The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby Luther Blissett » Sun Jan 25, 2015 12:43 am

Rich People Insisting They Can't Afford to Live, Vol. 666
Hamilton Nolan
Filed to: THE RICH
CLASS WAR
CANADA
DEBT
FIRST WORLD PROBLEMS
MONEY MATTERS
EAT THE RICH
Monday 11:02am

Despite many gracious pleas for the cessation of this practice, it appears that wealthy people (in Canada) are making bold and whiny public declarations of their puzzling inability to "afford" the lifestyle they purport to deserve.

Today's almost-impossible-to-believe journey into financial fantasyland comes courtesy of the Globe and Mail's "Financial Facelift" column, which offers advice to people struggling with their finances. Today's beleaguered couple: Eric and Ilsa, a doctor and a dentist, respectively, with five kids and a combined income of $450,000 per year. Their struggle: although they are "living rent-free in a relative's house" currently, they need to move out soon—"Last fall, they bought a building lot for $1.1-million and are planning to build a house large enough for their family and a live-in nanny."

But this is all very expensive!

"Two professionals should be able to afford a modest house, but we can't get the numbers to work and would appreciate some help," Eric writes. He earns $200,000 a year working one day a week in a medical clinic. But his real love is teaching, which he does one day a week at a university; this earns him $100,000 a year.


Two professionals should be able to afford a [HOUSE LARGE ENOUGH FOR SEVEN PEOPLE AND A LIVE-IN NANNY] [WITHOUT TAKING ON ANY DEBT] [WHILE WORKING A TOTAL OF TWO DAYS PER WEEK]! This is a message we can all get behind.

The actual expert advice offered: Eric should work three days a week.

On this Martin Luther King Jr. day, please take a moment to remember Eric and Ilsa and others who are unable to fend for themselves.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4994
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby zangtang » Sun Jan 25, 2015 5:48 am

times like that, a mans just gotta swallow his pride, put his bitch out on the street..........
zangtang
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby OuishAgain » Sun Jan 25, 2015 3:37 pm

Have you heard about Jeff Greene?

Jeff Greene is a man who accrued billions by betting against subprime mortgages. He’s also an attendee of the World Economic Forum, a Davos event during which the ultra-rich seemingly get together to take a vacation from skiing and tell everyone else what to do.

In Switzerland, Greene spoke to Bloomberg, and offered some depressing advice for the 99 percent. “America’s lifestyle expectations are far too high and need to be adjusted so we have less things and a smaller, better existence,” he said. “We need to reinvent our whole system of life.”

Having fewer things? A “smaller” existence? You’d be forgiven for thinking Greene was channeling Matthieu Ricard, a French Buddhist monk (who is also at Davos, and attended a panel on mindfulness with Arianna Huffington).

Greene, however, doesn’t seem to live by his own advice. Here’s Bloomberg’s Matthew G. Miller:

Greene, who flew his wife, children and two nannies on a private jet plane to Davos for the week, said he’s planning a conference in Palm Beach, Florida, at the Tideline Hotel called “Closing the Gap.”

One suspects “the gap” in question is not the gulf between Greene’s prescribed standard of living for millions of hardworking Americans, and the ones he enjoys himself.

Bloomberg reports that Greene is scheduled to dine with former U.K. prime minister Tony Blair, another man familiar with amassing a fortune in less than spotless ways. Davos, a place for friends.


The Bloomberg article quoted above:

Billionaire Jeff Greene, who amassed a multibillion dollar fortune investing in real estate and betting against subprime mortgage securities, says the U.S. faces a jobs crisis that will cause social unrest and radical politics.

“America’s lifestyle expectations are far too high and need to be adjusted so we have less things and a smaller, better existence,” Greene said in an interview today at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “We need to reinvent our whole system of life.”

The 60-year-old founder of Palm Beach, Florida-based Florida Sunshine Investments said his biggest fund was up more than 20 percent last year with bets on Apple Inc. (AAPL), Google Inc. (GOOGL), bank stocks and mortgage-backed securities.

