Not insinuating in the slightest that there is an alternative.
However, ignorance is sticking you head in the sand and saying "LA-LA-LA-LA we can totally fight off globalization with unions LA-LA-LA-LA!"
What is the alternative to globalization?
Globalization can work as long as those doing the globalizing don't have a plantation owners mentality that everyone else is there to serve them as cheap as possible as some new age serf/slave at the expense of everything else.
But isn’t the multinational corporations in question inherently American? Look at EU slamming down on multinational corps... I think it’s mandated to “union” if we are to reign in these mega corps..The U.S. is big enough and diverse enough to be successful. Economic isolation would give us time to get our house in order. I think dealing with a relatively brief economic upheaval in this country is preferable to becoming vassals to some multinational corporation destroying America in the process.
I believe it has to be more fundamental like the New Deal because increasing taxes and regulations (which I believe in) will simply cause companies to leave. As I said, this could be a good thing, if we also retrain the American workforce.
Whole heartedly agree.Not insinuating in the slightest that there is an alternative.
However, ignorance is sticking you head in the sand and saying "LA-LA-LA-LA we can totally fight off globalization with unions LA-LA-LA-LA!"
But isn’t the multinational corporations in question inherently American? Look at EU slamming down on multinational corps... I think it’s mandated to “union” if we are to reign in these mega corps..
The corporations do not.That's bullshit. American citizens pay taxes on their world wide earnings. The advantages of American corporate personhood are also rather large on the world stage. Legal protections for legit business are the best in the world.
multinational corporations are not American by definition. Forcing those corporations that are American to buy American would reign them in or, force them to leave.But isn’t the multinational corporations in question inherently American? Look at EU slamming down on multinational corps... I think it’s mandated to “union” if we are to reign in these mega corps..
That's bullshit. American citizens pay taxes on their world wide earnings. The advantages of American corporate personhood are also rather large on the world stage. Legal protections for legit business are the best in the world.
If you qualify as an American citizen residing abroad (basically having lived at least one year abroad), there are two methods by which you can reduce your US tax by a substantial amount. These are the "Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE)" and the "Foreign Tax Credit."
However, neither of these methods excuses you from filing if your income was above the filing threshold.
The Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE, using IRS Form 2555) allows you to exclude a certain amount of your FOREIGN EARNED income from US tax. For tax year 2018 (filing in 2019) the exclusion amount is $103,900. What this means is that if, for example, you earned $118,000 in 2018, you can subtract $103,900 from that leaving $14,100 as taxable by the US. But beware: this $14,100 is taxable at tax rates applying to $118,000 (the so-called "stacking rule"). The exclusion applies only to foreign earned income. Other income, such as pensions, interest, dividends, capital gains, US-sourced income, etc., cannot be excluded with the FEIE. You are liable for full US tax on this type of income.
Here's a simple example. Suppose you live in France and you earned EURO 100,000 (about $118,000) from your French employer. You are married filing jointly, have two children and you take the standard deduction ($24,000) and child tax credit ($4,000 for two children).
The US tax on this income is calculated as follows:
US tax on $118,000 is $8,559
US tax on $103,900 (amount excluded) would be $5,457
Net US tax payable
($8,559 - $5,457) = $3,102
While this is only an approximate calculation, it gives you an idea of how the system works.
The other method for reducing your US tax bill is the foreign tax credit, using IRS Form 1116. If your income was taxed by a foreign country, you can subtract that tax from your US tax, in most cases substantially reducing your US tax bill. But be careful: you cannot claim a foreign tax credit for foreign taxes on income excluded on Form 2555. In other words, you can only claim a foreign tax credit for foreign taxes on the same income that the US is taxing. The fraction of your foreign taxes that can be taken as a tax credit is determined by the ratio of non-excluded income to total income. Here's an example, using the same figures as above.
We had a job market for the middle class.
Now we are nothing but a services based economy... So anyone who has skills related to "building and doing stuff" are pretty much screwed.
I think we could very well still have a middle-class. Hell, I just paid a plumber a few grand to do things around my house. No one wants to learn those skills though for whatever reason.
I'm no fan of Wuawei but they did not go from nothing a few years ago. Their larger growth has also been in China.-A family can be responsible for 20 years, one bad health complication and their economic security can be destroyed
-College used to be cheap and mostly free. Now textbooks are 300 books each. Administrators make almost a million is some community schools.
-Trillions and trillions spent on wars around the world. All that money invested in the US would have built great infrastructure, happier healthier population, R&D [ Maybe the war economy does lead to better breakthroughs]
-Downfall of unions and job security, BS managers got too much control
- Moving manufacturing to China [The biggest fuck up , I cant imagine but i feel like US corps have cut off their own feet. Huawei has a revenue of 80 billion a year, from nothing a few years ago. This is money that democratic countries should be making]
I sound like conjur or dmcowen now.
Yeah this pretty much nails it. The middle class in America came about because the Germans lost the second great war. China was non existent at the time as far as manufacturing power goes and Europe was in shambles. The only place left in the world after the second great war with any mass scale manufacturing ability and the people needed to fill those jobs was America.You emerged largely-undamaged from a war that destroyed all your economic competitors?
Not saying that's 'the' answer. I don't really know. It must be part of it, though. Those are dramatic bar charts.
Aaaaaaand also coincidentally during that time frame is when globalization really started to take hold....
But hey, it was all Reagan. He could have totally prevented it -and even if he DID prevent it, then subsequently the future administrations could have prevented it as well
The pipeline for trades could be improved but there are a lot of caveats.
