Friday, October 5, 2007

Thoughts on Racism

It’s a sad fact that racism exists at all, but the fact is that there is prejudice throughout the human race, worldwide. Personally, I don’t discriminate based on race. I have friends that are all ages, colors, religions, shapes, sizes, etc. I base my opinions on personality, attitude, and the way people present themselves. If faced with a well-dressed, clean cut black man or a raggy looking white teenager with attitude, I would be leery of the teenager.

Of course, I’m not naive enough to think racism doesn’t exist. But like I mentioned earlier, there is prejudice of all kinds; it has been shown that thin, attractive people earn more than unattractive or overweight people…

All around the world, people who are genetically very similar kill one another because they are from different tribes or factions, or believe in different religions. I agree that in many cases, it is due to jealousy and mistrust. And I believe the same applies to racism here in America. It’s hard to believe people still think like this in this day and age, but they’re out there.

When I see white supremacists, etc. it sickens me, but it is a perfect example of ignorance. The recent incident with Imus (I’m not a fan) brought to the forefront the problem of “acceptable” prejudice and lack of respect for others in hip hop and the entertainment communities.

I don’t know if it would be accurate to say racism is ignored in America. But I do think that our society is becoming desensitized to things like violence against those who believe differently than we do, or stereotyping, etc. After 9-11, many Americans are suspicious of Muslims and/or foreigners, which is purely reactionary.

I believe it’s everyone’s responsibility to speak up when racist (or hurtful) remarks of any kind are made. It is up to all of us to teach our children that we are all human. Respect is not deserved because of the color of one’s skin or their birthright. Instead it is EARNED and we all have the ability to earn respect and our place in life. As a society, we have to decide that prejudice against any segment of the population is wrong. There are those that feel racism is wrong, but will treat homosexuals like the scourge of the earth. This is wrong. Prejudice is prejudice. No amount of bible-thumping or cross-burning or hood-wearing will change that fact.

I was once at my children’s school and a group of children were picking on one girl until she cried (it wasn’t racist-just hurtful, bullying). I stopped them and spoke to them all. I asked them how they would feel if others treated them this way and that they needed to treat each other with respect and kindness. It was a lesson for all of them. I made the offenders apologize and they were all quiet afterward. Hopefully, it sent an important message. However, the teachers often ignore this type of behavior. If every adult stepped up to the plate when kids engage in this type of hurtful behavior, maybe they would grow up to be more tolerant, respectful, kind adults. We can’t change everyone’s backward thinking, but we can make a huge difference if we start with the children.

Should an anti-racism curriculum be implemented in our schools? What are your thoughts on ending racism in America?

Poverty: Does a Lack of Opportunity Lead to a Cycle of Lack of Opportunity?

By Kim Chernecky, Founder & Director,
Compassionate Community Services, Inc.
www.compassionatecommunityservices.org

The Hypothesis: Lack of opportunity such as that which results from poverty, leads to a lack of opportunity, like education, which leads to low-paying jobs, which again leads to lack of opportunity, perpetuating the cycle.

According to The Center for American Progress “37 million Americans live below the official poverty line”. As one of the richest nations in the world, numbers like these are alarming. In their article entitled “The Poverty Epidemic in America, by the Numbers” they compare these staggering figures to the population of California, which is currently about 36.5 million. In the United States of America, we have 37 million people living in poverty, while millions more barely make ends meet.

This is a huge national crisis that needs addressing. The fact that millions and millions of Americans are struggling to simply survive day to day, makes many opportunities that the wealthy take for granted, virtually unattainable. Even the middle class is beginning to struggle with every day expenses, limiting their opportunities for growth as well.

It’s well known that those with higher educations are more qualified for higher-paying jobs than those with lesser educations. There are extensive studies comparing levels of educational attainment to their corresponding salaries. Recent U.S. Census Bureau studies, What It’s Worth: Field of Training and Economic Status in 2001 (Issued September 2005) show that a much higher percentage of the American population, age 18 and up are obtaining higher educations compared to data collected in 1984.

According to this study “In 2001, more people in the United States held postsecondary educational credentials than ever before”. And this trend has continued. But for those without the financial means to pursue higher education, these opportunities to improve their situations through educational attainment are almost impossible.

