Frank F. Matthews

I suspect that you have a very strange idea of middle class. I'm not
sure of the time comparison but there is still a fairly large middle
class in the US.

I would also disagree with the comment that most folks do not dislike
their work. Of the fairly large range of folks that I know there are
few jobs where the people genuinely like their work. Fortunately for me
I have one of those jobs and it manages to get me a middle class life
style. My wife had a job that she really grew to dislike but it did pay
twice what mine did.

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > D. Lloyd writes:
    >
    >
    >>In order to do that, citizens must believe that
    >>it is possible to grab a piece of the American dream no matter how small
    >>that piece may be.
    >
    >
    > It's easier in the U.S. than almost anywhere else. However, it was a
    > lot easier in the 50s and 60s. Currently the pendulum has swung back to
    > where it was around 1900, with a very small number of very rich people,
    > a very large number of near-poverty-level people, and a nearly
    > nonexistent middle class.
    >
    >
    >>People in Europe are very lucky.
    >
    >
    > Lucky in some ways, unlucky in others. Europeans still think they've
    > accomplished great things if they can buy a color TV after saving up for
    > ten years.
    >

Frank F. Matthews

I suppose that you are saying take-home wage after deductions for taxes
& insurance.

[email protected] wrote:

    > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:32:09 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>D. Lloyd writes:
    >
    >
    >>>People in Europe are very lucky.
    >>Lucky in some ways, unlucky in others. Europeans still think they've
    >>accomplished great things if they can buy a color TV after saving up for
    >>ten years.
    >
    >
    >
    > I donm't know about the rest of Europe but here in the UK a 28"
    > widescreen TV costs the equivalent of a week's wage.

Bob Ward

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:39:21 +1000, Gregory Toomey
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Jonathan wrote:
    >> When an American friend told me people in the US only have two weeks
    >> of paid leave PER YEAR I could scarcely believe it. He said yeah but
    >> we get paid public holidays.
    >>
    >> In the UK we get 4 to 5 weeks paid leave plus public holidays . Other
    >> countries like France get 5 to 6 weeks plus public holidays. Plus
    >> they only work 35 hours per week yet they are one of the most
    >> productive countries in the world.
    >>
    >> If this is true about the US, how can the average American live under
    >> such a system and not lose their mind???
    >>
    >> Life can't all be about work. It seems such a system would breed
    >> highly neurotic and hysterical people. I wouldn't want to live like
    >> that no matter how much they paid me.
    >By way of comparison, the average in Australia is 4-5 weeks vacation.
    >Plus Australia has free healthcare, funded pensions, a growing budget
    >surplus, & has been the best performing western economy for 5 years.
    >Ooh, and the best beaches.
    >gtoomey


But, on the other hand, you've got Rod Speed - so our quality of life
is still higher.

Frank F. Matthews

Torgari wrote:

    > Ted Ng wrote......

    >>"AJC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>news:[email protected]. ..

    >>>Don't worry, most Europeans are well aware of what life in the US is
    >>>really like.

    >>Indeed. That's why so many Europeans move here. 255,976 *legal* immigrants
    >
    >>from Europe alone in 2002. In just 4 years, over a million Europeans moved
    >>to the United States to seek permanent legal residency.

    >>http://www.migrationinformation.org

    > From Eastern Europe. The USA only attracts immigrants from 2nd and 3rd world shit holes.

Not really. The most recent european immigrant who I know came from the
UK. Oops perhaps you mean that the UK is 2nd world.

Frank F. Matthews

Rod Speed wrote:

    > Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >
    >>Ted Ng <ted_ng@[nospam].com> writes
    >
    >
    >>>It sucks, but I see in the news that business conditions are now
    >>>forcing Europe to cut back on the extensive social welfare system.
    >
    >
    >>It will never regress to the American extreme.
    >
    >
    > We'll see, particularly now with countrys like
    > Turkey and Poland becoming part of the EU etc.

Poland yes in the EU but it will be a long while, if ever, before Turkey
joins. In any case the EU isn't europe.

