Comments on: U.S. moderates aren’t in the middle Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:34:09 +0000 hourly 1 By: LBK2 Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:15:40 +0000 “Affluent elites”

The “1%” no more represent moderates than any of the rest of this nation’s non-wealthy population.

By: LEEDAP Thu, 12 Jul 2012 08:38:51 +0000 Another fine piece by Chrystia Freeland and a good explanation why the fiscal debt has taken center stage from the jobs deficit among “moderates”.

The commenters here who fear work visas should focus more on the real problem that underlies the job deficit and not this symptom. The fact is that employers can’t find good home grown employees. Americans can’t do math or find Washington on a global map. We’re uneducated and yet feel entitled because we’re constantly told we’re great when really it was our fathers and grandfathers who were so great. THIS is why our middle class is being shipped overseas and our high paying jobs given to visa holders. The fix is a proper public school system- not a “no child left behind” band aid.

This is another problem with Chrystia Freeland’s “moderates”. THEY’VE all got good educations and their children do, too. They think the poor education system is relegated to the Urban poor. But standards have dropped everywhere but the best schools. The average American student gets less capable of competing on the World stage every year. But the wealthy political moderates are blind to this, too, it seems.

By: zhmileskendig Wed, 11 Jul 2012 19:15:01 +0000 Since treasury markets are about, strike that, more reflective of central banks desire to manage things than Libor the attempt to equate “market” pricing with a crowd sourced opinion rooted in perfect information and pricing seems disingenuous at best.

You are capable of better Crystia.

By: JohnSmith1978 Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:34:38 +0000 nonsense, all of it.

By: JackRS Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:01:11 +0000 Increasing jobs and GDP is a matter of making money move around the circular flow. Currently all the gains are going to the top 1% and to corporations, both of which are saving lots of cash. It’s 1929 all over again with our federally insured banks playing the part of the naive investors and the Fed feeding the bubble (again). Unless money starts flowing in the real sector — instead of spinning around in the financial sector — collapse is inevitable.

By: Thucydides Tue, 10 Jul 2012 14:00:15 +0000 Europe dug its own grave in like fashion over 100 years ago. Our nation, society, and institutions are all collapsing in real time. The election of Obama – a man with virtually no qualifications to be president, is a clear reflection of that. What’s more, his ideology is ironically aligned to the same socialist construct which is now collapsing in real time in Europe.

Defeat America, re-elect Barak Obama.

By: trevorh Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:37:22 +0000 @111Dave111
Most employers will replace you if they get a better deal. It’s always like that everywhere not just in STEM.

That’s why I think sooner or later people should get self-employed in one way or another.

After reading your posts, I actually think they should scrap H-1B all together. It makes more people happy, too much hostility now.

By: Byron5 Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:24:21 +0000 I think over all this is a kind of poorly written article. It makes a few valid points, pointing out relatively obvious things, that have nothing to do with the subject of the article. Half of the article is random statistical information that does nothing to strengthen or weaken the point being made. It kind of rambles a bit… so I will too!! ——————
There is one issue addressed as a primary point of the article (though you wouldn’t guess it at first), and that is the job deficit vs the fiscal deficit. IMO the primary reason focus has shifted so much to the fiscal deficit rather than the job deficit is because way back when, four score and seven years ago, there was huge market crash caused by a cascading of events that led to many companies going under. Lots of companies went under because of that crash, leading to LOTS of job losses. The crash led to the government and fed deciding that what the market needed was a cash influx to help banks write off more of the debts and losses so that the banks could once again loan money to the companies. And it worked, kind of… Since then, most companies have indeed gotten things under control and there is small amounts of optimism, work and success helping companies grow. Indeed there is a need for new hires in many companies in the US currently. ——————– Policy makers saw this and realized it, but unexpectedly there was still resistance to growth and therefore job number increases. They (policy makers) realized that companies were hedging their bets, increasing safety nets, etc, and not hiring new employees for fear that there would be another crash and that the current goodness is only a short term thing. ———————————————————One of the primary reasons this fear is exists is because of the alarming governmental fiscal deficit growth; partially created by the influx of cash used to soften the blow of the market crash and partially create by ongoing wars. This view point is not unwarranted, because even as of a month ago, the fed is still practicing quantitative easing and the fiscal debt is still climbing at alarming rates, and the US is still involved in very costly overseas wars. It is not a sustainable situation. These situations create very poor market confidence.
Ultimately, the primary debate caused by the fiscal deficit (which does need to be solved to increase market confidence, and thus allow companies to feel safe to grow again and create more jobs) is the classic question: “is it the government’s job to create jobs or is it the private industy’s job?” If it’s for private industry, then its the government’s job to create an atmosphere friendly to private companies (lower taxes, higher incentives etc). If it’s the governemnt’s job to create jobs, then higher taxes, more government programs would be the path. —————————————————– The fundamental difference is not one that can be easily mixed. Because of this there is not necessarily ‘middle’ ground. So yes, with regards to ‘US moderates’ stand on US deficits, they are not in the middle; they stand either left or right of the situation.
Mixing in class-ism or views on healthcare muddies the argument (not to say any of the other issues point out in the article are not valid).

By: trevorh Mon, 09 Jul 2012 18:23:43 +0000 @DifferentOne
The down hill is based on my own experience about myself and a few (albeit small) number of researches on cognitive ability. Btw, I’m not talking about cognitively demanding but routine tasks. Actually for routine tasks and tasks with a lot of unknown factors the more experience (older), the better.

From your comments and many others I come to conclude that they need to have a requirement for H-1B salary to exceed whatever median “dream” numbers from the department of labor stats (according to the job of course, so would be 90k+).

It would solve the low wage problem that scare many people away and reduce the psychological impact.

Hopefully, that would make people happier.
I always think making sure as many people feel the system is reasonably fair and just is important. Anyway hopefully, they’ll have more over sight on H-1B and make people happier.

By: tmc Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:23:51 +0000 I fear the day that @AdamSmith and the other H1B enthusiast find out about the L1 visa. H1B is for chump consulting firms.

In the grander scheme of things, the US is not going to be able to maintain its high living standards. All of the problems discussed above by commenter’s are probably true to varying degrees, but they are all just symptoms of larger changes. The United State is only 5% of the population, and consumes 25% of the resources. Yes, it is 25% of the global GDP too. The problem is the rest of the world is not going to let this continue. Society will smooth out this rather large bump in the global economic road called the American middle class. We can (and should) fight it as long as we can, but we cannot win. Other countries will not play by our rules anymore. They don’t have to. For America to keep this up, we need “growth”. All politicians and corporate types repeat this constantly. Well, the American markets have been “mature” for a long time. As far back as the Nixon administration we’ve know this. The growth potential in the US compared to the rest of the world is miniscule. Besides, American capitalism is based on 20th century ideas and will not work for a global economy. All countries can’t export more than they import and maintain “growth” forever. It is a flawed plan. Americans cannot stop time. As to this article specifically, of course no one is representing the masses. No one ever does. As long as we have a two party system no one ever will.