• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is it All that Difficult to Enter the Middle-Class or Above in the Current US System?

Is it All that Difficult to Enter the Middle-Class or Above in the Current US System?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 31.3%

  • No

    Votes: 18 56.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Total voters
    32
xMathFanx

xMathFanx

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 21, 2017
Messages
345
Reaction score
85
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Is it All that Difficult to Enter the Middle-Class or Above in the Current American System?

Regardless of race, gender, class background, family structure/background, ect. ect, is it all that difficult to enter the Middle-Class or above in the current American system. That is, is there any genuine need to live a life of poverty in America (for an extended period of time--on the scale of decades)?

Note: The Middle-Class in 2016 defined by Pew Research Center was those earning 67-200% of the median income (per household), or $39,560-$118,080.

(Due to character restrictions, see my longer post immediately following the construction of this debate in order to give members more "food for thought" on the matter)
 
Part I:

Now, given our current system, everyone has enough opportunity to find a way to attend a College for an Engineering, Statistics, Computer Science, Business, ect. degree that would potentially set them up for at least decent to good paying jobs after graduation. Even a completely poor person has an opportunity for this since there are Government Stafford Loans that everyone qualifies for, regardless of credit history, no co-signer needed, and is enough to first attend a Community College plus apartment (if you work part-time also) and later to a State School program or even to a University of Florida type school (depending on the tuition of the big state school program in one's respective state). From there, PhD programs are free, in fact, they pay you a stipend to attend. This is enough to set someone up for life (if used wisely--and they can ultimately get into nearly any major University by Grad School regardless of what they are confined to/able to attend for Undergraduate degree). Here are important points to note about the University system in the US (in regards to this topic):

1. There is a clear hierarchy in Academia, and it is wise to understand the "Game" in order to best play it
2. No matter what your previous grades/schooling have been like, there are ways you can still get into virtually any level program for your Undergrad still (including the Elite level schools)
3. No matter what Undergrad program you go to, there are ways to go to virtually any Grad School Program
3. Even if your financial resources are limited, there are ways to get into good schools and be able to pay for it all the way up through PhD
4. The level of school you attend is going to greatly effect how difficult the courses are, and thus the GPA you will be able to get
a) Community College will be at a very reasonable level of difficulty as will a Public State School Program
b) A school around the 100-150 level (national rank) will definitely be noticeably more challenging than CC or State School (for the same program)
c) A school around the 50 level will be very challenging and completely different than CC or State School level
d) A school at the Elite level (roughly the top 20) would require one to be at an elite level for that stage in order to pass (top few% or so of people inclined for that technical subject at that level)
5. In the modern era, there are countless resources available that thoroughly teach any given technical subject area for free or a limited fee, and would prove to be an invaluable asset in learning said material (either for formal training/school or self-study).

Now, if a person's true interests lie in Art History however since they are coming from a poor economic background, one would have enough money (if used wisely) to first get a degree in a practical subject (e.g. Business, Engineering, ect.) that would set them up with a decent/good paying job which they could function as a stepping stone and safety net that allows them to go back to College for the subject matter they are truly interested in and pursue that career path henceforth.
 
Part II:

This is to say, although the current system is far from optimal and certainly does not have "equality of opportunity" in a strict sense, there currently are ways to reach the highest level outcomes even from the bottom of US society for anyone. Now, Stafford Loans are flawed (in my view) since the amount of money you are eligible to receive is only compatible with a State-School of low college ranking (unless you happen to live in a state such as Florida where the major Public University were only about $7000 tuition per year). However, if Stafford Loans (Government Loans) were expanded to say the Graduate school level of $18,000-20,000 per year (rather than $12,000) than regardless of State one is in, family financial background, ect. ect., any person would be afforded "Equality of Opportunity" as it pertained to going to College as they would have the means to attend a Major University for their Undergrad which opens the door for the highest possibilities after that point (i.e. to follow ones intellectual interests as a career path and/or acquire the credentials needed to land a high paying job--depending on what the individual values more). Furthermore, Stafford Loans apply to Trade Schools as well. Therefore, any person who is savvy enough to play the "game" wisely could either (A) attain even the highest levels of education in Academia (B ) attend a Trade School & get solid job training to become an Electrician, Plumber, Carpenter, ect. ect. which typically is 1-2 year programs that cost between $1000-$10,000 total and sets them up with a job which on average earn about $50,000 a year (a solid income).

Now, one of the staples of America is (ostensibly) the open/fair opportunity for all citizens toward economic/class mobility (up & down the latter) based upon how savvy they are at "playing the game" as well as how hard they are willing to work for their "spot". Stafford Loans (as current) go a long way toward fulfilling that "staple social contract" of America & if it were expanded just a bit more than currently, then it would completely satisfy that "social contract". Also, this would eliminate all arguments to the contrary--as in, nobody would be able to claim that "the system is holding them down perpetually" as it would be overtly false. Note, this also wouldn't cost much more at all compared to now, as it is only a several thousand dollar extension that (very likely) most people would not be savvy enough to capitalize on anyway. Compare that to the "Free College" program promoted by the Social Dems. that would be mandated in tax dollars, regardless of who is or is not using the system (which would cost orders of magnitude more money to fund in tax-payers' dollars). This would actually objectively create quite a "fair" socio-economic system as everyone has equal access to this opportunity regardless of race/class/gender/family structure/ect. ect. & it would be up to them (the individual) to do with it what they will (Note: it already is like that--however, as I explained previously, simply expanding this ever so slightly more would make an enormous difference (for reasons I explained)).
Here is a link to the Stafford Loan program in the US:

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/l...dized#how-much

Remember, the Classes are defined by a three-person household standard. That is, a married couple and child (or less--e.g. independent individual, ect.). Now, a household with one member that had a Trade degree (and corresponding Profession) as an Electrician, Plumber, Carpenter, ect. would make on average $50,000 and therefore would be part of the middle-class. If two members of the household had a similar background (or above), then they would be at the 6-figure income mark.
This begs the question, what keeps people in lifelong poverty? It is certainly understandable to go through significant rough-patches at a point or points (particularly & obviously when in their youth and still attempting to establish oneself, or being laid off from a job/position, and many other potential circumstances, ect. ect.). However, if one were approaching 40 years old for instance, and below the poverty line their entire life, why not utilize government loans and attend a Trade school for $1000-$10,000 total for and within 1-2 years they could be earning on average $50,000? Or, likewise, attend College for the first time or go back for a practical degree that would earn them a solid income?
 
xMathFanx said:
Is it All that Difficult to Enter the Middle-Class or Above in the Current American System?

Regardless of race, gender, class background, family structure/background, ect. ect, is it all that difficult to enter the Middle-Class or above in the current American system. That is, is there any genuine need to live a life of poverty in America (for an extended period of time--on the scale of decades)?

Note: The Middle-Class in 2016 defined by Pew Research Center was those earning 67-200% of the median income (per household), or $39,560-$118,080.

(Due to character restrictions, see my longer post immediately following the construction of this debate in order to give members more "food for thought" on the matter)
Click to expand...

Entering the middle class for all races and genders is relatively easy if the proper procedure is followed. Don't have kids until you're married, acquire a high school degree, and find a full time job. If you do these three things you will not be in poverty.

The issue is we have a culture currently in America which pushes rampant materialism. A lot of people are horrible at deferring gratification and there is also a lot of entitlement in all generations. There are also arguments for immigration taking lower wage jobs or labor jobs which might also impact the ability for people to find work. Over saturation of college degrees AND the propaganda that is preached to young people these days that they should "pursue their dreams" when "their dreams" are not always a realistic career or will ever find them any significant work for the price they pay for a degree.

I think another big issue is ambition. With the way the political environment is with talking heads preaching the end of the world every other day over sometimes completely arbitrary news points doesn't help. Video games, cell phones, social media, and a very hedonistic sex culture have atomized peoples ability to feel and aspire for greatness into oblivion.

Ultimately, in my opinion, the biggest issue is not the economy itself but a loss of culture and values.
 