“I’m remarkably long for my level of pessimism,” he said. “Our economy is in deep trouble. We need to be honest with ourselves. We’ve had a realistic level of job destruction, and those jobs aren’t coming back.”

Greene, who flew his wife, children and two nannies on a private jet plane to Davos for the week, said he’s planning a conference in Palm Beach, Florida, at the Tideline Hotel called “Closing the Gap.” The event, which he said is scheduled for December, will feature speakers such as economist Nouriel Roubini.

Giving Pledge

“My greatest worry for our country is that globalization and the exponential growth of technology which have destroyed millions of jobs already, will undoubtedly eliminate millions and millions more jobs during the next several years,” he said. “Many manufacturing jobs that we lost will come back to the U.S., but most will be filled by robots and software.”

“I live in Palm Beach, where no one wants to hear bad news,” he said. “We need to have an event where people aren’t just focused on predicting the price of oil.”

Greene says he has no investors or partners and manages about $2 billion in financial investments, more than $750 million in real estate and at least $1.5 billion in assorted property development projects.

Greene joined Warren Buffett’s Giving Pledge in 2011, and vowed to donate 80 percent of his estate to his foundation.

“I started with nothing and have lived the American dream,” he said. “My office is right next door to the Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach where I worked as a busboy and waiter working my way through college. Every day when I go to work, I drive by the Breakers and I’m reminded of the great opportunities I’ve had, and my goal is that these opportunities are again available to today’s busboys. That’s why I’m at Davos, in the Giving Pledge, donate to hundreds of charities and am willing to invest a lot of time and money in a conference.”

The billionaire said he’s planning on having dinner tonight with former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, and will attend several private meals and parties throughout the week.


Yahoo! Homes has a feature on Greene's own lifestyle expectations:

Jeff Greene is a billionaire who made most of his fortune shorting subprime mortgages ahead of the last recession. Greene took a private jet to this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, along with his wife, children and two nannies, and then told Bloomberg that "America's lifestyle expectations are far too high and need to be adjusted so we have less things and a smaller, better existence. We need to reinvent our whole system of life."

Green owns a $195-million palace in Beverly Hills with 23 bathrooms and a rotating dance floor, two other Los Angeles mansions, a mansion in Palm Beach, a mansion in the Hamptons, and a 145-foot party yacht called Summerwind that once severely damaged a protected coral reef off Belize.

Greene paid $35 million for Beverly Hills's Palazzo di Amore in 2007, when it was still only partly built. He finished the job and today the property has a 35,000-square-foot main house with 12 bedrooms, a 3,000-bottle wine cellar and tasting room, a separate 10,000-bottle cellar, a kitchen with walk-in fridge, a staff wing, and a Turkish spa; a 15,000-square-foot entertainment center with bowling alley, 50-seat theater, "a dressing room for live stage shows," and a disco/ballroom with "state-of-the-art laser light system and revolving dance floor"; a vineyard that produces 400 to 500 cases a year; a total of 23 bathrooms; a quarter-mile driveway; and the aforementioned rotating dance floor. He put it up for sale last fall for $195 million, the most expensive home on the market in America by far.

Today when they're in Los Angeles, Greene and family mostly stay in this three-story, beachfront Malibu house, which he had built in 2010 (he bought the property for $5.5 million in 2007). The 4,110-square-foot home has four bedrooms, glass walls and direct ocean access. Greene's been trying to sell the house for years. It's now listed at $11.75 million.

In 2009, Greene decided to leave California (possibly for tax purposes) and move back to Palm Beach, Florida, where he grew up. He paid $24 million for La Bellucia, a 1920 estate with a nine-bedroom, 12,000-square-foot main house designed by Addison Mizner and 234 feet of oceanfront. During an extensive renovation of the house, he shacked up with his family in six suites at his own Omphoy Ocean Resort hotel, where he reportedly converted a banquet-equipment storage room into "a playroom with a photo booth, juke box and movie theater" and a meditation garden into a playground for his children.