    >>>The wrenching changes the US has gone through over the
    >>>past decade, western Europe will also have to experience.
    >
    >
    >>Nobody imposed those changes on the U.S.;
    >
    >
    > Economic circumstances did, actually. Particularly with the manufacturing
    > industrys that couldnt hope to compete with places like China etc.
    >
    >
    >>it made most of the changes itself in search of ever-higher corporate profits.
    >
    >
    > Mindlessly superficial silly stuff, just like your completely silly claim
    > that the middle class is virtually non existent in the US now.
    >
    >
    >>>Is it fair for American and European workers to compete
    >>>against workers in other countries who make 1/10 the
    >>>salary and have no benefits or workplace safety regulations?
    >
    >
    >>It depends on whom you you ask.
    >
    >
    > And the consumers basically buy those products.
    >
    >
    >>>All I know is whenever I go into the store, I struggle to find anything that
    >>>isn't manufactured in China, stuff that we used to make. It makes me sad.
    >
    >
    > Welcome to the real world.
    >
    >
    >>It makes shareholders glad.
    >
    >
    > And the consumers too.
    >
    >
    >>They don't care about anyone else or about the
    >>future of the economy; they just want it all now.
    >
    >
    > More mindlessly superficial silly stuff.
    >
    > The US is STILL where virtually every technology is fully commercialised
    > first, everything from the car to heavy aircraft and radio, TV, movies, etc
    > initially, right thru to fast food, consumer credit, the PC and consumer
    > software thru to the internet etc in more recent times.
    >
    >

Rod Speed

Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Rod Speed writes:
    >> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote

    >>> There has been an increasing stratification of society in the U.S.,

    >> Nope, thats a myth.

    > I've seen it with my own eyes.

That was just another of hallucinations.

    > It used to be possible for a middle-class family to live quite well,

It still is, and plenty still do. Live better than their
middle class grandparents did at that age too.

    > and that was possible with only one person working.

It still is, and plenty still do.

    > That is no longer the case.

Lie.

    > I don't know anyone who is doing really
    > well any more in the so-called middle class,

You want to get out more, child.

    > even though they were all comfortable a few decades ago.

Hordes still are. The percentage that own their own
homes is at an all time high. Have fun explaining that.

    >>> reversing a trend towards equilibrium that apparently
    >>> culminated in the 1950s and 1960s. Today most of
    >>> the middle class is regressing to the lower classes,

    >> Another silly myth/lie.

    >> The percentage employed in the professions, doctors,
    >> teachers, engineers, etc etc etc, hasnt dropped.

    > But their standard of living has.

Another silly myth/lie.

    > Also, doctors and engineers are usually
    > upper middle-class (especially the former).

Irrelevant to that lie of yours about regressing to the lower classes.

    >>> while the most wealthy upper classes shrink and become wealthier.
    >>> Unconstrained capitalism and/or greed is probably the cause.

    >> Pity its a myth/lie run by leftys.

    >> The percentage who live in the house they
    >> own or are buying is higher than its ever been.

    > The percentage of what?

The percentage that own their own homes or are buying it, as
opposed to the percentage that are renting the home they occupy.

    > What percentage of their income do they pay for their homes?

Separate issue entirely. And plenty own their home outright too.

    >> And the size of the house has increased
    >> substantially too from say the 50s.

    > So has the price ... much more than the size.

Not a problem for those who bought it at lower prices.

Rod Speed

Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Rod Speed writes:

    >> That 'near poverty level' is pretty luxurious tho.

    > Not compared to the wealthy or the former middle class.

Another lie. And there is nothing 'former' about the middle class.

Still going strong.

    >>> and a nearly nonexistent middle class.

    >> Mindless drivel. The number who own or are buying their own homes
    >> is nothing even remotely resembling anything like 'nearly nonexistent'

    > There's much more to the former middle-class
    > standard of living than having a home.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out
of your predicament better than that pathetic effort.

Rod Speed

D. Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...

    > Canadians (of which I am one) also suffer under a system which requires them
    > to work far more than is healthy.

Not a shred of evidence of any health benefit
of more than 2 weeks vacation per year.