What I find more baffling than the trades is a lot of people not considering or staying in the military (foolishly going out to get some lame diploma mill degree with their 9/11 bill). Enlisted beats the pants off of many college graduates. A lot of the jobs only require a whopping ~40 days of training.
Are the trades really the economy's best kept secret?
The story is a little more complicated than the headlinestheweek.com
For example, let's zoom out to the national level for a moment, and look at median pay for the jobs that generally fall under the umbrella of the trades. One or two outliers pay between $60,000 and $80,000 a year, and a few between $40,000 and $50,000. But the vast majority pay between $50,000 and $55,000 a year, compared to a national median income for households of over $61,000.
That certainly doesn't mean pay in the trades is bad — $55,000 a year is nothing to sneeze at — but it's certainly not the six-figure paydays that news stories sometimes advertise. Rather, as a career path, the trades appear to be right down the middle.
For one thing, the trades tend to be pretty seasonal. As you can see in the graph below, the unemployment rate in construction (the blue line) bounces up and down several percentage points compared to overall unemployment (the red line). The graph also shows how the trades are particularly sensitive to the business cycle, and were absolutely decimated by the 2008 crisis. "During the Great Recession we blew about two million construction workers out of the construction labor market," Belman said.
As a result, the gap in pay between the union and non-union workers can be pretty big. Belman used electricians in heavily-unionized eastern Michigan versus those in non-unionized western Michigan as an example: Put together pay and benefits like pensions and health care, and compensation for the unionized workers can be twice that of their non-unionized peers.
We tend to assume that high pay is a sign of a labor shortage — demand for workers outpacing supply to a greater degree. But while those forces matter, labor markets are rarely "markets" in the technical way economists mean. They're social institutions, structured by laws and contracts and the bargaining power of the players involved. According to Belman, the significant labor shortages in the trades actually tend to happen in the non-unionized regions with lower pay: "There's a belt of labor shortages running from North Carolina across to Texas," Belman said. "That's also a heavily non-union area with particularly low wages and a lack of effective training systems. So they neither have the ability to train, nor are the jobs conducive to bringing in workers — because there's a lot of traveling in construction."
Yeah this pretty much nails it. The middle class in America came about because the Germans lost the second great war. China was non existent at the time as far as manufacturing power goes and Europe was in shambles. The only place left in the world after the second great war with any mass scale manufacturing ability and the people needed to fill those jobs was America.
We had the manpower the money and the manufacturing facilitys to provide the rest of the world with what it needed to heal and recover form one of the worst evils in human history.
Enlisting beats degree wind-mills because it requires this thing called discipline, patience, and hard-work.
Something that kids out of college just don't have.
What? You mean my 4 year psychology degree doesn't get me a starting cushy job with $60k starting?! WAAAAAAAAAT?!
I would say a gutting of the tax code on the rich has more to do than any other thing you can point to.
Enlisted beats a lot of college bound people in either state or higher tier colleges. Not just diploma mills. There is a lot of risk for even more marketable degrees. For example, engineering commonly leads to "engineering waste" for even the grads. Enlisted provides a pretty straightforward path to a pension that is easy to get.
Even if you get into ~80 percentile on the ASVAB, you aren't that bright. ASVAB is like the retarded version of the SAT/ACT.
I've come across a lot of people that are brighter than a lot of those enlisted, and they dug themselves into a giant hole going the college route while being sporadically employed in shit jobs or internships during that time with little to show for.
Most of it is for a similar reason to trades -- it isn't introduced, and they are ignorant of the benefits or undervalue them. One reason why employers want to get rid of pensions is because people underestimate compensation received later.
And yet pest control, diet nutritionist (not even registered dietician...), pharm tech etc. with short training will make twice or more than civilian equivalent AND also get to retire at 38 (roughly ~20-something with COLA for life).
So what? There are only 1.3M people in active duty & 800K more in the reserves. It's a drop in the bucket. Beyond that, only a fifth of enlistees ever get the pension & most of them are officers.
I have a college education. My family (father, actually) instilled in us (me, anyway) that a college education was expected of me. If I didn't get that, I figured the worst would be my fate, not that I had any real sense of what that would be in realistic terms. However, once I got that degree I'd seen a lot of the world, been here and there, been in and out of college several times, gotten an education OUTSIDE of the systems, hard knocks and all and I learned that people who work with their hands are quite human, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with them, they aren't white collar, they aren't yuppies and I respected them and didn't think myself superior to them by virtue of anything including my upbringing or my education.The idea that you are useless if you don't have a college degree, the denigration of unions, and the accompanying disrespect for people who work with their hands.
So it's Reagan's fault? You're just saying for a different reason?Aaaaaaand also coincidentally during that time frame is when globalization really started to take hold....
But hey, it was all Reagan. He could have totally prevented it -and even if he DID prevent it, then subsequently the future administrations could have prevented it as well
Ignoring the military thing for a moment is this list another way to say, INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING??Yet investment in the military is what created America’s prosperity.
Rapid industrialization - driven by WW2
Silicon Valley - military R&D
Internet - military R&D
Interstate System - Cold War
California - post war migration of Pacific veterans
Greatest Generation - defined by military service
Pork spending and the military industrial complex is a whole other issue, and not attributed to one party.
That really does suck. Americans should be up in arms over that. Marie Antoinette lost her head because of that syndrome. I'm not saying we should kill those people, but we should not stand for the rich having shaken down the "middle class." Myself, I will not cry if the Republican party dies. No... I would celebrate.We bought in to the bullshit of trickle down Reaganomics & have been taking a beating in top down class warfare ever since.
Three people now have greater wealth than the lower 50% of the population.
Bernie Sanders: Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Warren Buffett have more wealth than bottom half of U.S. | PolitiFact Wisconsin