The failure of salaries to keep pace with the cost of inflation and the high cost of energy seem to be some of the driving forces behind the push for higher education among working adults. Many adults who have been in the work force for years are going back to school to obtain their degrees in order to survive in the workplace. A degree today is almost as necessary as a high school diploma was 20 years ago. Without a degree, families across the nation are finding it increasingly difficult to survive financially.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics’ National Household Educational Surveys of 2001, 46% of American adults participated in some sort of Continuing or formal education program between 2000 and 2001.

According to "The Poverty Epidemic in America, by the Numbers" Published by the Center for American Progress “Poor children have little chance at the American Dream…” According to their studies, “children that are born in the bottom quintile have little economic mobility.” They claim that 42% of these children will remain in poverty as adults. According to their figures, the poorest 20% of the American population earns just 3.4% of the nation’s income, while the wealthiest 1% of the American population earns a whopping 19% of our nation’s income. And this gap continues to grow.

The question we must answer is why? Why do children born into poverty have overwhelmingly high odds of remaining poor into adulthood? And what can we do to stop it?

According to this same report, 12.6% of Americans earned less than $19,971 for a family of four. Many of these citizens are what is often referred to as the “working poor” earning minimum wage, which at the time of this report was just $5.15 (adjusted for inflation, at its lowest point in 50 years). So even when employed full-time, or even working multiple jobs, these families cannot make ends meet. Overwhelmingly, these same working poor citizens have little or no education, perpetuating the cycle.

When families can barely survive financially, higher education is rarely an option. Even a $35 or $50 application fee is generally out of reach for these individuals, which, in effect, removes any chance of ever improving their financial situations. And as we have seen, a lack of higher education, whether it be trade school or a degree, definitively translates into higher salaries.
Most jobs available to the uneducated tend to fall within the restaurant, retail, and construction industries, etc. where health insurance benefits are generally not available. A lack of health care services adds additional strain to family budgets, and the overall health of the individuals. This lack of health care translates into lost time at work and school, and results in more serious health conditions. These types of jobs are also generally more labor-intensive, meaning they are working much harder for less money, draining their energy besides.

According to the World Socialist Web Site in their article entitled “A million more Americans living in poverty”(published 9/1/05) the loss of health insurance and the failure of wages to keep pace with inflation has led to increased rates of poverty in the United States for the fourth consecutive year. These same catalysts have led to a decline in standards of living for many Middle Class American citizens, as well, leading many to cut back on any unnecessary spending, affecting the entire economy.

This article addresses the absurdly low poverty rates determined by our government as well. In this article, like “The Poverty Epidemic in America” article, the author is very clear that these types of incomes are “a subsistence level”, meaning they can’t possibly survive on these types of incomes. Interestingly, the article also sites the fact that according to the Census bureau, median earnings for women dropped by another percent from 2003 to 2004. Mens’ median incomes dropped by 2.3% for the same period, which according to the author, (adjusted for inflation) is less than the median income back in 1973.

In an article entitled “Despite more jobs, US poverty rate rises” by Sara B. Miller and Amanda Paulson, staff writers of The Christian Science Monitor, the authors discuss the steadily increasing poverty rates in America, despite the fact that the number of jobs increased. In the course of the year, the number of Americans living in poverty grew from 12.5% to 12.7%.

According to the authors, politicians on both sides continue to point fingers, blaming the rising numbers on the other party’s policies, but the fact remains that an increasing number of Americans are struggling just to survive. Salaries are simply not keeping pace with the high cost of living.
There is some controversy as to how the numbers are determined, with analysts holding different views, both pessimistic, and optimistic. However, the trend is alarming, as the effects of poverty are long-reaching.

An article in The Washington Post, “Poverty Rate Up 3rd Year in a Row- More Also Lack Health Coverage” confirms the findings. Published in Aug., 2004, America was still feeling the effects of the Recession. While some analysts argue that continued increases in poverty rates are common and to be expected after rebounding from recession, others disagree.

Simply stated, “This recovery has failed to reach those in the bottom half”. Jared Bernstein, from the Economic Policy Institute feels that the recovery has not reached our most vulnerable and needy citizens.
President Bush and the Republican Party report widespread recovery and job growth, while the reality seems to be that Americans are falling deeper into debt, and higher education is becoming further and further from their reach.

