are determined by priciple of supply and demand. Cost effective manufacturing is of course very important, but competition and demand really prevail over cost.

Your comment strongly opposes everything I ever learned about labour. We have learned to regard human resource management as a corporate pillar - personnel is an important part of the corporate capital, not just a fuqin nuisance...

Would you lower your prices when you could lower the wages you have to pay? Nope, you'd just pocket a fatter profit.. That's why deflation is not very common in economics.

I would not mind the price for a Big Mac going to $15. I never eat that crap anyway. :eww: