The Declining Middle class and the Coming Civil War

There is a lot of talk about a possible coming civil war here in the United States. I think that despite what some may think, it won't be solely racially based; although that may play a significant role, I think it is going to have more to do with the current elimination of the middle class in America.

Since 1973, the middle class has been a dwindling population. It seems that the government is attempting to develop a two class economy, the super rich and the super poor.

Our economy is marked by a very uneven distribution of wealth and income. For example, it is estimated that 28% of the total net wealth is held by the richest 2% of families in the U.S. The top 10% holds 57% of the net wealth. If homes and other real estate are excluded, the concentration of ownership of financial wealth is even more glaring. In 1983, 54% of the total net financial assets were held by 2% of all families, those whose annual income is over $125,000. Eighty-six percent of these assets were held by the top 10% of all families (US Bishops Economic Justice 183, quoting 1983 Federal Reserve Board figures).

Just as I keep trying to tell everyone,but, alas, no one is listening.

Real weekly wages in the U.S. rose until 1973, and have been declining since. From 1977 - 1989, the wealthiest 660,000 families gained 75% of "average pretax income" increases, while most middle income families saw only a 4% increase -- and those in the bottom 40% of income cohorts had real declines.

Source

Now, if you look at what is currently happening here in the United States, it is no wonder that we have reached a state where there will be no turning back. We are living in a nation where if you don't have a degree from a university of some college, you can forget about being self-sustaining. And even a degree is not a sure way to ensure economic stability.

-- In 1997, it is significantly more expensive to secure the basic household needs than it was in 1970 and before. Some of this relates to the breakdown of previous systems (such as private school tuition and day care). A higher percentage of household income is now required to meet these needs than was true in previous years (59, 62).

Source

For those who don't think this is serious, you had better think again. It will get to the point to where the so-called middle class in this country won't even be living to a third world status.

Of course, with the decline of middle class households, the decline of middle class neighborhoods follow.

Middle-income neighborhoods as a proportion of all metropolitan neighborhoods declined from 58 percent in 1970 to 41 percent in 2000. This dramatic decline far outpaced the corresponding drop in the proportion of metropolitan families earning middle incomes, from 28 percent in 1970 to 22 percent in 2000.

# Only 23 percent of central-city neighborhoods in the 12 large metropolitan areas had a middle-income profile in 2000, down from 45 percent in 1970. A majority of families (52 percent) and neighborhoods (60 percent) in these cities had low or very low incomes relative to their metropolitan area median in 2000.

# A much larger proportion—44 percent—of suburban neighborhoods in the 12 metropolitan areas had a middle-income profile in 2000. Yet this proportion fell over the 30-year period, too, from 64 percent in 1970, accompanying a smaller decline in suburban middle-income families. Suburban middle-income neighborhoods were replaced in roughly equal measure by low-income and very high-income neighborhoods.

Declining neighborhoods

What Is The Impact Of A declining Middle Class

1. A segmented society. The Ultra haves vs. ultra have-nots.

2. Civil disorder. This is a no brainer. When you have a regimented mass of people who cannot survive, there is going to be violence and a bunch of it.

3. The "ghetto-zation" of middle class neighborhoods. Common sense dictates that with the lessening economic affluence come some pretty atrocious living standards.

4. Essentially, this will lead us into a civil war that will cross all racial and ethnic boundaries.

Possible Causes

You say, "Well, Speaker, all you are doing is pointing out the problems and not offering any solutions." Well, in order to offer a solution, you must pin point the cause of the problem. Is that not true?

Firstly, the outsourcing of jobs to India, China, Mexico, and other places is not beneficial to the people of the U.S at all. While some will argue that it's good for the economy, it's only good for the political "fat cats" that have implemented such plans as NAFTA and the cross border job-a-thon with India and China.

Secondly, you can't have a system where companies are unwilling to train people and expect it to work.Some are not fortunate enough to go to some ritzy university or college and obtain a line of alphabets behind their name.

Thirdly, when you have companies consistently making comments like, "We need skilled immigrants to do our work," that doesn't vote well for the economic health of the CITIZEN of that nation.

I think most can tell, just from that list that I gave, what might need to be done in order to correct the situation. Alas, it has become overwhelmingly apparent by the actions of our federal government that it is not going to make the proper moves to secure a bright future for its citizenry. So, I suppose it's CIVIL WAR, HERE WE COME!!



[edit on 29-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Civil disorder is a broad term that is typically used by law enforcement to describe one or more forms of disturbance caused by a group of people. Civil disturbance is typically a symptom of, and a form of protest against, major socio-political problems. Typically, the severity of the action coincides with public outrage

Civil Unrest

Needless to say, when an economic change occurs, it affects to the bottom 98% of the population. The top 2% has enough surplus to protect them from any dramatic change in the economy, especially a negative one.

I think that most likely once the middle class is eliminated from the economic structure of the United States, the nation will be declared by the, then presiding, president in a state of emergency.

A state of emergency is a governmental declaration that may suspend certain normal functions of government, may work to alert citizens to alter their normal behaviors, or may order government agencies to implement emergency preparedness plans. It can also be used as a rationale for suspending civil liberties.

Governmental fear

Naturally, any major change in the economic structure of the U.S, will bring such outrage that the presiding government will do whatever it deems necessary to maintain control of the situation. One of the first things to go, a process which I am not too sure hasn't already begun, will be your civil liberties. Civil liberties will most likely be obstructed particularly for the former middle class citizenry because they will be the ones viewed as "rebels" by the federal government.

Well i got A LOT of rounds, A LOT of MRE's, and have no problem living off the land. THis should be fun...haha! Maybe this is just what we need...get rid of the people who do nothing but abuse their rights and live off others who work hard...things are taken for granted...maybe it's time for a MAJOR event....

Shadow, maybe it is. However, with some sense, which is tremendously lacking in this country, it can be averted. That's the sorry part about it. It doesn't HAVE to happen.

Speaker, we must avert this if we can. A war of this nature will be a thing of great destruction to our whole nation.

We must make a last ditch effort to elect someone who will at least try to curb these problems. And I agree that you state the 'mess' we're in very well.

There must be a grass roots effort , IMO, to elect Ron Paul. Read his record. See what he has done in the past.

I know that hope for change is in short supply, but we owe it to our children to make the effort, to try to avert what will surely be a time of great darkness for our nation.

Liberty will prevail, though it takes many lives to secure it once more. Liberty is a power that cannot be erased from the hearts of men. It is the dream, the hope, the peace ,for which man lives. There is no greater thing for mortal man than liberty. There are now but two ways that the path to freedom may run, through the ballot, or by the bullet.

This time, this election, we dare not fail to chose wisely.

NGC, I have said repeatedly that the only two candidates that I see worth voting for out of the whole lot is either Ron Paul or Mitt Romney, and I stay by my conviction.

I agree it doesn't have to happen, but neither does $4 for a gallon for gas, niether does $2000 a year for car insurance, niether does having to pay more taxes because you make your home look good, niether does paying $30,000 a year for a college education, etc etc etc....its time for a cleansing in good old America...

Shadow, you may be right. I sure do dread it though. However, I see it coming. Others are trying to put a good face on the current situation in the U.S, it's not good.

People always say, "Well, the U.S is supposed to take in the weak, tired, downtrodden." Well, it's the Americans that are weak, tired and downtrodden. It is time that America took care of America and quit concerning itself so much with everyone else in the world, in my honest opinion. Might be selfish, but that's just how I see it.

The cost of the Iraq war has cost the U.S

cost of war

Isn't that money that we could be using to create more jobs here in the U.S? If we are going to allow other people from other nations to flood our job market, then we had better start working on developing more job opportunities if we don't want the nightmare scenario that I am talking about to occur.

Here is a perfect example of what is helping to cause the problem.

THACA, N.Y. -- A just-released report to a bipartisan Congressional commission documented 48,417 U.S. jobs outsourced to other countries or publicly announced as being scheduled for outsourcing, from January through March 2004. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics had reported that only 4,633 private-sector jobs in companies with more than 50 employees were lost during that time period, a gross underestimation, warn the report's authors.

Part of the problem

What for? To whose benefit? It certainly isn't to the benefit of the middle or lower class in this country. That is certain.

here is another tidbit of information.

o From January through March 2004, there were 69 production shifts from the United States to Mexico (compared with 30 during the same period in 2001); 58 shifts to China (compared with 25 shifts in January-March 2001); and 31 shifts to India (compared with 1 shift in January-March 2001). The companies shifting jobs to China tend to be large, publicly held, highly profitable and well established, with 72 percent of them owned by U.S. multinationals.

Selling out of America

Here is a nother example of the war on American citizenry

March 27 -- While there's no consensus on the precise number of white-collar jobs American companies will outsource to India in the coming years, it seems increasingly clear that millions of middle class jobs -- from programmers and back-office technicians to Wall Street analysts and architects -- will soon find their way from U.S. office parks to the cubicles of Bangalore and Mumbai.

And while we swap stories about out-of-work programmers, one thing is clear: no one is preparing for the most important challenge -- ensuring that America's suburbs are ready for the inevitable and painful transition.

Does anyone care?

I think we are all quite aware of this fact:

In the last decade, an increasing number of American companies have been radically cutting costs by sending manufacturing and customer service jobs overseas, where labor costs can be dramatically lower.

So, is this what we are urning into?

So,I have a simple question. Are we basically just a nation that puts the interest of corporate globalist ideology over the welfare of its own citizens? It certainly does appear that way to me. It certainly does.

America has become dependent on conflicts to boost the economy. We have become a War machine that is unstoppable. We are waging wars in a desperate attempt to stay atop the rest of the world. The fall of the "Great American Experiment" has begun.

Originally posted by Godruigez
We are waging wars in a desperate attempt to stay atop the rest of the world. The fall of the "Great American Experiment" has begun.

See, but you state that as if it is necessary. It's not. Look, the state of Texas alone is the eighth largest economy in the world. Yes, you heard me right. In the WORLD. California is like 4th or 5th.

f Texas were a nation, its economy would rank as the eighth largest in the world, according to the Comptroller's Fall 2004 Texas Economic Update. ...

Huge Economy

In the midst of the world's fifth largest economy lies Central California-the heart of the Golden State.

California

I don't think that what you are saying is necessary for the U.S to remain a super power. We don't have to go around "big blanking" to be a supreme power. We just don't.

[edit on 30-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Interesting and important thread. Though i do not think this is happening in just the US. Many capitalist countries (including my own, Canada) are sending jobs and opportunities across borders in persuit of higher profits. As my favorite author says "Its the third worldization of the US, its the thrid worldization of our continent." In other words, capitalist governments and their lobbyists want a two class system to support their oppulance while the rest of us are to feed off the table scraps they throw.

If civil war is sparked, your right, it wont be racial (though that motivation im sure will be thrown around by media pundits) but a class war.

Originally posted by InSpiteOf
Though i do not think this is happening in just the US. Many capitalist countries (including my own, Canada) are sending jobs and opportunities across borders in persuit of higher profits. As my favorite author says "Its the third worldization of the US, its the thrid worldization of our continent." In other words, capitalist governments and their lobbyists want a two class system to support their oppulance while the rest of us are to feed off the table scraps they throw.

Well, I am sure it may be occurring other places. I don't know. As someone who lives here in the United States, it is quite obvious here.

The main excuse that corporations are giving for this is cheaper labor and they claim that we benefit because it keeps the cost of products down. While that's good and all, I really don't see where it is necessarily keeping the cost of products down.