Greene paid $36 million in 2011 for a Hamptons spread called Tyndal Point; it's a 55-acre parcel with 3,000 feet of beachfront, three houses, two carriage houses, and two docks.

Greene bought his bachelor pad in Beverly Hills in 2002 for $1.575 million. It was recently renovated, but in its Greene heyday it had five bedrooms, a 1,000-bottle wine cellar, a dance club, a theater, a four-story elevator, and two dog runs. Also possibly an observatory. He's downsizing, though: After trying for years to sell it, just a couple of days ago he closed a sale on it for $8.9 million.

Image

Image


Ouish note: more photos at the Yahoo! Homes article.
User avatar
OuishAgain
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:14 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby Luther Blissett » Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:53 am

I know that seemslikeadream just posted some similar coverage in the White Man's Last Tantrum thread, but this Jacobin piece has a good take on the class ramifications of this and reflects my initial reaction to the news and I wanted to put it in a place that has more to do with class war. This reversal is pretty harrowing and illustrative of the widening gulf in class in this country and the all-out assault on our health, our food, our air and our water.

How Class Kills
A recent study showing rising mortality rates among middle-aged whites drives home the lethality of class inequality.
by A. W. Gaffney


Good health — like wealth — does not trickle down the economic ladder.

That’s one conclusion that should be drawn from a widely covered paper published this past week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, albeit for reasons that may not be immediately apparent.

The paper — authored by Anne Case and recent Nobel Prize winner Angus Deaton, both of Princeton University — presents an alarming finding: middle-aged white (non-Hispanic) Americans experienced a stunning reversal in mortality trends in the early twentieth-first century, unique among demographic groups. Between 1999 and 2013, this group saw a major — and previously unnoticed — rise in mortality.

The magnitude of this phenomenon becomes clear in the investigators’ conclusion: “The mortality reversal observed in this period bears a resemblance to the mortality decline slowdown in the United States during the height of the AIDS epidemic.”

By their estimation, had the death rate for middle-aged whites simply remained at its 1998 level, 96,000 fewer people would have perished during this period. And if the rate had, as might be expected, continued to decline at its historic pace, some 488,500 deaths could have been averted.

This staggering die-off was accompanied by a general deterioration of health status: more middle-aged whites reported “fair or poor health,” various chronic pains, and “serious psychological distress.” Rates of heavy drinking and abnormally high liver enzymes — a marker of liver injury — also rose. Much of the uptick in mortality was due to various “external causes,” such as poisoning (by alcohol or drugs), liver disease, and suicide.

In sum: a demographic and social disaster has been quietly — almost invisibly — unfolding in America.

The story is incomplete, however, without the critical element of class. While the study provides evidence of more acute suffering within the demographic as a whole, the increase in overall mortality was restricted to those with no more than a high school education. Those with more than a high school diploma also saw an increase in mortality from poisonings and suicide, but still managed to enjoy an overall decline in death rates (as typically happens in modern societies when there isn’t a war, famine, or major epidemic).

As a result of such differentials by class, the ratio in mortality rates between those with a high school degree or less compared to those with a bachelor’s degree or more increased from 2.6 (in 1999) to 4.1 (in 2013). This spike was so pronounced it dragged down the rate for the white middle-aged cohort as a whole.

Case and Deaton’s study complements a larger literature demonstrating that health inequality along class lines — approximated by socioeconomic indicators like income and education — is rising. While it’s long been known that class affects health, decades of cross-class declines in mortality make this dynamic less obvious. Recent research, however, paints a different picture: with the historic rise in economic inequality, there’s been an attendant increase in health inequality.

This year, a publication from the National Academies of Sciences, The Growing Gap in Life Expectancy by Income, confirmed earlier reports in finding that the difference in life expectancy after age fifty between top- and bottom-income groups was much higher for those born in 1960 than those born in 1930. The analysis was limited by a number of assumptions and extrapolations, but its bottom line remains striking: despite three decades of medical progress and economic growth, there’s been no projected improvement in life expectancy for males in the lowest income quintile — and females in this income group have seen a projected decline in life expectancy.

Rising health inequality helps explain how overall health measures can improve even as those of particular populations stagnate — or in the case of Case and Deaton’s study, greatly deteriorate. Such inequities may also be partially driving the US’s lagging health metrics in relation to other countries.

As health researcher James House points out in Beyond Obamacare: Life, Death, and Social Policy, America went from being a health leader to a straggler in the second half of the twentieth century. Despite rising health expenditures,

our standing on a number of indicators of population health — such as life expectancy, infant mortality, and, more recently, maternal mortality — has been declining from among the best in the world in the 1950s to worse today than virtually every developed nation in the world, as well as a number of developing ones. We are even beginning to see some evidence of absolute declines in the health of portions of the American population.

Case and Deaton’s study demonstrates this is precisely what we’re witnessing in the US today.

What are we to make of the factor of institutional racism in this study? It is not that being white has suddenly become bad for one’s health; indeed, despite the dynamics described in the study, black Americans still suffer worse health and lower life expectancy. But as the health policy scholar Vicente Navarro argued in a 1990 Lancet article, understanding racial disparities in health requires the addition of a class-based framework:

The stark fact is that these [racial] differentials cannot be explained merely by looking at race. After all, some blacks have better health indicators (including mortality rates) than some whites, and not all whites have similar mortality indicators. Thus we must look at class differentials in mortality in the US, which are also increasing rather than declining.

This isn’t to suggest that race doesn’t matter outside of class. In a 2005 article, social epidemiologist Ichiro Kawachi and colleagues emphasize the importance of confronting inequalities in each of these realms.

Racism — both past and present — is a crucial determinant in producing worse health among blacks as compared to whites. But within demographic groups and US society as a whole, class is an increasingly critical determinant of health. It’s easy to miss the underlying dynamic of this chilling reality when we focus on aggregate statistics.

To reverse the trends Case and Deaton document, it’s undoubtedly important to fight the various “upstream” causes of mortality, such as substance abuse or mental illness. But if we narrowly focus on specific risk factors for death — say by controlling the opioid epidemic, which has rightly become a major public health priority— we risk missing a larger, more daunting reality: class-based health inequality preceded the opioid epidemic, and will no doubt survive it.

Without more fundamental change, the larger structure of health inequity will persevere, and possibly worsen. Population health is deeply interwoven into the economic structure of society. Those who seek to improve the former must, it is increasingly clear, join in the contest to transform the latter.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4994
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby slomo » Sun Nov 15, 2015 3:52 pm

I recently discovered this model of social class, and found to be very enlightening, certainly consistent with my experience, and explanatory of a great many topics discussed on this board. I don't entirely agree with it, but it posits a model of class based on social network rather than (solely) income:

The 3-ladder system of social class in the U.S.

Typical depictions of social class in the United States posit a linear, ordered hierarchy. I’ve actually come to the conclusion that there are 3 distinct ladders, with approximately four social classes on each. Additionally, there is an underclass of people not connected to any of the ladders, creating an unlucky 13th social class. I’ll attempt to explain how this three-ladder system works, what it means, and also why it is a source of conflict. The ladders I will assign the names Labor, Gentry, and Elite. My specific percentage estimates of each category are not derived from anything other than estimation based on what I’ve seen, and my limited understanding of the macroeconomics of income in the United States, so don’t take them for more than an approximation. I’ll assess the social role of each of these classes in order, from bottom to top.

This is, one should note, an exposition of social class rather than income. Therefore, in many cases, precise income criteria cannot be defined, because there’s so much more involved. Class is more sociological in nature than wealth or income, and much harder to change. People can improve their incomes dramatically, but it’s rare for a person to move more than one or two rungs in a lifetime. Social class determines how a person is perceived, that person’s access to information, and what opportunities will be available to a person.


...