What some of the analysts fail to take into consideration when counting jobs is the type of jobs and the salaries they pay. These are deciding factors as to whether or not those jobs will have a positive financial impact on workers. Job growth adds little value to the economy or to the lives of those at the bottom of the ‘financial food chain’ when those jobs are paying minimum wage with no benefits.

And who typically fills minimum wage positions? Young, inexperienced workers, and those without higher educations. And therein lies the problem. Poverty limits opportunities available to obtain a higher level of education due to the lack of time and money.

Minimum wage positions require that employees work longer and harder just to get by. This necessity limits the time and energy available to pursue an education. Other family responsibilities; e.g. such as in the case of single parents, children supporting their parents, or working to help support the family, teenagers supporting siblings or themselves, etc. limits one’s opportunities to pursue an education.

According to The Washington Post article, loss of health care benefits hits the middle class and the poor the hardest. America’s wealthiest can afford to pay any out of pocket expenses, and in most cases, have higher educations which provide health care benefits as part of their compensation packages. If for some reason they do not receive benefits as part of their compensation, they can afford to provide their own.

The poor do not have that option. In most cases, minimum-wage positions do not offer the option of health care, and if they do, the bulk of the employee’s salary would be consumed by the premiums. Due to this simple reality, many of these working poor must choose not to take the health care offered, as their salary cannot cover the cost of the benefits and still support their families. This is yet another lost opportunity, as the reality (lack of sufficient funds) does not allow the employee to take advantage of the opportunity to have health insurance coverage for their family.

Opting out of the benefit plan (again, out of necessity) creates more problems by way of untreated illnesses, no preventative care, lost school and work time, etc. This again, perpetuates the problem of poverty by adding to financial losses, which adds to the financial difficulties these people are already living with.

So what can be done to stop this endless cycle of poverty and lost opportunities? The National Association of Social Workers has addressed this issue as well. In an article entitled ”Number of Americans Living in Poverty Increases” Elizabeth Clark, PhD, ACSW, MPH, the executive director of NASW isn’t surprised that the numbers of Americans living in poverty is on the rise. She sites several factors as causal, such as the loss of blue-collar jobs, decreasing wages for low-skilled workers, and increased unemployment. But Clark knows there are things that can be done to help stop this cycle of despair. “To reduce the number of families and children in poverty, better education, training, and access to resources such as child care and transportation is necessary,”

Things that many take for granted, like readily available transportation are NOT necessarily available to low-income citizens. Unavailable or unreliable transportation affects one’s ability to find and keep a job, low-paying or not. Should they find the time and means to attend school, unavailable or unreliable transportation affects one’s ability to attend class. An inability to get to class has a negative impact on one’s grades. A lack of transportation also limits the variety of jobs available to the employee, which can limit their potential for advancement once they find a job.
NASW has a legislative agenda to deal with this laundry list of problems plaguing our nation’s poorest citizens. They understand the importance of curing the cause, rather than treating the symptom. The key lies in breaking the cycle of inopportunity.

This huge body of professionals knows from first-hand experience working with the neediest, most underserved segment of the American population what types of programs can and cannot help lift people out of poverty, and how to help them stay out of poverty. In order to have lasting success, they understand that the situational impediments must be removed to allow these people to take advantage of opportunities for growth. NASW’s “Promoting Economic Security Through Social Welfare Legislation” addresses the problems that plague our nation’s poor and underserved, and offers real solutions for addressing those needs.

One of the most critical obstacles to escaping poverty is not having access to higher education. As such, making the process easier to comprehend, making funding more readily available, and addressing the real, physical needs of these individuals, by helping to provide reliable, accessible transportation is a great way to help some of our most vulnerable citizens reach for and take advantage of those opportunities that others take for granted.

Until our nation starts addressing the cause, instead of the symptoms, the endless cycle of poverty and missed opportunities will continue. In conclusion, the idea that a lack of opportunity leads to a cycle of poverty and more lack of opportunity is correct and fully supported by research. Fortunately, there are professionals (NASW) who recognize the problems and have come up with viable solutions to address and one day solve this endless cycle of poverty and inopportunity in our nation.


What can be done to break the cycle? What are your ideas for ending the cycle of poverty in the world today?


Sources:
· The Center for American Progress
· U.S. Census Bureau, “What It’s Worth: Field of Training and Economic Status in 2001”, Issued Sept. 2005
U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration
· Center for American Progress “The Poverty Epidemic in America, by the Numbers”, April, 2007
· World Socialist Web Site, www.wsws.org
“A million more Americans living in poverty”, Sept., 2005
· The Christian Science Monitor,
http://www.csmonitor.com/, “Despite more jobs, US poverty rate rises
· Washingtonpost.com, “”Poverty Rate Up 3rd Year in a Row”, Aug., 2004
· National Center for Education Statistics
· U.S. Department of Education, National Household Education Surveys of 2001, “Participation in Adult Education and Lifelong Learning 2000-2001
· National Association of Social Workers (NASW), “Numbers of Americans Living in Poverty Increases”, Sept. 2003
· NASW’s “Promoting Economic Security Through Social Welfare Legislation”
· Economic Policy Institute, Research for Broadly Shared Prosperity
· Occupational Outlook Quarterly

The Widening Income Gap in America

The idea that economic inequality exists in America is not new. In Paul Krugman’s article “For Richer”, he discusses the growing chasm between America’s poorest citizens and its growing elite. But more importantly, he discusses the political policies that increasingly support this widening gap. It is with these policies that middle America needs to be most concerned.

Initially reminiscing about growing up in the ‘50’s and ‘60’s, Krugman notes how the ‘American dream’ was really within reach of all Americans if they worked hard. It was in his words, a “fairly equal society”. Times had changed from the ‘20’s and ‘30’s of what he calls “the Gilded Age”, when generations of families controlled most of the country’s wealth, living lavishly in mansions, with servants and status fit for a king.

But what should concern us all is the fact that these times of ‘American Royalty’, so to speak, are upon us again, and it is getting increasingly difficult for most working Americans to achieve the American dream. The idea that hard work will pay off is no longer necessarily true. And that, sadly, is in large part due to the policies that our government makes to lift up and support our wealthiest citizens, at the expense of the poor and quickly disappearing middle class.

What has changed, though, is who is holding this wealth today. As Klugman demonstrates, roughly 60 percent of the economic gains in our country went to just to the top .05% of taxpayers. When comparing gains overall throughout the taxpayer base, the so-called middle class had economic gains of just 10% from 1979 and 1997 while America’s wealthiest rose 157% (after taxes)! These disparities are alarming. When factoring in the cost of inflation, a 10% gain over almost 20 years actually translates into a loss! And that gain includes the addition of second wage-earners in middle class families. Overall, many families are finding that their debt ratios are on the rise while their standard of living is dropping.

Today’s wealth is no longer controlled by wealthy families through inherited assets, but rather by young CEO’s who are earning sometimes 300 times what the average worker earns! Krugman asks how these salaries can be justified. His theory is that over time, unlike the ‘50’s and ‘60’s when he was growing up, society has accepted the notion that these ‘all powerful leaders’ somehow deserve these enormous salaries. The understanding is that without these types of perks and benefits, corporations will be unable to retain skilled leaders and if they aren’t willing to pay, someone else will.

This type of thinking is obviously flawed, leading to outrage amongst the rest of the working public. This shift in acceptable norms in corporate America will at some point face correction. But it will probably take a huge uprising on the part of middle America before we see any real changes.

Another question, however that Krugman raises is the idea that there was ever a sustainable “middle-class” in the first place. Historically most of the wealth has been controlled by a minority, with huge gaps in income between them and the rest of the public. It wasn’t until after the Depression that economic equality really existed here in the U.S. Krugman questions whether or not this shift back to two general economic classes; the very wealthy, and the relatively poor (or struggling) population isn’t a more normal course of events.

The fact is, the more wealth one holds, the more relative power one holds. And the more power held, the more decisions and policies they can create. And it seems only natural, that in an effort to preserve their way of living, that those policies that are created tend to lean in favor of the policy-makers and the holders of power. It is this shift in wealth that creates the power, which in turn snowballs, creating more and more wealth and more and more power for a select few, leaving the rest of our population holding the bag. Unfortunately, the limited nature of all resources means that in order for some to hold most of the wealth and power, everyone else must lose theirs. It is this sad reality that makes it so critical that these issues not be ignored in our society before we become not one united nation, but a nation divided.