I can see how it's easy for the middle class and the wealthy to maintain at least a middle-class lifestyle. I can see how those who are impoverished can see the pursuit of the middle class lifestyle as futile or more difficult.
 
reinoe said:
I can see how it's easy for the middle class and the wealthy to maintain at least a middle-class lifestyle. I can see how those who are impoverished can see the pursuit of the middle class lifestyle as futile or more difficult.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow the second half of your argument. My question refers to people on the scale of decades and/or generational cycle of being below the Middle-Class line. Can you elaborate on your position a bit more (before I respond)?
 
It is incredibly easy to reach middle class. No kids before marriage, graduate high school, get a job. 98% of people that follow those steps break out of poverty.

We live in a society where you can make millions of dollars from playing sports, writing a play, or a catchy song. There are people making an incredible amount of money simply playing video games. One guy made more than a hundred thousand dollars writing a blank book.

The idea you can't make it in America is pretty ridiculous.
 
Nap said:
It is incredibly easy to reach middle class. No kids before marriage, graduate high school, get a job. 98% of people that follow those steps break out of poverty.

We live in a society where you can make millions of dollars from playing sports, writing a play, or a catchy song. There are people making an incredible amount of money simply playing video games. One guy made more than a hundred thousand dollars writing a blank book.

The idea you can't make it in America is pretty ridiculous.
Click to expand...

While I agree with many of your observations, there is actually quite a substantial gap between "breaking the Poverty Line" (which is defined as $11,500 for an individual & $24,000 for a family) and entering the Middle-Class or above. If one works at the local Grocery Store, ect. ect. ect. then they will in fact have quite a difficult time monetarily (even if they are above the poverty line and meet the criteria you cited). However, my point is, there is no need to work at a Grocery Store type job indefinitely (even though there may very well be points in ones life where it is necessary--I cant see the rational for living like this for decades if further income is needed and deemed a significant problem in ones life (for the reasons I discussed previously))
 
Koke;
Entering the middle class for all races and genders is relatively easy if the proper procedure is followed. Don't have kids until you're married, acquire a high school degree, and find a full time job. If you do these three things you will not be in poverty.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Well said.
 
xMathFanx said:
Is it All that Difficult to Enter the Middle-Class or Above in the Current American System?

Regardless of race, gender, class background, family structure/background, ect. ect, is it all that difficult to enter the Middle-Class or above in the current American system. That is, is there any genuine need to live a life of poverty in America (for an extended period of time--on the scale of decades)?

Note: The Middle-Class in 2016 defined by Pew Research Center was those earning 67-200% of the median income (per household), or $39,560-$118,080.

(Due to character restrictions, see my longer post immediately following the construction of this debate in order to give members more "food for thought" on the matter)
Click to expand...

I think you under estimate the struggle.
For instance if someone was 33 years old with a wife and kid. Maybe you have a full time minimum wage job $18k and your wife has a part time minimum wage job $7k. So their family is holding down $25k This is considered poverty but most people would consider them a functional part of the lower class and at least they’re not a huge drain on public resources. Now you’re talking about that family that’s struggling to pay 2 years’ worth of trade school tuition and book costs. To attend school he may have to find a new job due to conflict in hours which can be hard to do. Full time student and full time job is hard to pull off when your older, you first have to have a job that you can work those hours outside of the class schedule (which is not like online school) and now your sacrificing sleep to pull it off, seeing your child and spending time with them for 2 years being hampered is hard to put up with, the stress on the marriage cuz you’re not able to help her out like your used to. So for a lot of people they have to drop down to part time work to make it work, so you’re asking for someone to pay for school and reduce their wages which is hard to do when you have a child. Then once you’re done with school which probably takes you longer then the 2 years due to classes conflicting with other classes or your job or you not able to take the full 15 credit per semester. SO maybe it takes you 3 years to finish, now you’re ready to look for a job with no relative job experience and very limited job openings in your geographical area.
So putting your family thru 3 years of hell and struggling more than ever to then spend 2 years finding job just to start off at the bottom of that rung we have 5 years of debt to make $30k. Once you spent a few years in your job u start making what everyone else makes. It could take you 7 years to reach that $50k mark and all that you've been thru and put others thru is the reason so little people chose do it. Plus losing any government benefits from being poor has to be accounted for and couple that with drugs like marijuana that makes you lazy and complacent.
 
xMathFanx said:
While I agree with many of your observations, there is actually quite a substantial gap between "breaking the Poverty Line" (which is defined as $11,500 for an individual & $24,000 for a family) and entering the Middle-Class or above. If one works at the local Grocery Store, ect. ect. ect. then they will in fact have quite a difficult time monetarily (even if they are above the poverty line and meet the criteria you cited). However, my point is, there is no need to work at a Grocery Store type job indefinitely (even though there may very well be points in ones life where it is necessary--I cant see the rational for living like this for decades if further income is needed and deemed a significant problem in ones life (for the reasons I discussed previously))
Click to expand...