In fact Japan which is rather notorious for salarymen choosing to not
use all the vacation time they are entitled to do rather better on the
basic health stats than almost any other modern first world country.

    > Most people here also start off with 2 weeks vacation, which only slowly
    > increases after several years with a company.

Rod Speed

KM <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:2CZfd.184$%[email protected]...
    > D. Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote

    >> North Americans. Canadians (of which I am one) also suffer under a system
    >> which requires them to work far more than is healthy. Most people here also
    >> start off with 2 weeks vacation, which only slowly increases after several
    >> years with a company.

    > I'm glad someone pointed out that both Canada and the U.S. are in this
    > short-vacations culture together.

Japan in spades.

    > Catching up with the British, Australians, New Zealanders and Irish (all of
    > whom have or are preparing to adopt four-week minimums) won't be easy. There
    > was a private members' resolution introduced in Parliament in 2002 to raise
    > the federal minimum -- covering 10% of the workforce -- to three weeks. The
    > Liberals and the then Canadian Alliance joined forces to defeat it,

They clearly feel that there wouldnt be any real political backlash in doing
that.

    > with the Liberals claiming that nothing should be done without consulting the
    > provinces and the Alliance claiming that nothing should be done at all. Yet
    > the six smaller provinces won't dare move unless one of the Big Four moves
    > first, and the Big Four are under governments that won't touch the issue for
    > ideological reasons or because they're busy putting out fires.

    >>> If this is true about the US, how can the average American live under such a
    >>> system and not lose their mind???

    >> I guess it's because it's been that way for a long time and people expect it.

    > Not to mention that many North Americans don't know that two weeks per year is
    > abnormally low.

Thats distinctly arguable if you include Japan with North
America on that shorter end of vacation entitlements.

    > If more than a small percentage of North Americans knew the extra vacation
    > time they're rewarded after five or more years would be considered less than
    > or just barely the legal minimum in many other modern countries, this would be
    > a red-hot political issue.

I doubt it. Its mostly a cultural difference.

Japan in spades. They often dont take what they are legally entitled to,
with the govt encouraging them to take what they are legally entitled to.

    > Most probably figure that if it's two weeks here then it must be two weeks
    > everywhere, so there's little sense of deprivation.

And its distinctly arguable that they would prefer the european approach.

Rod Speed

Torgari <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected] t...
    > Ted Ng wrote......
    >> AJC <[email protected]> wrote

    >>> Don't worry, most Europeans are well aware of what life in the US is really
    >>> like.

    >> Indeed. That's why so many Europeans move here. 255,976 *legal*
    >> immigrants from Europe alone in 2002. In just 4 years, over a million
    >> Europeans moved to the United States to seek permanent legal residency.

    >>http://www.migrationinformation.org

    > From Eastern Europe. The USA only attracts
    > immigrants from 2nd and 3rd world shit holes.

Lie. That site has a breakdown by country and you're lying.

Rod Speed

"Mxsmanic" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > "Ted Ng" <ted_ng@[nospam].com> writes:
    >> Indeed. That's why so many Europeans move here. 255,976 *legal* immigrants
    >> from Europe alone in 2002. In just 4 years, over a million Europeans moved
    >> to the United States to seek permanent legal residency.

    > From which countries?

The site he cited lists that at any detail level you want.

    > And what _percentage_ of the total European population is that?

Completely irrelevant.

Rod Speed

Frank F. Matthews <[email protected]> wrote
in message news:[email protected]...
    > Rod Speed wrote:
    >> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote
    >>> Ted Ng <ted_ng@[nospam].com> writes

    >>>> It sucks, but I see in the news that business conditions are now
    >>>> forcing Europe to cut back on the extensive social welfare system.

    >>> It will never regress to the American extreme.

    >> We'll see, particularly now with countrys like
    >> Turkey and Poland becoming part of the EU etc.

    > Poland yes in the EU but it will be a long while, if ever, before Turkey
    > joins.

I used the word like for a reason.

    > In any case the EU isn't europe.

Never said it was. It is however a very substantial part of europe now.
And a part that has the most extensive social welfare system on the whole.

