The middle class is shrinking just about everywhere in America

[oxymoronic]

Don't worry trickle down will kick in any moment now.

to be honest it already has... would you rather be poor today or 50/100/500 years ago? things are better for everybody but we humans are built to want more... and hey, that is okay.

[Cthulhu 2020]

If people can't afford to purchase items companies do not make items, if companies do not make items they do not ship items, if they do not ship items stores cannot sell items, if stores cannot sell items people lose their jobs, if people lose their jobs they cannot afford to purchase items....

There's a reason velocity of money is important and to the people who will eventually blame the workers that cycle effects everyone from the cashier at the store to the guy in charge of manufacturing at the Company. Less consumption = fewer jobs at all income levels.

And those on the right will continue to make excuses, like "People just need to negotiate for better wages" or "They should go back to school and get more skills".

The reality is legislation and the power of unions worked during the mid 20th century, and created a strong middle class. Now that some of those made a lot of money from that time are wealthy, they've convinced a lot of suckers that we should dismantle those protections and benefits for workers to "help the economy"

This is the result.

[Derecho]

Small businesses that provide work for millions of Americans have been hit with some pretty bad regulations in the past few years. I saw the token liberal jab at trickle down. It was a wildly successful economic policy. Of course, as with most facts nowadays, there's two right answers. So who's wrong? The other guy, of course. The guy who disagrees with me is ignoring history or the facts.

The government picking which industries to back and prop up is one of the leading causes of a decline in the middle class. For example, the government picking which energy companies to support based on climate change has caused certain job markets to decline, increasing the number of blue collar workers displaced, as the EPA regulations make certain industries too expensive to compete in legally. (You can argue the whether it's right or wrong all day, but it's definitely caused a loss in jobs and a decline in the middle class - you didn't have elites working in coal mines, drilling for oil, and power plants. A decline in employment in one industry can lead to impacts on other, unrelated industries.) I don't know about you, but, I have an HSA1500 provided through my employer. I have my wife, my daughter, and myself on this plan, and it comes out to over $450/month. That's not exactly my definition of affordable, and that certainly does impact what I am able to purchase.

Other government regulations have had similar effects on different industries. Whether it's Obamacare regulations that require employers of more than 50 people to provide affordable health insurance to associates that average more than 30 hours a week to minimum wage hikes, the government is doing a fantastic job of suppressing economic growth. (Note, i'm not arguing whether Obamacare is good or bad, I'm simply arguing its effects)

Minimum wage hikes lead certain businesses to automate (look at Wendy's announcement). In turn, people who used to start out at the minimum wage and work their way to a better wage will have a much tougher time getting their foot in the door. Many people who have been displaced out of their jobs have stopped looking. The unemployment calculation used by the department of labor used to take this into account, but that is no longer the case, last I saw. Lots of people are working less hours or even working just a couple days a week due to the economic environment. Things just keep spirally downward.

I argue that a majority of underemployment in America is being caused and has been caused by the federal government imposing regulations on the private sector, as well as having some of the harshest tax policies for US businesses operating overseas. (If they weren't harsh, companies wouldn't be so interested in going overseas, causing Obama to try to order them to stay.)

All these factors play in to whether businesses can afford to hire more people. Whether you agree with the policies that are leading to this decline or not, we must consider the effect they have had, are having, and will continue to have.

[Deleted]

to be honest it already has... would you rather be poor today or 50/100/500 years ago? things are better for everybody but we humans are built to want more... and hey, that is okay.

No just no. You are cutting out the industrial revolution, the liberal reforms, childrens charter and so on. Those things did not happen because a bunch of rich people got richer.

[DeadmanWalking]

Does a president have that power? Also, is that even legal?

Heres the thing about taxes and tarriffs on other countries as punishment, they just raise the cost on the consumer (You and me) and still come out on top, so we essentially pay their tax or tarriffs.