Do you feel that the "Middle Class" is sustainable? Are you finding it harder to make ends meet? If you could speak with your legislators about this issue, what would you want them to know? Do you feel our legislators have lost touch with"average" Americans?


Source:
“For Richer-How the permissive capitalism of the boom destroyed American equality”- by Paul Krugman, New York Times Magazine, October 20, 2002

Joseph Stiglitz' Views on Globalization Policies

In Joseph Stiglitz’ (Columbia University) article, “We Have to Make Globalization Work for All”, he addresses both the benefits and the problems associated with Globalization and the need for reforms within the system. Frankly, I was quite surprised at what I learned. Though the article was brief, Stiglitz brought to light issues that I assumed would never have even existed.

For instance, I think most Americans, or citizens of any developed country for that matter, would assume that Globalization Development policies would be designed more fairly, promoting a global economy for the betterment of all. However, as Stiglitz makes us aware this is not the case. Unfortunately, developed countries such as the United States have used their power as developed nations to get the upper hand and ultimately take advantage of developing countries in trade negotiations and policy creation.

Instead of creating policies that aid everyone involved, the policies are skewed in favor of the more powerful nations, and are crafted in such a manner as to continue to give those powerful nations an advantage across the board. This of course, is blatantly unfair. The intention of Globalization policies is to bring cohesiveness to the world as a whole, for mutual benefit of everyone involved. However, when policies are created in favor of one party over another, the benefits are no longer mutual. This, in my opinion, is highly unethical. I find it discouraging to know that our world leaders would create policies such as this.

But Stiglitz’ point is that, while acknowledging these problems and inequities within the system overall, Globalization is vital if we are to have hope of lifting “millions out of poverty.” In effect, the idea is sound; but reforms are needed to make the policies work as originally intended. To this, I would agree wholeheartedly. If we as human beings wish to assist fellow human beings in developing nations, we must impress upon our policy-makers the importance of “playing fair” and extending opportunity to everyone, equally.

Europe and the United States’ use of economic and military muscle to enact policies that give them unfair advantages is wrong, and needs to be reformed. Stiglitz’ belief is that as “the superpower with the strongest economy”, we must “be willing to play a special role”. The U.S. should be setting a positive example by creating policies that do indeed benefit all involved parties, and should not be creating policies that enable us to take advantage of less-developed countries. As a superpower, it is our responsibility to be above board and do the right thing.

Stiglitz even discusses the self-interest issue. Even if our policy-makers choose not to do the right thing for the right reasons, if only for reasons of self-interest, it still makes more sense that policies implemented benefit all parties equally, as eventually, our global-connectedness affects us all. Bad, unethical policies designed to give unfair advantages to more powerful players in the ‘globalization game’, will eventually hurt those same nations down the road. Whether policies are created out of moral obligation, or for selfish purposes, Stiglitz’ argument is that they need to be better managed and reforms must be implemented if the overall system is to be successful, for the good of all mankind.

What are your thoughts on this issue?

Globalization's Effect On America's Middle Class

The world we live in today is one of global proportions. Gone are the days where retail stores were filled with products that were “made in America”. Today we are more likely to find products made in China, Taiwan, Bangladesh, or Mexico. But what does this mean to Americans? How does this shift in our nation’s economy affect the average American? How does this shift affect our Middle Class?

The answers to these questions are not simple. Advances in technology have quickly brought our nation into a fast-moving, worldwide market. While many would agree that these technological advances are good for humanity as a whole, there are those that would argue that this rapid advancement to globalizing societies comes with some very steep costs.

In “The World is Flat” by Thomas L. Friedman, a New York Times Columnist, Friedman goes through the timeline of technological development, mainly in the communications arena, and the effects this rapid advancement has had on America, in particular. What Friedman comes to realize, is that the technology that has rapidly catapulted our nation into the global market (which is a good thing) has also had a negative impact on our society.

What does he mean by this? The same advances that allow us to communicate and access the rest of the world, also makes our markets open to them, in Friedman’s words, “leveling the playing field” for less-developed nations, like India, for example. The fact that these lines of communication are now open allows these other nations to get in the game, so to speak, providing direct competition to American workers. This easy access to cheap labor has had a direct impact on American jobs, due to corporate outsourcing, which, prior to globalization was never a concern. In effect, globalization has made America vulnerable to the competition.
So how does this affect us?

