- Joined
- Jul 31, 2010
- Messages
- 5,395
- Reaction score
- 2,782
- Location
- Minneapolis
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
My argument has not busted. Not even scratched.
But your obviously slanted opinion is noted. Unfortunately for you, there are no figures to back your claim. California alone has lost over 30% of it's manufacturing jobs over the last 20 years. For example, where there were once 4 automobile assembly plants in the state, there is now only one, and Tesla hardly counts.
If you were to apply logic to your feelings, you would discover it is not possible for "rich people", management and the Koch Brothers to pay themselves enough money to account for the loss of good middle income jobs.
As I suggested, what happens when the topic of regulatory incrementalism is brought up, demagogues like yourself step in and start finger pointing to absurd culprits, without applying any real thought to resolving the issue.
First, most of what you're arguing against are the points I cited as those made by the writers of the article. I think you missed that everything in my first post - except the beginning and last paragraph - was a summary of the article for the benefit of the OP, who obviously didn't read it. I would place a large wager that you didn't read it either.
Second, what the article addresses is that other countries have a growing middle class while ours is declining. Canada has just caught up to us. While the loss of manufacturing jobs certainly is terrible for our nation, how losses that happened 20 years ago can account for what is happening now escapes me. Our manufacturing industry is growing, Canada's is in decline, yet their middle class is growing and ours is in decline. If your brain can disregard those trends and yet again repeat "it's tax codes and loss of manufacturing jobs," then there is no reasonable discussion to be had with you.