Trump said he would put a 65% tarrif on China unless they played ball, and Cruz said, "When you put a Tarrif on China of 65% they raise the cost of everything they sell to us by 65% so when you go into Walmart things are 65% more expensive for you and you end up paying for the Tarriff. China never pays that Tarriff, you do." Which Trump replied, "It's just a threat of a Tarriff!" so now they know it is 'just a threat' and don't need to take it seriously.

So lets say you want a new $1000 TV in Walmart, well under trump it would be $1,650.00. If you spend $200 on your kids for christmas at walmart on toys it will cost you $370 to get the same toys under a Trump tarriff.

Just another thing that Trump has no clue about how it works.


Now that being said, this problem of middle class shrinking is directly tied to us sending jobs out of the country, leaving behind only minimum wage jobs like restaurant work. We are now an economy of feeding the people who live here. No more factory production jobs that paid nearly double minimum wage. It is cheaper to produce it in china and ship it all the way across the world back to us than it is to pay an American to make it here. It is cheaper by a hell of a lot.

Any politician who says they are getting those jobs back from china/mexico are lying to you, it is not physically possible to get those jobs back here. Politicians have changed their tune to 'Jobs that can't be shipped away' which means restaurant work and road construction. Not many educated people want to be laying hot tar on the highways.

Trump won't be getting those jobs back. Dont let him lie to you. He could be president for 100 years and never get 1 job back from china.

[PC2]

Unless you don't belong to the richer classes.

Yeah all of our poor people with widespread obesity and smartphones galore are really oppressed.

[DeadmanWalking]

Small businesses that provide work for millions of Americans have been hit with some pretty bad regulations in the past few years. I saw the token liberal jab at trickle down. It was a wildly successful economic policy. Of course, as with most facts nowadays, there's two right answers. So who's wrong? The other guy, of course. The guy who disagrees with me is ignoring history or the facts.

The government picking which industries to back and prop up is one of the leading causes of a decline in the middle class. For example, the government picking which energy companies to support based on climate change has caused certain job markets to decline, increasing the number of blue collar workers displaced, as the EPA regulations make certain industries too expensive to compete in legally. (You can argue the whether it's right or wrong all day, but it's definitely caused a loss in jobs and a decline in the middle class - you didn't have elites working in coal mines, drilling for oil, and power plants. A decline in employment in one industry can lead to impacts on other, unrelated industries.) I don't know about you, but, I have an HSA1500 provided through my employer. I have my wife, my daughter, and myself on this plan, and it comes out to over $450/month. That's not exactly my definition of affordable, and that certainly does impact what I am able to purchase.

Other government regulations have had similar effects on different industries. Whether it's Obamacare regulations that require employers of more than 50 people to provide affordable health insurance to associates that average more than 30 hours a week to minimum wage hikes, the government is doing a fantastic job of suppressing economic growth. (Note, i'm not arguing whether Obamacare is good or bad, I'm simply arguing its effects)

Minimum wage hikes lead certain businesses to automate (look at Wendy's announcement). In turn, people who used to start out at the minimum wage and work their way to a better wage will have a much tougher time getting their foot in the door. Many people who have been displaced out of their jobs have stopped looking. The unemployment calculation used by the department of labor used to take this into account, but that is no longer the case, last I saw. Lots of people are working less hours or even working just a couple days a week due to the economic environment. Things just keep spirally downward.

I argue that a majority of underemployment in America is being caused and has been caused by the federal government imposing regulations on the private sector, as well as having some of the harshest tax policies for US businesses operating overseas. (If they weren't harsh, companies wouldn't be so interested in going overseas, causing Obama to try to order them to stay.)

All these factors play in to whether businesses can afford to hire more people. Whether you agree with the policies that are leading to this decline or not, we must consider the effect they have had, are having, and will continue to have.

Trickle Down economics don't work like they did in the 80's now. It use to be that the rich would take their money and build businesses here, create jobs here and buy services here. They use to say, "I want a mansion and I want to install a pool, so the pool building guy makes money, he buys food so the farmer makes money, ect ect ect." but now the rich build pools in their mansions in Barbados where their shell tax loop hole bank is and build jobs in China so they don't have to pay Americans retirement or health benefits.

But trickle down economics is working out real well for the Chinese, I heard they recently bought one of the worlds largest Superpower's debt crisis.

[JohnBrown1917]

Yeah all of our poor people with widespread obesity and smartphones galore are really oppressed.

Thats one way of saying it'll be a waste of time to even discuss this.

[Acidbaron]

Small businesses that provide work for millions of Americans have been hit with some pretty bad regulations in the past few years. I saw the token liberal jab at trickle down. It was a wildly successful economic policy. Of course, as with most facts nowadays, there's two right answers. So who's wrong? The other guy, of course. The guy who disagrees with me is ignoring history or the facts.

The government picking which industries to back and prop up is one of the leading causes of a decline in the middle class. For example, the government picking which energy companies to support based on climate change has caused certain job markets to decline, increasing the number of blue collar workers displaced, as the EPA regulations make certain industries too expensive to compete in legally. (You can argue the whether it's right or wrong all day, but it's definitely caused a loss in jobs and a decline in the middle class - you didn't have elites working in coal mines, drilling for oil, and power plants. A decline in employment in one industry can lead to impacts on other, unrelated industries.) I don't know about you, but, I have an HSA1500 provided through my employer. I have my wife, my daughter, and myself on this plan, and it comes out to over $450/month. That's not exactly my definition of affordable, and that certainly does impact what I am able to purchase.

Other government regulations have had similar effects on different industries. Whether it's Obamacare regulations that require employers of more than 50 people to provide affordable health insurance to associates that average more than 30 hours a week to minimum wage hikes, the government is doing a fantastic job of suppressing economic growth. (Note, i'm not arguing whether Obamacare is good or bad, I'm simply arguing its effects)

Minimum wage hikes lead certain businesses to automate (look at Wendy's announcement). In turn, people who used to start out at the minimum wage and work their way to a better wage will have a much tougher time getting their foot in the door. Many people who have been displaced out of their jobs have stopped looking. The unemployment calculation used by the department of labor used to take this into account, but that is no longer the case, last I saw. Lots of people are working less hours or even working just a couple days a week due to the economic environment. Things just keep spirally downward.

I argue that a majority of underemployment in America is being caused and has been caused by the federal government imposing regulations on the private sector, as well as having some of the harshest tax policies for US businesses operating overseas. (If they weren't harsh, companies wouldn't be so interested in going overseas, causing Obama to try to order them to stay.)

All these factors play in to whether businesses can afford to hire more people. Whether you agree with the policies that are leading to this decline or not, we must consider the effect they have had, are having, and will continue to have.

Yes, regulations everyone must follow. let's ignore the big corporations that started major businesses near those small businesses. Unless you want to argue a small store can compete with walmart?

The US is the easiest country to start a business up in. Regarding green energy solar and wind are not yet to the point they can survive without subsidies however at one point it will and when that happens everyone invested in the right company can expect a good pay day.

[alexw]

to be honest it already has... would you rather be poor today or 50/100/500 years ago? things are better for everybody but we humans are built to want more... and hey, that is okay.

That has absolutely nothing to do with trickle down. Technological process is not the same thing as trickle down economics no matter how much you try and confuse the issue.

[Arganis]

Personally I think it's intentional. We live in richest country in the history of the world and they act like somehow there's no money to be spent. Those on top obviously want the population to start stepping backwards in order to make them more 'competitive' with the rest of the miserable and exploited wretches of the world.

[PC2]

Personally I think it's intentional. We live in richest country in the history of the world and they act like somehow there's no money to be spent. Those on top obviously want the population to start stepping backwards in order to make them more 'competitive' with the rest of the miserable and exploited wretches of the world.

Who is acting like there is no money to be spent? We spend trillions on social and health programs. The system is working.

[Derecho]

Yes, regulations everyone must follow. let's ignore the big corporations that started major businesses near those small businesses. Unless you want to argue a small store can compete with walmart?

The US is the easiest country to start a business up in. Regarding green energy solar and wind are not yet to the point they can survive without subsidies however at one point it will and when that happens everyone invested in the right company can expect a good pay day.

I do agree that everyone must follow the regulations. I'd also just argue that not all businesses are able to handle the regulations and stay in business. Certain big businesses can absorb the costs associated with regulations better than other businesses. So, while big stores moving in to small store areas does impact business, federal government regulations make it even more difficult for smaller businesses to compete. Even though everyone has to comply with regulations, certain businesses and certain sized businesses are more disadvantaged, creating an even greater disparity. Since small business is what has traditionally employed more people than big business, I argue that this impacts the middle class as a whole.

I do look forward to the day that green energy can stand on its own two feet. I'd just argue that, like other industries, we let the best product rule the day until the next best product comes to light. I'd like to see fewer restrictions and regulations on other energy sources. If green energy got to the point of out-doing non-green energy, the non-green energies will go out of business on their own.

[Adarian]

A sign of decline? With our economy showing such an uneven recovery, what will happen when the next big slump happens? Or worse the next crash?

you ever see pictures of Wiemar Germany with people carting around wheelbarrows of useless money and simple bread cost as much as a car?

yeah, learn to hunt and fish while its still a leisure.

right now two things keep the US going, tech's growth and the forcibly maintained monopoly of oil trade through the dollar which keeps it as the reserve currency for alot of the world.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Who is acting like there is no money to be spent? We spend trillions on social and health programs. The system is working.

In much the same way that a Pentium 1 computer from the 90's still "works" yes.

[PC2]

In much the same way that a Pentium 1 computer from the 90's still "works" yes.

Okay, well if someone has come up with a new economic system that is proven to increase productivity and discretionary income, let me know.

[alexw]

Small businesses that provide work for millions of Americans have been hit with some pretty bad regulations in the past few years. I saw the token liberal jab at trickle down. It was a wildly successful economic policy. Of course, as with most facts nowadays, there's two right answers. So who's wrong? The other guy, of course. The guy who disagrees with me is ignoring history or the facts.

The government picking which industries to back and prop up is one of the leading causes of a decline in the middle class. For example, the government picking which energy companies to support based on climate change has caused certain job markets to decline, increasing the number of blue collar workers displaced, as the EPA regulations make certain industries too expensive to compete in legally. (You can argue the whether it's right or wrong all day, but it's definitely caused a loss in jobs and a decline in the middle class - you didn't have elites working in coal mines, drilling for oil, and power plants. A decline in employment in one industry can lead to impacts on other, unrelated industries.) I don't know about you, but, I have an HSA1500 provided through my employer. I have my wife, my daughter, and myself on this plan, and it comes out to over $450/month. That's not exactly my definition of affordable, and that certainly does impact what I am able to purchase.

Other government regulations have had similar effects on different industries. Whether it's Obamacare regulations that require employers of more than 50 people to provide affordable health insurance to associates that average more than 30 hours a week to minimum wage hikes, the government is doing a fantastic job of suppressing economic growth. (Note, i'm not arguing whether Obamacare is good or bad, I'm simply arguing its effects)

Minimum wage hikes lead certain businesses to automate (look at Wendy's announcement). In turn, people who used to start out at the minimum wage and work their way to a better wage will have a much tougher time getting their foot in the door. Many people who have been displaced out of their jobs have stopped looking. The unemployment calculation used by the department of labor used to take this into account, but that is no longer the case, last I saw. Lots of people are working less hours or even working just a couple days a week due to the economic environment. Things just keep spirally downward.

I argue that a majority of underemployment in America is being caused and has been caused by the federal government imposing regulations on the private sector, as well as having some of the harshest tax policies for US businesses operating overseas. (If they weren't harsh, companies wouldn't be so interested in going overseas, causing Obama to try to order them to stay.)