Actually, Inspiteof, I think it's leading to a socialist type system where the governments of the world are going to say, "We will take care of you in exchange for your adherence to our laws."

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
The main excuse that corporations are giving for this is cheaper labor and they claim that we benefit because it keeps the cost of products down. While that's good and all, I really don't see where it is necessarily keeping the cost of products down.

I cant remember which book i read it in, but the explanation that made most sense to me was, it lowers teh cost of production for the company, but the company turns around and sells it at the same price as if it was manufactured locally, thus inceasing the companies profits.

Actually, Inspiteof, I think it's leading to a socialist type system where the governments of the world are going to say, "We will take care of you in exchange for your adherence to our laws."

Uhh...maybe you need to define what you mean by "socialism" because i hardly see social benefits in the US and in Canada on the rise. What i do see is Capital benefits on the rise. Look at capitalist Nicaragua, where the rate of capital accumulation is much much higher than the US or Canada, primarily because of the lack of democratic conditions in that countries polical and social sphere's. If anything, existing Capitalist countries (with a taste of democracy) are leaning more towards unregulated[b/] capitalism, which will spell ecological disaster the likes of which we have never seen, social destruction and repressive actions which will demoralize the populace, and a higher concentration of wealth.

Speakeroftruth,

This topic is something that as been on my heart for a long time,

It is almost impossible to make ends meet.

Originally posted by InSpiteOf

Uhh...maybe you need to define what you mean by "socialism" because i hardly see social benefits in the US and in Canada on the rise. What i do see is Capital benefits on the rise. Look at capitalist Nicaragua, where the rate of capital accumulation is much much higher than the US or Canada, primarily because of the lack of democratic conditions in that countries polical and social sphere's. If anything, existing Capitalist countries (with a taste of democracy) are leaning more towards unregulated[b/] capitalism, which will spell ecological disaster the likes of which we have never seen, social destruction and repressive actions which will demoralize the populace, and a higher concentration of wealth.

Well, unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how you look at it... One eventually turns into the other. Anytime that you start causing people to become dependent upon the state, which is certainly what is beginning to happen to the United States, you turn to socialism.

It seems to me that the powers that be are using capitalism as a way to meet their goal. Now just bear with me here.

As we have already stated, it is becoming harder and harder to make it in society. What it seems to me is that the governments are wanting the average citizen to be dependent upon them. After all, a dog is not very likely to bite the hand that feeds it.

Once the powers that be have people on their knees they will basically state that they will take care of us "poor cattle" as long as we do as we are told. You see?

[edit on 30-5-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

It is almost impossible to make ends meet.

Yes, it is and it continues to get harder all of the time. I have seen situations where forty year old men were living back at home with their parents because they couldn't earn the wages required to survive.

Overall, i see what your saying; heres my take

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Well, unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on how you look at it... One eventually turns into the other. Anytime that you start causing people to become dependent upon the state, which is certainly what is beginning to happen to the United States, you turn to socialism.

Marx said it best "Democracy is the road to socialism."
I disagree completely. Unregulated capitalism enhances the repressive powers of the state and removes civil liberties (much of which is happenning now.) In unregulated capitalism the people will reach a level where they are dependant on the state, but the state will in turn, say "find another way to get by." I guess what imtrying to say here is that just because the people are needy, doesnt mean the government will fulfill those needs.

The goal of "capitalism is to change nature into comodities, and comodities into capital." then to invest that capital to make more capital. It certainly doesnt make any capital by giving to socialist needs.

Whereas the goal of socialism is the betterment of (generally speaking) the citizens of a given society. Now the betterment is pretty subjective in taht the definition changes from person to person. SO what i mean by it is that everyone will genreally be able to get along in life will minimal to no economic struggle, whereas in a capitalist environment its every dog for himself.

(i hope im making sense, im on my way out of work and want to wrap this up fast.)

I dont see capitalist states willingly turning into socialist states. Not without massive popular agitation from the people. And by that i mean social and economical revolution.