    >>>> The wrenching changes the US has gone through over the
    >>>> past decade, western Europe will also have to experience.

    >>> Nobody imposed those changes on the U.S.;

    >> Economic circumstances did, actually. Particularly with the manufacturing
    >> industrys that couldnt hope to compete with places like China etc.

    >>> it made most of the changes itself in search of ever-higher corporate
    >>> profits.

    >> Mindlessly superficial silly stuff, just like your completely silly claim
    >> that the middle class is virtually non existent in the US now.

    >>>> Is it fair for American and European workers to compete
    >>>> against workers in other countries who make 1/10 the
    >>>> salary and have no benefits or workplace safety regulations?

    >>> It depends on whom you you ask.

    >> And the consumers basically buy those products.

    >>>>All I know is whenever I go into the store, I struggle to find anything that
    >>>>isn't manufactured in China, stuff that we used to make. It makes me sad.
    >> Welcome to the real world.
    >>>It makes shareholders glad.
    >> And the consumers too.
    >>>They don't care about anyone else or about the
    >>>future of the economy; they just want it all now.
    >> More mindlessly superficial silly stuff.
    >> The US is STILL where virtually every technology is fully commercialised
    >> first, everything from the car to heavy aircraft and radio, TV, movies, etc
    >> initially, right thru to fast food, consumer credit, the PC and consumer
    >> software thru to the internet etc in more recent times.
    >

Rod Speed

Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Rod Speed writes:
    >> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote
    >>> Richard Cline writes:

    >>>> It is interesting that many of the best and brightest
    >>>> people immigrate to the US for their career betterment.

    >>> They used to. They don't necessarily do that anymore.

    >> Wrong.

    > I disagree.

Irrelevant. http://www.migrationinformation.org/ proves you're wrong.

    > Nowadays they are likely to stay a few years and then return home.

Wrong.

    > Some come just for an education (because it is easier to
    > obtain in the U.S., albeit not necessarily of better quality).

And FAR more move for their career betterment.

Rod Speed

Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Rod Speed writes
    >> Mxsmanic <[email protected]> wrote
    >>> Cindy hamilton writes

    >>>> There's nothing stopping me from taking my vacation days,
    >>>> except I don't want to. I have plenty of time to do everything
    >>>> I want. I don't have any children, so my time is pretty much my own.

    >>> Let's hope you continue to see it this way when
    >>> you look back on your life a few decades from now.

    >> Quite a few who like what they are being
    >> paid to do dont change their view on that stuff.

    >>> Cardiologists will tell you that no heart patient ever
    >>> says "I wish I had spent more time at the office."

    >> Irrelevant, most of us dont end up needing a cardiologist
    >> and many who do do so because they smoke etc.

    > Heart disease is the leading cause of death in developed countries.

Irrelevant to the amount of time spent at work.

Much of that is due to smoking.

Japan has in fact a significantly lower heart disease rate than
many modern first world countrys, and they tend to spend more
time at work than in most other modern first world countrys too.

The Real Bev

Magda wrote:

    > ... From what I've seen lately, the norm on a new job is a week or two weeks the
    > ... first year, on an accrual basis, and usually some waiting period before you
    > ... could take any. In the dotcom days, it wasn't unusual to see three or four
    > ... weeks given to a new employee.
    >
    > Your "sick time" is the most cruel thing I've heard. Who is the perfectly healthy imbecile
    > who invented that ? If you get ill for, say, a month or two, you lose your job ?
    > The could as soon put robots everywhere and let the people die like flies...

They're working on it. OTOH, when I was let go (canned actually, but I
fought like hell) after 12 years I forfeited over 700 hours of unused
sick leave. That's one hell of a lot of skiing I could have done on
"mental health days." What an idiot I was :-(

--
Cheers,
Bev
================================================== ====================
"Steve Balmer, CEO of Microsoft[0], recently referred to LINUX as a
cancer. Unsurprisingly, that's incorrect; LINUX was released on Augusîò©5th, 1991 and is therefore a virgo." -- Kevin L