|
|
Post by Flitzerbiest on May 1, 2014 23:48:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 2, 2014 8:26:49 GMT -6
When I compare the graphs associated with the article to the headline and text, I see two different stories. Race to the bottom? Not based upon this data. Jim p.s. I agree with these conclusions, particularly with respect to educational attainment: "In 1980, the American rich and middle class and most of the poor had higher incomes than their counterparts almost anywhere in the world. But incomes for the middle class and poor in the United States have since been growing more slowly than elsewhere. Why? Among the reasons: This country has lost its once-wide lead in educational attainment. Other countries have increased their workers’ skill levels more quickly, helping create well-paying jobs. The United States also tolerates more inequality: The minimum wage is lower here. Executives make more money. The government redistributes less of it. By 2010, the poor in several other countries had pulled ahead. And Canada’s median income had reached a virtual tie with that of the United States. Since 2010, other data suggest Canada has moved ahead."In particular I agree that we tolerate more inequality and that the Government redistributes less than in other places. That's America. Jim |
|
|
|
Post by Flitzerbiest on May 2, 2014 13:32:48 GMT -6
You don't buy that there has been a strong income shift in favor of the wealthiest?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 2, 2014 16:10:27 GMT -6
You don't buy that there has been a strong income shift in favor of the wealthiest? Of course I buy that. It is well documented in the article's bottom graph. The main premise of the article and study however is that our median income level (which roughly corresponds to the middle class) was the highest in the world from 1980 to 2010. Now, Canada has equaled our median income level. Other than Canada, the US median income level still exceeds the rest of the world by lesser or greater margins. (See the top and sidebar graphs). The net is that the rest of the industrialized world is generally catching up to our median wealth level, although they are not there yet, not by a long ways in most cases. This is hardly a "race to the bottom" article no matter how you slice it. The US faces challenges for sure. In particular, re-tooling the non-advanced-degree workforce is a big deal now and is going to be a big deal in coming decades. But seriously, a race to the bottom? J |
|
|
|
Post by Flitzerbiest on May 2, 2014 22:28:02 GMT -6
You don't buy that there has been a strong income shift in favor of the wealthiest? Of course I buy that. It is well documented in the article's bottom graph. The main premise of the article and study however is that our median income level (which roughly corresponds to the middle class) was the highest in the world from 1980 to 2010. Now, Canada has equaled our median income level. Other than Canada, the US median income level still exceeds the rest of the world by lesser or greater margins. (See the top and sidebar graphs). The net is that the rest of the industrialized world is generally catching up to our median wealth level, although they are not there yet, not by a long ways in most cases. This is hardly a "race to the bottom" article no matter how you slice it. The US faces challenges for sure. In particular, re-tooling the non-advanced-degree workforce is a big deal now and is going to be a big deal in coming decades. But seriously, a race to the bottom? J Yes. As you know I have done a bit of historical reading. Some clear patterns tend to emerge in history. One is that when the gap between rich and poor gets too wide, or when the populace decides that the game is fixed, violent means of redress are increasingly considered. The game is definitely fixed. Will it lead to violent revolution this time? I don't know, but the student of history in me isn't particularly interested in testing for the exception. |
|