There are various opinions which place all the blame on outsourcing for our “Disappearing Middle Class”. In “Global Outsourcing and the Disappearing Middle Class” by William Raynor of the State University of New York, Raynor specifically discusses the impact outsourcing has had on our economy, and the middle class here in the U.S.

While Raynor acknowledges that not all of the job losses here in America can be attributed to outsourcing, he does feel that it has had a significant, negative impact on our economy. Like Friedman, Raynor also recognizes that advances in technology also play a part in the loss of jobs, as advanced technology often translates into higher productivity with fewer workers. Ready access to cheap, educated workers in addition to these technological advances, essentially puts many American jobs on the line.

So is it true that the hardest hit is the middle class in this loss of jobs? Raynor sites some of the ways domestic employment levels have been affected. He sites the drop in the number of workers hired by American employers as well as the quality of those jobs. Quoting Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Raynor adds “Only a few of the 116,000 private sector jobs created in October provide good incomes…the remainder…consist of temps, retail trade, telephone marketing…” (Roberts, 11/12/03) It is important to note that a decline such as this in the quality of these jobs has a huge impact on employees’ ability to survive financially. This in turn, impacts our entire economy.

Interestingly enough, there are many who believe the “middle class” that we have accepted as the norm for generations, really is an anomaly. In Paul Krugman’s Article, “For Richer; How the permissive capitalism of the boom destroyed American equality” he demonstrates how historically, there were really just two economic classes; the very rich and the poor or struggling. While it’s true that there has been a shift in wealth over the last three or four decades, the gap between rich and poor is growing and the formerly middle class appears to be losing ground.

But Krugman questions this middle class ‘reality’. He points out that in America, prior to the Depression, there was no economic equality. Prior to the Depression there was the rich and the poor or struggling. So the question of whether or not a middle class is actually sustainable in our economy is valid. But Krugman looks further at this issue and seeks to find out why this is so. His answer; as the rich get richer, they attain more power. Those with power make public policy (or influence those that do). Therefore, those policies that are created will be created with the most powerful (wealthiest) in mind. In effect, the cycle builds upon itself, creating its own cocoon of self-protection.

Of course, policies that are designed to protect one segment of society must come with a cost to those it is not designed to protect. In this case, policies that are designed to favor the wealthiest American taxpayers, in effect, hurt the rest of the taxpayers by passing along higher tax rates, broader tax policies, making less funding available for service providers, etc. As there is a limit to the ‘pie’, if one large piece goes to one segment of society, the rest must get smaller pieces.

But Krugman isn’t the only one weighing in on this idea. In “Globalism: Enemy of the Middle Class-February 2007 Phyllis Schafly Report”, the author also cites the fact that “the majority of countries in the world (e.g., Mexico) have two classes: the ruler who are very, very rich and the rest of the people who are very, very poor.” But the author points out that America is different, because we built our society with the belief that anyone can live the ‘American Dream’ and prosper if one works hard. (Disclaimer; this report may not be unbiased, but I still felt it had information worth mentioning)

But this report also goes on to point out that globalization is hurting the U.S. by providing cheap products and labor from other nations who “don’t play by the rules”. The overall sentiment is that “the effects of globalization are not equal.” While globalization is a boon to Asia and India, wages for many American workers are down substantially or have remained the same over the last five years. This direct competition with substantially cheaper labor and goods has had a direct negative impact on working Americans’ ability to provide for their families.

According to this report, the United States has lost more than three million jobs since the Bush Administration took office. The fact is America cannot compete with cheap labor from Asia and India. The fact that these workers do not have access to the same benefits as American workers makes the cost even less for companies looking to outsource. And this is an alarming trend.

Janny Scott of the New York Times and Blaine Harden of the Washington Post both make reference to the loss of middle class neighborhoods in America. Why is this significant? The loss of these neighborhoods is a clear indication of this economic class as a whole. According to Harden “middle-class neighborhoods…are shrinking at more than twice the rate of the middle class itself”…”in their place, poor and rich neighborhoods are both on the rise.” Blaine blames the decline on widening income inequality in our nation.

This brings us back to Krugman’s analysis that this economic inequality is perpetuated by policy-makers who seek to protect their wealth and power. And as mentioned earlier, much of our nation’s wealth is held now by young CEO’s who earn their wealth by taking advantage of cheap goods and labor; namely Globalization. So, while we cannot necessarily draw a direct line of cause and effect between Globalization and the Decline of America’s Middle Class, there are clear connections that need examining.

According to Evette Treewater, University of Florida International Review, just fifty years ago, India had a self-contained economic system, isolating itself from the rest of the world. Deregulation in the ‘70’s and ‘80’s opened up a whole new global market. It was just a matter of time before corporations around the world, American companies included, began to take advantage of this cheap labor market.

Treewater gives an example of computer programmer wages. In the U.S. the average wage for a computer programmer is up to $80,000 per year. In India, a programmer can expect to average just $11,000 per year. With wage differentials like this, it’s easy to see why corporations find it hard to resist outsourcing. But the instant savings for corporations are not generally passed on to the consumer. Instead, corporate profits explode, and top-heavy administrations receive excessive salaries and benefits. Ultimately, it is the average worker that suffers.

One needs only to look around to see the downturn in the U.S. economy. Rising interest rates, layoffs, cutbacks, reductions in or elimination of pensions, lost jobs, rising consumer debt, reduced housing starts, the rising cost of education…the average “middle-class” American is finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet. These economic factors impact families negatively, despite working hard, many families are finding their standard of living has dropped. And it’s unlikely to improve any time soon.

So, is Globalization really to blame for the Disappearance of America’s Middle Class? Or is it an unsustainable state of being, as Klugman suggests? In the scope of mankind, historically, I would conclude that the true nature of any economy is that there are the haves and the have-nots. Those who are able to keep a balance by remaining safely in the “middle-class” are in a temporary, if precarious position.

And globalization’s impact on our economy and our standard of living cannot be ignored. There is a saying, “There but for the Grace of God go I”. What this means is that our situation is always precarious, and external forces can have a direct impact on our personal situations. And in this day and age, we live in a Global world, and what happens in India and Asia does indeed, have an impact our lives as individuals.

Those living currently in the “middle class” are usually just one illness, layoff, or divorce away from poverty. Yet presented with these same crises, the rich do not suffer the same devastation as the middle class. But globalization has made layoffs and outsourcing more common for average Americans, and our policy-makers need to take a long, hard look at the real long-term ‘costs’ to America associated with these short-term savings.

What are your thoughts on outsourcing and the policies that are affecting American workers today?


Reference Sources:
“Global Outsourcing and the Disappearing Middle Class” by William Raynor
The State University of New York

“The World is Flat” by Thomas L. Friedman (NY Times Columnist)

“For Richer-How the permissive capitalism of the boom destroyed American
Equality” by Paul Krugman, New York Times Magazine, October 20, 2002

“Globalism: Enemy of the Middle Class” The Phyllic Schafly Report, February
2007, vol. 40, no. 8

“U.S. Losing Its Middle-Class Neighborhoods” by Blaine Harden,
Washingtonpost.com, 6/22/06

“Cities Shed Middle Class, and Are Richer and Poorer for It” by Janny Scott,
The New York Times, nytimes.com

“The Invisible Man: Evaluating the Outsourcing of American Jobs to India” by
Evette Treewater, University of Florida International Review

RULES FOR SUBMITTING

We want to hear your thoughts on these important issues. We just ask that you do the following before submitting:

1. Please be polite and respectful at all times.
2. Please write in complete sentences, using proper English.
3. Please Edit your entry before posting.
4. Feel free to suggest topics and/or issues you would like to discuss.
5. Feel free to ask questions.
6. This is not meant to be a political forum. Please discuss the issues
and any suggestions you have for solutions.
7. Any links posted must be reputable and abide by the Google guidelines
that pertain to this site.
8. Please post any professional credentials if applicable with your post.
9. Please put serious thought into your submission. We want REAL
suggested solutions to these problems facing society today.
10.Thank you for being part of the solution!

WELCOME

Welcome to my BLOG! This BLOG is designed to not only discuss real issues and problems facing our world today, but to hopefully inspire readers to come up with some viable suggestions and solutions to enable us to bring about real change. I am hopeful that we will be able to use this as a springboard for real solutions that we can share with our policy-makers to bring about real reforms where they are needed.