Someones income is based mostly on there education at least to a degree (no pune intended) but when (33 percent) of immigrants which make up 14% of our population and native population of (12 percent) dont have a high school diploma how are they going to make double the minimum wage?

Then look at job structures and wages, example fast food joints, restuarants, retail stores these make up big parts of our working class. You have 75% (workers) of them making minimum wage, 17% (leads and supervisors) making a few bucks more then minimum wage, 7% (supervisors and assitant managers) barely making the middle class, and just 1% (store managers) actually making middle class wages. You find this percentage in any of the jobs above.

I believe if someone doesnt get the education to succeed into the middle class or higher by the age of 25 the percentages of them being able to later in their life is extremley low. Which leads to a life time in the poor or barely making middle class, then gentically what held them back from pursuing that education in the first place is passed on and then taught to them by their parents which leads to the next generation of kids living the same poor life style.
 
Koke said:
Entering the middle class for all races and genders is relatively easy if the proper procedure is followed. Don't have kids until you're married, acquire a high school degree, and find a full time job. If you do these three things you will not be in poverty.
Click to expand...

This! If young people would follow this track poverty would virtually disappear.

The issue is we have a culture currently in America which pushes rampant materialism. A lot of people are horrible at deferring gratification and there is also a lot of entitlement in all generations. There are also arguments for immigration taking lower wage jobs or labor jobs which might also impact the ability for people to find work. Over saturation of college degrees AND the propaganda that is preached to young people these days that they should "pursue their dreams" when "their dreams" are not always a realistic career or will ever find them any significant work for the price they pay for a degree.

I think another big issue is ambition. With the way the political environment is with talking heads preaching the end of the world every other day over sometimes completely arbitrary news points doesn't help. Video games, cell phones, social media, and a very hedonistic sex culture have atomized peoples ability to feel and aspire for greatness into oblivion.

Ultimately, in my opinion, the biggest issue is not the economy itself but a loss of culture and values.
Click to expand...


I've seen a symptom of this in action many times when I volunteer at the local soup kitchen. A handful of single mothers will always be there with their teen children (we're very happy to feed them), but the kids wear athletic shoes that run $200+ and smart phones they play on the whole time they're eating.

It's about immediate gratification these days, and poor choices.
 
jdog21 said:
Someones income is based mostly on there education at least to a degree (no pune intended) but when (33 percent) of immigrants which make up 14% of our population and native population of (12 percent) dont have a high school diploma how are they going to make double the minimum wage?

Then look at job structures and wages, example fast food joints, restuarants, retail stores these make up big parts of our working class. You have 75% (workers) of them making minimum wage, 17% (leads and supervisors) making a few bucks more then minimum wage, 7% (supervisors and assitant managers) barely making the middle class, and just 1% (store managers) actually making middle class wages. You find this percentage in any of the jobs above.

I believe if someone doesnt get the education to succeed into the middle class or higher by the age of 25 the percentages of them being able to later in their life is extremley low. Which leads to a life time in the poor or barely making middle class, then gentically what held them back from pursuing that education in the first place is passed on and then taught to them by their parents which leads to the next generation of kids living the same poor life style.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, our higher education system isn't all its cracked up to be. If a kid wants to enter the sciences, sure, he needs college, but kids are coming out of college today with 4-year liberal arts degrees only to find jobs that barely allow them to pay back their loans.

We need a different system -- trade schools -- apprenticeships, whatever it takes to help the kids who don't want to attend (and won't be helped by) college.
 
jdog21 said:
I think you under estimate the struggle.
For instance if someone was 33 years old with a wife and kid. Maybe you have a full time minimum wage job $18k and your wife has a part time minimum wage job $7k. So their family is holding down $25k This is considered poverty but most people would consider them a functional part of the lower class and at least they’re not a huge drain on public resources. Now you’re talking about that family that’s struggling to pay 2 years’ worth of trade school tuition and book costs. To attend school he may have to find a new job due to conflict in hours which can be hard to do. Full time student and full time job is hard to pull off when your older, you first have to have a job that you can work those hours outside of the class schedule (which is not like online school) and now your sacrificing sleep to pull it off, seeing your child and spending time with them for 2 years being hampered is hard to put up with, the stress on the marriage cuz you’re not able to help her out like your used to. So for a lot of people they have to drop down to part time work to make it work, so you’re asking for someone to pay for school and reduce their wages which is hard to do when you have a child. Then once you’re done with school which probably takes you longer then the 2 years due to classes conflicting with other classes or your job or you not able to take the full 15 credit per semester. SO maybe it takes you 3 years to finish, now you’re ready to look for a job with no relative job experience and very limited job openings in your geographical area.
So putting your family thru 3 years of hell and struggling more than ever to then spend 2 years finding job just to start off at the bottom of that rung we have 5 years of debt to make $30k. Once you spent a few years in your job u start making what everyone else makes. It could take you 7 years to reach that $50k mark and all that you've been thru and put others thru is the reason so little people chose do it. Plus losing any government benefits from being poor has to be accounted for and couple that with drugs like marijuana that makes you lazy and complacent.
Click to expand...

Here is an idea, don't try and raise a family on a minimum wage income. Minimum wage is for entry level work and teenager after school and summer jobs. If you have a family and don't have any particular skills then it is likely you need to quit flipping burgers and try to get into construction or some other job that pays more than min wage.
 
xMathFanx said:
Part II:

This is to say, although the current system is far from optimal and certainly does not have "equality of opportunity" in a strict sense, there currently are ways to reach the highest level outcomes even from the bottom of US society for anyone. Now, Stafford Loans are flawed (in my view) since the amount of money you are eligible to receive is only compatible with a State-School of low college ranking (unless you happen to live in a state such as Florida where the major Public University were only about $7000 tuition per year). However, if Stafford Loans (Government Loans) were expanded to say the Graduate school level of $18,000-20,000 per year (rather than $12,000) than regardless of State one is in, family financial background, ect. ect., any person would be afforded "Equality of Opportunity" as it pertained to going to College as they would have the means to attend a Major University for their Undergrad which opens the door for the highest possibilities after that point (i.e. to follow ones intellectual interests as a career path and/or acquire the credentials needed to land a high paying job--depending on what the individual values more). Furthermore, Stafford Loans apply to Trade Schools as well. Therefore, any person who is savvy enough to play the "game" wisely could either (A) attain even the highest levels of education in Academia (B ) attend a Trade School & get solid job training to become an Electrician, Plumber, Carpenter, ect. ect. which typically is 1-2 year programs that cost between $1000-$10,000 total and sets them up with a job which on average earn about $50,000 a year (a solid income).

Now, one of the staples of America is (ostensibly) the open/fair opportunity for all citizens toward economic/class mobility (up & down the latter) based upon how savvy they are at "playing the game" as well as how hard they are willing to work for their "spot". Stafford Loans (as current) go a long way toward fulfilling that "staple social contract" of America & if it were expanded just a bit more than currently, then it would completely satisfy that "social contract". Also, this would eliminate all arguments to the contrary--as in, nobody would be able to claim that "the system is holding them down perpetually" as it would be overtly false. Note, this also wouldn't cost much more at all compared to now, as it is only a several thousand dollar extension that (very likely) most people would not be savvy enough to capitalize on anyway. Compare that to the "Free College" program promoted by the Social Dems. that would be mandated in tax dollars, regardless of who is or is not using the system (which would cost orders of magnitude more money to fund in tax-payers' dollars). This would actually objectively create quite a "fair" socio-economic system as everyone has equal access to this opportunity regardless of race/class/gender/family structure/ect. ect. & it would be up to them (the individual) to do with it what they will (Note: it already is like that--however, as I explained previously, simply expanding this ever so slightly more would make an enormous difference (for reasons I explained)).
Here is a link to the Stafford Loan program in the US:

https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/l...dized#how-much

Remember, the Classes are defined by a three-person household standard. That is, a married couple and child (or less--e.g. independent individual, ect.). Now, a household with one member that had a Trade degree (and corresponding Profession) as an Electrician, Plumber, Carpenter, ect. would make on average $50,000 and therefore would be part of the middle-class. If two members of the household had a similar background (or above), then they would be at the 6-figure income mark.
This begs the question, what keeps people in lifelong poverty? It is certainly understandable to go through significant rough-patches at a point or points (particularly & obviously when in their youth and still attempting to establish oneself, or being laid off from a job/position, and many other potential circumstances, ect. ect.). However, if one were approaching 40 years old for instance, and below the poverty line their entire life, why not utilize government loans and attend a Trade school for $1000-$10,000 total for and within 1-2 years they could be earning on average $50,000? Or, likewise, attend College for the first time or go back for a practical degree that would earn them a solid income?
Click to expand...



You do not need a college education to make it into the middle class. It depends on what you are interested in doing with your life. There are trades that are very lucrative to get into. College isn't for everyone.
 
Nap said:
Here is an idea, don't try and raise a family on a minimum wage income. Minimum wage is for entry level work and teenager after school and summer jobs. If you have a family and don't have any particular skills then it is likely you need to quit flipping burgers and try to get into construction or some other job that pays more than min wage.
Click to expand...
Construction is hard to get into, most want u to know a skill before hand plus a lot of contract work is done under the table and with so many illegal immigrants its hard to get it

HowardBThiname said:
Unfortunately, our higher education system isn't all its cracked up to be. If a kid wants to enter the sciences, sure, he needs college, but kids are coming out of college today with 4-year liberal arts degrees only to find jobs that barely allow them to pay back their loans.

We need a different system -- trade schools -- apprenticeships, whatever it takes to help the kids who don't want to attend (and won't be helped by) college.
Click to expand...
I agree the promis being sold doesnt fit the reality of most people getting a degree, that degree will help them later in life 10 years down the road once you start moving up in management. I belive we need a cultural awakening so people realize to honor trade schools after high school and apprenticeships are nice but they are dwindling in the amount of people that are offering them. Plus the rise of tech and the rise of internships may lead to a nice life down the road it does nothing for these young adults in the short run and people who have families are then turned off by this.
 
No matter how much I earned during the course of my life, I have always had class.

It's that modesty thing which was always hard to achieve :lamo
 
jdog21 said:
Construction is hard to get into, most want u to know a skill before hand plus a lot of contract work is done under the table and with so many illegal immigrants its hard to get it


I agree the promis being sold doesnt fit the reality of most people getting a degree, that degree will help them later in life 10 years down the road once you start moving up in management. I belive we need a cultural awakening so people realize to honor trade schools after high school and apprenticeships are nice but they are dwindling in the amount of people that are offering them. Plus the rise of tech and the rise of internships may lead to a nice life down the road it does nothing for these young adults in the short run and people who have families are then turned off by this.
Click to expand...

My dad owns his own concrete company and my uncle a remodeling service, they are practically always hiring because they have trouble finding workers that will actually work. My contractor I use seems to be the same way. There is quite the turnover here in MS.
 
Nap said:
My dad owns his own concrete company and my uncle a remodeling service, they are practically always hiring because they have trouble finding workers that will actually work. My contractor I use seems to be the same way. There is quite the turnover here in MS.
Click to expand...

Looks like they need to up their labor wages
 
xMathFanx said:
While I agree with many of your observations, there is actually quite a substantial gap between "breaking the Poverty Line" (which is defined as $11,500 for an individual & $24,000 for a family) and entering the Middle-Class or above. If one works at the local Grocery Store, ect. ect. ect. then they will in fact have quite a difficult time monetarily (even if they are above the poverty line and meet the criteria you cited). However, my point is, there is no need to work at a Grocery Store type job indefinitely (even though there may very well be points in ones life where it is necessary--I cant see the rational for living like this for decades if further income is needed and deemed a significant problem in ones life (for the reasons I discussed previously))
Click to expand...

ASSUMPTION - I am not discussing people who have a physical or mental restriction on working, that is another topic.

The federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Using the salary rule of thumb (double the hourly rate times 1000 to create annual salary) that would mean a minimum wage worker in this country working 40 hours a week earns about $14,500 per year. If said person were to marry and not have children, their household income would be $29,000 per year. In other words the federal minimum wage keeps all Americans above the poverty line. Summary - anyone in poverty is not working full time.

All of that is really a bunch of bunk anyway, because even fast food joints in my neck of the woods can't hire unskilled high school kids (no disparity intended) for less than $10 buck an hour ($20K per year). Factor in that over half of the states have a higher minimum wage than the feds and staying in "poverty" by the definition you provided is actually pretty hard to do. A full time job automatically puts a person in the lower income category.

Note that I am not arguing for or against the minimum wage, just pointing out that getting out of poverty is mathematically as easy as getting a full time job.

To answer the main question - post 1, 2, & 3 cover some pretty effective methods of getting into the middle class - one method not mentioned would be to enter a trade. Learn how to operate a screwdriver and/or a hammer and you can easily earn $50K plus per year and put the idea of poverty well behind you without ever going to college.
 
jdog21 said:
Looks like they need to up their labor wages
Click to expand...

The pay rate is rarely the issue. Many will work when they feel like it - paying them more per hour/day just means that they can get by working fewer days per month (or hours per day due to "car trouble" or whatever lame excuse sounded good that day) and drink/drug more days per month.

Most framing crews that I have worked on had at least one person that would not last 3 months. They always claimed that some mysterious outside force is conspiring to keep (just?) them from making it to the job site on time and/or every work day.
 
Nuber said:
ASSUMPTION - I am not discussing people who have a physical or mental restriction on working, that is another topic.

The federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Using the salary rule of thumb (double the hourly rate times 1000 to create annual salary) that would mean a minimum wage worker in this country working 40 hours a week earns about $14,500 per year. If said person were to marry and not have children, their household income would be $29,000 per year. In other words the federal minimum wage keeps all Americans above the poverty line. Summary - anyone in poverty is not working full time.

All of that is really a bunch of bunk anyway, because even fast food joints in my neck of the woods can't hire unskilled high school kids (no disparity intended) for less than $10 buck an hour ($20K per year). Factor in that over half of the states have a higher minimum wage than the feds and staying in "poverty" by the definition you provided is actually pretty hard to do. A full time job automatically puts a person in the lower income category.

Note that I am not arguing for or against the minimum wage, just pointing out that getting out of poverty is mathematically as easy as getting a full time job.

To answer the main question - post 1, 2, & 3 cover some pretty effective methods of getting into the middle class - one method not mentioned would be to enter a trade. Learn how to operate a screwdriver and/or a hammer and you can easily earn $50K plus per year and put the idea of poverty well behind you without ever going to college.
Click to expand...

That (bolded above) assertion means that acquiring the amazing skill of being able to wield a basic hand tool (or two) will get you hired at $24/hour ($192/day or $50K/year). I offer to pay my help about half that and have no difficulty finding (basic hand tool qualified) takers.
 
Nuber said:
ASSUMPTION - I am not discussing people who have a physical or mental restriction on working, that is another topic.
Click to expand...

?

Nuber said:
The federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Using the salary rule of thumb (double the hourly rate times 1000 to create annual salary) that would mean a minimum wage worker in this country working 40 hours a week earns about $14,500 per year. If said person were to marry and not have children, their household income would be $29,000 per year. In other words the federal minimum wage keeps all Americans above the poverty line. Summary - anyone in poverty is not working full time.
Click to expand...

Agreed, however (as I explained) there is quite a gap between the Poverty line and the Middle-Class. Such a person would not be close to the Middle-Class

Nuber said:
To answer the main question - post 1, 2, & 3 cover some pretty effective methods of getting into the middle class - one method not mentioned would be to enter a trade
Click to expand...

The potential to enter a Trade School & thus Profession was central to my argument (in my larger 2-part post).
 
holbritter said:
You do not need a college education to make it into the middle class. It depends on what you are interested in doing with your life. There are trades that are very lucrative to get into. College isn't for everyone.
Click to expand...

Agreed. In fact, what you stated was central to my argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom