Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Yep to hell with the working class.

I have no doubt the financial (sic) Robber Barons share a par of the blame for our current predicament, but I'm sorry, NOTHING that's printed in Rolling Stone carries one iota of credibility with me. jorge

I missed out on flight pay?

Generally speaking, Rolling Stone is geared to a young, mostly liberal audience. Yet the mentioned article is a condemnation of the cap and trade bill,...which is touted as a Democrat initiative.

That thought is probably the only reason the author will have a life span past the publish date of the article....

Tony

most of the things workers seek to be afforded now....the bulk of what they spend money on....didn't exist or was only available to the super-rich in our father's times.


simply living in a nice three bedroom tract house, with one car and one TV and one phone......that's poverty now. Will has a great column on this today. Did you know that fifty years ago the largest single expense in many hospitals was....linens?

"simply living in a nice three bedroom tract house, with one car and one TV and one phone......that's poverty now"

Much truth to that. Gov bennies come with this poverty?
_________________________

No,...this is poverty in America now. It was taken in Pilsen,...Chicago's largest barrio of Mexican Americans. (and illegals, of course)

,...coming soon to a neighborhood near you.

Yep - right on Jorge.

You might not like Rolling Stone Mag, but read the article. It's a very good history of what has happened over the last two years, and is a very good illustration of the state of our financial system today. If you want to see just how far down the rabbit hole we've traveled, this article is a good primer. Don't dismiss the content just because you don't care for the vehicle. I found the most interesting part in the last part concerning cap and trade.

Mike: I can get the same information from other, more credible sources, but subject magazine has had SO MANY inaccuracies, distortions and outright lies, I equate it to the New York Times or the Washington Post: GARBAGE. jorge

Sorry Gunny, but you did! S/F, jorge

That's actually highly debatable. Look at the source of most modern technology in your house. Heck, even US fighter planes contain technology from Asia. The top Supercomputers fluctuate between the US and other countries. A huge percentage of programmers are Indian. Almost all memory chips are manufactured in Asia. Japan is a leader in manufacturing automation and robotics.

The sad fact is that we are producing smaller and smaller numbers of engineers and scientists in this country. Everyone wants to be in the financial industry. Any remaining US dominance in technology is likely to be short. It will only last as long as the US can entice foreign born scientists and engineers to work in the US.

Some sobering statistics:

55% of Ph.D. students in engineering in the United States are foreign born (2004).

Between 1980 and 2000, the percentage of Ph.D. scientists and engineers employed in the United States who were born abroad has increased from 24% to 37%.

45% of Ph.D. physicists working in the United States are foreign born (2004).

80% of total post-doctoral chemical and materials engineering in the United States are foreign-born (1988).

At the undergraduate level, US-born engineering students constitute upwards of 90-95% of the student population since most foreign born candidates for engineering graduate schools are trained in their home countries. Yet, the size of the pool of BS engineering graduates with US citizenship is much larger than the number who apply to engineering graduate schools including foreign born engineers and scientist.

the proportion of foreign-born engineers among assistant professors younger than 35 years has increased from 10% in 1972 to 50%-55% in 1983-1985, illustrating a dramatic increase on US dependence on foreign-born students in the US college system. The increase in non-citizen assistant professors of engineering is the result of the fact that, in recent years, foreign-born engineers received close to 50 percent of newly awarded engineering doctorates (naturalized citizens accounted for about 4 percent) and, furthermore, they entered academe in disproportionately large numbers.

33% of all U.S. Ph.D.s in science and engineering are now awarded to foreign born graduate students (2004).

In 1982, foreign-born engineers constituted about 3.6% of all engineers employed in the United States, 13.9% of which were naturalized; and foreign-born Phds in Engineering constituted 15% and 20% were naturalized.

In 1985, foreign-born Phds represented almost 33% of the engineering post-doctorate researchers in US universities. Foreign-born Phd engineers often accept postdoctoral position because other employment is unavailable until green card is obtained. [2] A system that further incentivising replacement of US-citizens in the upper echelons of academic and private sector engineering firms due to higher educational attainment relative to native-born engineer who for the most part do train beyond undergraduate level.

In recent years, The number of applicants for faculty openings at research universities have increased dramatically. Numbers of 50 to 200 applications for a single faculty opening have become typical, yet even with such high numbers of applicants have yielded a foreign-born component in excess of 50%

An astounding 60 percent of the top science students in the United States and 65 percent of the top math students are the children of immigrants. In addition, foreign-born high school students make up 50 percent of the 2004 U.S.Math Olympiad�s top scorers, 38 percent of the U.S. Physics Team, and 25 percent of the Intel Science Talent Search finalists�the United States� most prestigious awards for young scientists and mathematicians.

Among 1985 foreign-born engineering doctorate holders, about 40% expected to work in the United States after graduating. An additional 17 percent planned to stay on as post-doctorates, and most of these are likely to remain permanently in the United States. Those, almost 60% of foreign-born engineering doctorate holders are likely to become part of the US engineering labor force within a few years after graduating. The other approximately 40% of foreign born engineering Phds mostly likely find employment working for Multinational corporations outside of the US.

In the 2004 Intel Science Talent Search, more children (18) have parents who entered the country on H-1B (professional) visas than parents born in the United States (16). To place this finding in perspective, note that new H-1B visa holders each year represent less than 0.04 percent of the U.S. population.

Selection for admission to US graduate schools continue to be made by committees dominated by faculty member.(1985) Foreign born facility now accounts for over 50% of facility in engineering (1994).

27 out the 87 (more than 30%) American Nobel Prize winners in Medicine and Physiology between 1901 and 2005 were born outside the US

Large numbers of foreign-born engineering graduate students serve as TAs in undergrad classes at universities and colleges, many of these students have inadequate command of the English Language and a cultural background that have provided disincentives for native-born students. In addition, US universities including many foreign-born undergraduate professors have speak English very poorly.Questions have been raised bout the effectiveness of many of these people in the classroom.

At the undergraduate level, US-born engineering students constitute upwards of 90-95% of the student population since most foreign born candidates for engineering graduate schools are trained in their home countries. The size of the pool of BS engineering graduates with US citizenship is much larger than the number who apply to engineering graduate schools.

All that you say above is mostly true, hence my statement "as of right now", but as to your statement our military aircraft have foreign technology from Asia? that's a joke right? Like Porsche, nobody even comes close...jorge

Guess where most of the flat screens used in US aircraft come from? Taiwan. Memory chips used in computers mostly come from Asia. High tech optics originate in places like Germany. Components are often purchased from US companies who outsource production overseas And this doesn't include counterfeit parts that the Pentagon admits have gone into service.

The 1993 Buy American Act requires that 51 percent of all purchases by the Pentagon be produced in the United States. Only 51 percent.

The Pentagon relies on foreign suppliers more and more, and expects that trend to continue and accelerate.

Here's an article from 2005. One of many from various sources.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/business/worldbusiness/22iht-weapons.html

Jorge, watched a special on the Military Channel quite a while back. They discussed the 5 year plan and military procurement. The focus of the program was the F-18. There's critical parts for the F-18 that are made offshore. By their estimates it would take 3 years to begin producing those parts in the US if the foreign sources dried up or stopped making them. Someone would have to start from scratch. You would have to start up a company, order the equipment to produce the parts and then train individuals in all areas of production along with finding sources for additional components.

The displays on the instrument panel were one of them.

Amazing. Add to that, in 1950 Americans spent twice the percentage of disposable income on food than we do now.

My parents were both college graduates and teachers. The first two years of their marriage they lived in an apartment above a bowling alley.

My wife and I upgraded. We lived in a house built in 1914 that had an indoor bathroom added above the coal chute. After a year of laundromats I installed a washer and dryer in the porch.

My oldest daughter and her husband were married last spring and they upgraded too. They live in a nice 15-year old 3-bedroom split with a two car garage.

The definition of "starter house" has sure changed over the years.

JOG, you and Steve_NO nailed it. My wife and I lived in an apartment for several years before buying our first house, which was a modest 1300 SF, older home. These days, it's hard to find a builder that will build anything like that because there is no demand. Everyone expects to have a giant multi-bedroom house, two cars, 3 TVs, etc, etc.

