3 ms·

"Temin argues that, following decades of growing inequality, America is now left with what is more or less a two-class system: One small, predominantly white up

"Temin argues that, following decades of growing inequality, America is now left with what is more or less a two-class system: One small, predominantly white upper class that wields a disproportionate share of money, power, and political influence" Temin avoids mentioning Asians, who have a higher average income than whites, despite many being relative newcomers to the country. That would undermine the narrative of a static class structure.

bilbo0s 9y ago
To be fair, Temin wrote "...predominantly white...", so I would have assumed that meant mostly white, with everyone else in smaller numbers. The fact that asians, or blacks, or native americans or what have you are also included in the top class, does not mean that we don't have a two class system. From where I sit out here in fly over country, (Madison, WI), it definitely does feel like a 2 class system. I think that's what a lot of people, (in Wisconsin anyway), are reacting to when they vote Trump for instance.
Brockenstein 9y ago
However when you factor in their level of education, they're still making less than their white (male) peers. >One small, predominantly white upper class that wields a disproportionate share of money, power, and political influence" predominantly... Stop to consider the number of Asians in the U.S., now take the number of Asians that have a higher than average income than Whites. Now take the number of Whites who earn the same average income or greater than our Asian subgroup. You're not convinced that the group of relatively above average income earners is going to be predominantly white? You can look at the demographics in anything that you think qualifies people as upper class. Government, at the state or national level? Upper management at Fortune 500 companies? I mean pick anything and if you find any results that don't reflect predominantly white, and almost certainly predominantly white male I'll be shocked and pleasantly surprised that we've made that much progress. Your point only undermines Temin's narrative if you blithely ignore all the other information.
BeetleB 9y ago
He mentions it elsewhere: > “In the group that has been here longer, white Americans dominate both the FTE sector and the low-wage sector, while African Americans are located almost entirely in the low-wage sector,” he writes. “In the group of recent immigrants, Asians predominantly entered the FTE sector, while Latino immigrants joined African Americans in the low-wage sector.”
dv_dt 9y ago
When you look more closely at Asian income, you can say the grouping does access an opportunity for higher education more frequently than other groups, but they do not necessarily receive the same relative value of their investments there. https://www.epi.org/blog/asian-american-income/ https://www.epi.org/blog/asian-american-income/ "When one compares the annual personal income of Asian Americans and whites of the same gender and educational level, Asian Americans do not always come out on top. The figure below shows these comparisons for workers with a high school diploma and with a bachelor’s degree. In 2010, among workers with a high school diploma, white men earned about $11,000 more than white women and Asian American men and women." Also unaddressed is the wide variation of Asian subgroups and how much access to wealth some have access to before & after their immigration.
spiralx 9y ago
> Temin avoids mentioning Asians, who have a higher average income than whites, despite many being relative newcomers to the country. That would undermine the narrative of a static class structure. The fact that educated, middle-class Asian immigrants become educated, middle-class Asian-Americans does not undermine the narrative of a static class structure at all.
youpassbutter 9y ago
> Temin avoids mentioning Asians, who have a higher average income than whites Asians have higher average income than whites, but they are not wealthy in general. Income != wealth. Also, asians are the least likely to be promoted or advance in their careers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling Asians are underrepresented in the billionaire class or the elite class. Also, "asian" is a very fraught term. Some of the poorest people in america are asians ( hmong, cambodians, etc ). Asians are discriminated against in college admissions. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/harvard-asian-admission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/harvard-asian-admissio... > despite many being relative newcomers to the country. Asians are relative newcomers for a reason. Racist laws which banned asians from immigrating to the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924 Also, multigeneration asians like the chinese and japanese had their wealth stolen many times in the US. During the pogroms against the chinese in the 1800s, their gold mines, stores, homes, etc were all stolen from them. The japanese americans had their property stolen by the US government. > That would undermine the narrative of a static class structure. It doesn't. Your argument just shows that some asians went into higher paying industries ( primarily tech ). But asians are highly underrepresented in management, C-Suite, boards, etc of the tech industry. In other words asians are primarily confined in the lower levels of the tech industry. Just because the tech industry pays their lower level staff better than other industries doesn't change anything. Asian americans in the US are proof of "static class structure" as they are primarily stuck in their "class structure". Things obviously have improved for all minorities in the US. Asians aren't being lynched and robbed by the government/people like in the 1800s and asians are allowed to immigrate to the US, unlike for most of the 1900s, but asians are still a minority and they are obstacles for asians.

bilbo0s 9y ago

To be fair, Temin wrote "...predominantly white...", so I would have assumed that meant mostly white, with everyone else in smaller numbers. The fact that asians, or blacks, or native americans or what have you are also included in the top class, does not mean that we don't have a two class system. From where I sit out here in fly over country, (Madison, WI), it definitely does feel like a 2 class system. I think that's what a lot of people, (in Wisconsin anyway), are reacting to when they vote Trump for instance.

Brockenstein 9y ago

However when you factor in their level of education, they're still making less than their white (male) peers. >One small, predominantly white upper class that wields a disproportionate share of money, power, and political influence" predominantly... Stop to consider the number of Asians in the U.S., now take the number of Asians that have a higher than average income than Whites. Now take the number of Whites who earn the same average income or greater than our Asian subgroup. You're not convinced that the group of relatively above average income earners is going to be predominantly white? You can look at the demographics in anything that you think qualifies people as upper class. Government, at the state or national level? Upper management at Fortune 500 companies? I mean pick anything and if you find any results that don't reflect predominantly white, and almost certainly predominantly white male I'll be shocked and pleasantly surprised that we've made that much progress. Your point only undermines Temin's narrative if you blithely ignore all the other information.

BeetleB 9y ago

He mentions it elsewhere: > “In the group that has been here longer, white Americans dominate both the FTE sector and the low-wage sector, while African Americans are located almost entirely in the low-wage sector,” he writes. “In the group of recent immigrants, Asians predominantly entered the FTE sector, while Latino immigrants joined African Americans in the low-wage sector.”

dv_dt 9y ago

When you look more closely at Asian income, you can say the grouping does access an opportunity for higher education more frequently than other groups, but they do not necessarily receive the same relative value of their investments there. https://www.epi.org/blog/asian-american-income/ https://www.epi.org/blog/asian-american-income/ "When one compares the annual personal income of Asian Americans and whites of the same gender and educational level, Asian Americans do not always come out on top. The figure below shows these comparisons for workers with a high school diploma and with a bachelor’s degree. In 2010, among workers with a high school diploma, white men earned about $11,000 more than white women and Asian American men and women." Also unaddressed is the wide variation of Asian subgroups and how much access to wealth some have access to before & after their immigration.

spiralx 9y ago

> Temin avoids mentioning Asians, who have a higher average income than whites, despite many being relative newcomers to the country. That would undermine the narrative of a static class structure. The fact that educated, middle-class Asian immigrants become educated, middle-class Asian-Americans does not undermine the narrative of a static class structure at all.

youpassbutter 9y ago

> Temin avoids mentioning Asians, who have a higher average income than whites Asians have higher average income than whites, but they are not wealthy in general. Income != wealth. Also, asians are the least likely to be promoted or advance in their careers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling Asians are underrepresented in the billionaire class or the elite class. Also, "asian" is a very fraught term. Some of the poorest people in america are asians ( hmong, cambodians, etc ). Asians are discriminated against in college admissions. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/harvard-asian-admission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/harvard-asian-admissio... > despite many being relative newcomers to the country. Asians are relative newcomers for a reason. Racist laws which banned asians from immigrating to the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924 Also, multigeneration asians like the chinese and japanese had their wealth stolen many times in the US. During the pogroms against the chinese in the 1800s, their gold mines, stores, homes, etc were all stolen from them. The japanese americans had their property stolen by the US government. > That would undermine the narrative of a static class structure. It doesn't. Your argument just shows that some asians went into higher paying industries ( primarily tech ). But asians are highly underrepresented in management, C-Suite, boards, etc of the tech industry. In other words asians are primarily confined in the lower levels of the tech industry. Just because the tech industry pays their lower level staff better than other industries doesn't change anything. Asian americans in the US are proof of "static class structure" as they are primarily stuck in their "class structure". Things obviously have improved for all minorities in the US. Asians aren't being lynched and robbed by the government/people like in the 1800s and asians are allowed to immigrate to the US, unlike for most of the 1900s, but asians are still a minority and they are obstacles for asians.