All these factors play in to whether businesses can afford to hire more people. Whether you agree with the policies that are leading to this decline or not, we must consider the effect they have had, are having, and will continue to have.

Thanks for the laugh but you didn't need to really write all that, all you needed to do was write "It's the left's fault" and you would have saved yourself 10 minutes.

[Zan15]

Vote Trump.



He lambasted massive layoffs at air conditioner manufacturer Carrier's plant in Indianapolis. The company and its affiliates announced in February they would eliminate 2,100 Indiana jobs as they move production to Mexico. The layoffs have been a favorite target of Trump, who said Wednesday he would "tax the hell" out of the company.

"You’re going to bring it across the border, and we’re going to charge you a 35 percent tax," he said. "Now within 24 hours they’re going to call back. 'Mr. President, we’ve decided to stay. We’re coming back to Indianapolis.'"

At one point, Trump asked how many Carrier employees were in the audience of several thousand. A few people raised their hands. The union representing 1,400 of those Carrier workers voted to endorse Bernie Sanders for president.

Still, Trump's message resonated with many in the crowd. Doug Lantz, a 28-year-old steel welder from Greenfield who makes parts for Carrier and John Deere, said he liked Trump’s denouncement of Carrier’s move to Mexico and his promises to protect manufacturing jobs in the U.S.

“It’s nice to have someone who’s going to fight to keep it here,” he said. “I’m voting where my guns are safe, where my jobs are safe, where my money’s safe.”

because actions don't tend to have equal responses? isn't that one of the major laws in science?

So you bring the jobs back to america from mexico, close down the Mexican plants.
Carrier starts making them in the US plants. Carrier goes to export AC's to mexico.
Mexico slaps a 35% tariff on imported AC's from america in response.

Go google china tariffs i challenge you to find an instance where either the US or China have imposed a tariff/tax on imports that is not immediately countered either by a tariff on the same goods or a bigger tariff on another set of goods that have a bigger impact as revenge.





-China unexpectedly increased pressure Sunday on the United States in a widening trade dispute, taking the first steps toward imposing tariffs on American exports of automotive products and chicken meat in retaliation for President Obama’s decision late Friday to levy tariffs on tires from China.

-China has imposed permanent duties on U.S. and South Korean polysilicon. The decision comes within hours of the U.S. Department of Commerce's announcement about duties on Chinese solar products.

-Retaliation for 145% steel tariffs (on top of huge tire tariffs) has arrived: China announces anti-dumping steps on US chicken. China announced anti-dumping duties of up to 105.4 percent Friday on imports of U.S. chicken products, adding to trade strains with Washington

- In a move that will increase tensions between two of the world's biggest trading blocs, the commerce ministry in China said the government had begun an anti-dumping and anti-subsidy probe into EU wines at the request of Chinese wine manufacturers.
The Chinese move targets France, one of the countries that supported the commission’s tariffs on Chinese solar panels, levies that were opposed by Germany and Britain.

[Arganis]

Who is acting like there is no money to be spent? We spend trillions on social and health programs. The system is working.

lol just lol

[Theodarzna]

Who is acting like there is no money to be spent? We spend trillions on social and health programs. The system is working.

Well it is and it ultimately isn't depending on you perspective. The "System," is functioning as best it can but its currently seeking to maintain and sustain itself but in a world of dramatically reduced chances for "loot and pillage," I.E. low cost and massive rewards influxes of cash. Now that this is a global system, a global world, there is nowhere left to expand to. No rich new untapped market, nothing that will provide the tremendous RoI of the previous expansions.

We are now forced to live on annual income versus looted treasure. Annual income thus needs to be squeezed and wrenched as much as possible for the current power structure to survive thus gutting labour, and things like TTP and TTIP.

The goal now is sustainability and trying to find new ways to bleed more wealth out of the annual income.