Our parents worked for years to achieve what young people today expect to start out with. And they hock their souls to get it. Unfortunately, there have been 'enabler' banks willing to step in and provide the means, counting on increasing home value to protect their investment, even if the buyers default. No one ever plans for 'if things go wrong'.

Working in high tech prior to the dot com bomb, I saw many co-workers in this trap, with every penny of their huge salaries going to propping up their lifestyle. $500,000 home, beemer, etc. When the Internet companies collapsed, more than a few had to move back in with their parents.

My philosophy has always been to live below my means, pay in cash whenever possible and save to the disaster that will eventually come.

I'm very much in agreement. It's easier for us older folks to see it, having been there and lived through and seen the changes in lifestyle expectations. That's why the lament about the "death of the middle class" needs to be tempered by recognition that definition and expectations of middle class lifestyle have been ratcheting upwards for decades.

I don't know how many times I've heard workers complain that they're not "getting ahead", as if living better is some sort of inherent right. There is only one reason to get ahead, and that is if you improve your productivity and value. Expecting to make more money by doing the same thing over and over isn't realistic, but it's just one more reason for inflation and the mess we now find ourselves in.

Paul

Yes I did have some Idea, I still have the bill from my birth back in 1959, grand total $243, which was just broken down to one page, Hospital, Doctor, Medicine.

Where I agree with your assertion that we have more goodies than our fathers did, I would have to disagree with the assertion that this is why people doing the same jobs as our fathers held can afford the same. I would disagree that many jobs in the blue collar sector that afforded our father home ownership still do for those who hold them today.

Our fathers bought new cars at a much higher rate than many of us in the same job fields. It was general practice back in the fifties and sixties to trade your vehicle in for a new model after five years or so, today many drive their cars until they drop, sometimes ten, twenty years.

Back in the day you took your waffle iron and most other home appliances in and had it repaired for a few bucks, today you throw them away and pay $40 for a new one. Yes our father had one car, but Mom stayed home. How many blue collar workers do you think can afford to have their wives stay at home today? naturally a second car is needed for Mom to head off to work.

Many people in the same job fields as our fathers can't own a home, and prospects for retirement from the same jobs our father retired from would appear gloomy at best. The fact that we see a lot of old folks coming out of retirement to work again is a bad sign. People around here will blame these old folk for not preparing better for retirement, well OK, where does one go to prepare better for retirement if you are blue collar? That's right, union jobs prepare you better for retirement, but that isn't too popular, in fact scorned.

I'll be candid, before I was laid off from my job I had two retirement going. The union pension to be worth about $35K a year upon retirement, and a 401K that we were putting about $3.50 an hour into. Now would you say I will be flush upon retirement? Because I'm here to tell you I was putting more into retirement than any of my blue collar friends, most of whom are putting a couple of dollars an hour into a 401K

Somehow the few union jobs left that actually have a decent retirement package have some how now become excessive and the workers, greedy and lazy. Just as wages have gone up, the cost of living and retirement have gone up at a faster rate.

From 1987 to 2009, my union wages went up $5 per hour. We received more on raises, however medical ate it up, $5 an hour was all I realized on my paycheck for twenty two years. Do you think that those sky high union wages have covered the cost of living increases for the last 22 years?

I'm not here bitching, rather explaining to you that I had one of the best jobs a guy could get in our area without a college education, people working for non-union outfits were not as well off as I was. People have to realize that not all unions are the UAW. I have never heard or seen of a guy pushing a broom for 70K a year.

The difference between myself and the some of the non-union guys, was that $3.50 an hour I had going into my 401K, and some job protection, which I'll remind you that in 22 years I never saw the union retrieve a job for somebody who deserved to be fired. Other non-unions in the same field were well behind my package. The company I worked for has been union for decades and while doing so has become the second largest land owner in California, so I can't see how us being union has been too detrimental or oppressive on the company.

And for the record, I too lived in an 800 sq ft condo with three little kids, I didn't come out of high school and walk into a house and two cars.

There is one person and only one person who makes that decision. Labor Relations (not the union) is responsible for handing out penalties. The union can attempt to bargin down the penalty, the final say rests with LR. If someone returns to work it's only with LR's blessing.