National Elite (E2, 0.19%) are what most Americans think of as “upper class” or “old money”. They have Roman Numerals in their names, live in the Hamptons (although they’ve probably stopped using “summer” as a verb now that “the poors” know about it) and their families have attended Ivy League colleges for generations. They’re socially very well connected and have the choice not to work, or the choice to work in a wide array of well-compensated and highly-regarded jobs. Rarely do they work full time under traditional employment terms– never as subordinates, sometimes as executives in an apprentice role, often in board positions or “advisory” roles. It’s uncommon that an E2 will put a full-time effort into anything, because their objective with work is to associate their names with successful institutions, but not to get too involved.

To maintain E2 status, being wealthy is required. It takes about $500,000 per year, after tax, in income at a minimum. However, it’s not hard for a person with E2 status and connections to acquire this, even if the family money is lost. The jobs that E3’s regard as the pinnacle of professional achievement (the idea that such a notion as “professional achievement” exists is laughable to them; paid full-time work is dishonorable from an E2 perspective) are their safety careers.

Global Elite (E1, ~60,000 people worldwide, about 30% of those in the U.S.) are a global social class, and extremely powerful in a trans-national way. These are the very rich, powerful, and deeply uncultured barbarians from all over the world who start wars in the Middle East for sport, make asses of themselves in American casinos, rape ski bunnies at Davos, and run the world. Like the Persian army in 300, they come from all over the place; they’re the ugliest and most broken of each nation. They’re the corporate billionaires and drug kingpins and third-world despots and real estate magnates. They’re not into the genteel, reserved “WASP culture” of E2’s, the corporate earnestness and “white shoe” professionalism of E3’s, or the hypertrophic intellectualism and creativity of G1’s and G2’s. They are all about control, and on a global scale. To channel Heisenberg, they’re in the empire business. They aren’t mere management or even “executives”. They’re owners. They don’t care what they own, or what direction the world takes, as long as they’re on top. They almost never take official executive positions within large companies, but they make a lot of the decisions behind the scenes.

Unlike the National Elite, who tend toward a cultural conservatism and a desire to preserve certain traits that they consider necessary to national integrity, the Global Elite doesn’t give a shit about any particular country. They’re fully multinational and view all the world’s political nations as entities to be exploited (like everything else). They foster corruption and crime if it serves their interests, and those interests are often ugly. Like Kefka from Final Fantasy VI, their reason for living is to create monuments to nonexistence.

For the other social classes, there’s no uniform moral assumption that can apply. G1’s are likable and often deserving cultural leaders, but sometimes foolish, overrated, incompetent, infuriatingly petty, and too prone to groupthink to deserve their disproportionate clout. G2’s tend to have the best (or at least most robust) taste, because they don’t fall into G1 self-referentiality, but can be just as snooty and cliquish. As “pro-Gentry” as I may seem, it’s a massive simplification to treat that set as entirely virtuous. Likewise, the lower elite ranks (E2, E3, E4) also have their mix of good and bad people. There are E2’s who want to live well and decently, E3’s trying to provide for their families, and E4’s trying to get in because they were brought up to climb the ladder. On the other hand, E1 is pretty much objectively evil, without exceptions. There are decent people who are billionaires, so there’s no income or wealth level at which 100% objective evil becomes the norm. But if you climb the social ladder, you get to a level at which it’s all cancer, all the way up. That’s E1. Why is it this way? Because the top end of the world’s elite is a social elite, not an economic one, and you don’t get deep into an elevated social elite unless you are very simliar to the center of that cluster, and for the past 10,000 years the center of humanity’s top-of-the-top cluster has always been deep, featureless evil: people who burn peasants’ faces off because it amuses them. Whether you’re talking about a real person like Hitler, Stalin, Erik Prince, Osama bin Laden, or Kissinger, or a fictional example like The Joker, Kefka, Walter White, or Randall Flagg; when you get to the top of society, it’s always the same guy. Call it The Devil, but what’s scary is that it needs (and has) no supernatural powers; it’s human, and while one its representatives might get knocked off, another one will step up.
User avatar
slomo
 
Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 8:42 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby slimmouse » Sun Nov 15, 2015 3:57 pm

You know youre fucked when you put Money above people

Or at least you should
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Sun Nov 15, 2015 4:41 pm

This was gold: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Too many quotables. I'll come back and quote the whole thing once my computer stops being the house TV.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:14 pm

Thanks slomo, this is a very interesting categorization attempt, well worth reading:

https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/the-3-ladder-system-of-social-class-in-the-u-s/
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:47 am

The Tipping Point: Most Americans No Longer Are Middle Class
Updated December 10, 201510:30 AM ET

Americans have long lived in a nation made up primarily of middle-class families, neither rich nor poor, but comfortable enough.

This year, that changed, according to the Pew Research Center.

A just-released analysis of government data shows that as of 2015, middle-income households have become the minority. The trend is so firmly established that it may well continue; Americans have experienced "a demographic shift that could signal a tipping point," Pew researchers concluded Wednesday.

Thanks to factory closings and other economic factors, the country now has 120.8 million adults living in middle-income households, the study found. That compares with the 121.3 million who are living in either upper- or lower-income households.

"The hollowing of the middle has proceeded steadily for the past four decades," Pew concluded.

And middle-income Americans not only have shrunk as a share of the population but have fallen further behind financially, with their median income down 4 percent compared with the year 2000, Pew said.

So what exactly does it mean to be a middle-income family?

Pew starts with the U.S. median household income, which is the paycheck smack in the middle of them all, lined up from smallest to biggest. In other words, half of all households earn more, and half earn less. Then Pew defined "middle class" as households that had at least two-thirds of the median income, but no more than double that amount. And it adjusted for household size.

Bottom line: For a household with three people, being middle class means making between about $42,000 and $126,000. If your family of three makes less than $42,000, then you are in the lower class. If your family brings in more than $126,000, you are in the upper class.

Using that formula, Pew concluded that back in 1971, about 2 out of 3 Americans lived in middle-income households. Since then, the middle has been steadily shrinking. Today, just a shade under half of all households (about 49.9 percent) have middle incomes.

Slightly more than half of Americans (about 50.1 percent) either live in a lower-class household (roughly 29 percent) or an upper-class household (about 21 percent).

But Pew also points out that Americans have all gained. That is, the median income has risen 34 percent since 1970.

So we should be grateful, no? Yes, but here's the rub: Upper-class Americans have seen their incomes rise 47 percent, while lower-class families have gained only 28 percent.

In other words, the U.S. economy has been growing, and we all have been getting wealthier. But people who have the biggest incomes have been pulling away from the pack in a trend that shows no sign of slowing. Those upper-class households are increasingly likely to be headed by a married couple with higher educations, the data show.

"Those Americans without a college degree stand out as experiencing a substantial loss in economic status," Pew concluded.

The Pew study is the latest showing lost momentum for the middle class. For example, in August, Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce released a study showing that high-paying jobs are proliferating, but not middle-income jobs.

The Georgetown report concluded that the U.S. economy now has about 1 million more jobs that rank in the top third of income-generating occupations. But the middle third jobs have not yet recovered from the recession — that category is still showing 900,000 fewer jobs, compared with pre-recession levels.

The Georgetown study's key finding was this: Since the recession ended, "almost all good jobs have gone to college graduates. Out of the 2.9 million good jobs created since the recovery, 2.8 million have been filled by workers with at least a bachelor's degree."
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4994
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The USA Oligarchy-Austerity-Schadenfreude Thread

Postby tapitsbo » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:55 am

JackRiddler » Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:14 pm wrote:Thanks slomo, this is a very interesting categorization attempt, well worth reading:

https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2012/09/09/the-3-ladder-system-of-social-class-in-the-u-s/


This blog has a curious blend of social justice and neoreaction ideas that sit oddly with praise of Israel-as-utopia. "Tech"/software engineer culture is strange, to me...
tapitsbo
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 152 guests