3 ms·

> Wrong. Sure, we can say that there has been some benefit to the middle class in the West through reduced price on some of the goods but certainly not on big

> Wrong. Sure, we can say that there has been some benefit to the middle class in the West through reduced price on some of the goods but certainly not on big bill items such as housing and education. It's great that I can buy a cheap jacket and keep some of my income, it sucks that my housing expanses went from 1/5 to 1/2 of my income (as an example). Overall an American worker who lost his well paying manufacturing job and replaced it with a job at walmart lost massively. Elephant Chart I think tells the whole story[1]. 1. https://avc.com/2016/08/elephant-chart/ https://avc.com/2016/08/elephant-chart/

dcolkitt 7y ago
> but certainly not on big bill items such as housing and education On average, housing expenditures only makes up about 25% of American household income. And education expenditures are nearly a rounding error at 1.8%. Adjusted for inflation the median cost per square foot of a new home in the US actually fell by 8% from 1992 to 2018. It's true that Americans are spending more on housing than in the past, but that's mostly because they're buying significantly bigger houses. The median new home saw its square footage increase by more than 50% since 1985. Despite a decline in the average household size. And that doesn't even cover the significant increase in quality in things like central AC, attached garages, fire safety, higher ceilings, high ampere electrical circuits, better insulation, etc. The HN community is biased on this topic because they tend to live in HCoL metros like the Bay Area and to only recently be out of school. But the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of middle America in flyover states has not seen any significant loss of affordability in housing. That should tell you that the problem isn't globalization, it's the San Francisco zoning board. > Overall an American worker who lost his well paying manufacturing job and replaced it with a job at walmart lost massively. Since 1980 the decline in manufacturing employment have been more than offset by growth in high-paying jobs in healthcare, education, professional services, real estate, and financial services. American manufacturing output is at an all-time. There's huge job shortages in the industry, and American factories are desperate for workers. That should tell you that manufacturing jobs were never "replaced", rather Americans workers decided to move to other industries. Manufacturing jobs are good-paying, but dangerous, physically demanding and unpleasant. Most workers who left decided to either go to skilled construction trades or natural resource extraction, where pay is significantly better. Or they decided to become skilled professionals like nurses, teachers, or realtors, where pay is still good but working conditions are significantly better. [0] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm [1] https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/ https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/ [2] https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf [3] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/job-gains-for-the-manufacturing-industry-are-the-most-since-1995.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/job-gains-for-the-manufactur... [4] https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/30044/manufacturing-worker-shortage https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/30044/manufacturing-worke... [5] https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/current-employment-statistics-survey-100-years-of-employment-hours-and-earnings.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/current-employment...
badpun 7y ago
> It's great that I can buy a cheap jacket and keep some of my income, it sucks that my housing expanses went from 1/5 to 1/2 of my income (as an example). Maybe they went from 1/5 to 1/2 precisely because trade made everything else so affordable? In the world without international trade, housing, education and health care could still be expensive, but cheap jeans would be $100 and cheap jackets $200.

dcolkitt 7y ago

> but certainly not on big bill items such as housing and education On average, housing expenditures only makes up about 25% of American household income. And education expenditures are nearly a rounding error at 1.8%. Adjusted for inflation the median cost per square foot of a new home in the US actually fell by 8% from 1992 to 2018. It's true that Americans are spending more on housing than in the past, but that's mostly because they're buying significantly bigger houses. The median new home saw its square footage increase by more than 50% since 1985. Despite a decline in the average household size. And that doesn't even cover the significant increase in quality in things like central AC, attached garages, fire safety, higher ceilings, high ampere electrical circuits, better insulation, etc. The HN community is biased on this topic because they tend to live in HCoL metros like the Bay Area and to only recently be out of school. But the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of middle America in flyover states has not seen any significant loss of affordability in housing. That should tell you that the problem isn't globalization, it's the San Francisco zoning board. > Overall an American worker who lost his well paying manufacturing job and replaced it with a job at walmart lost massively. Since 1980 the decline in manufacturing employment have been more than offset by growth in high-paying jobs in healthcare, education, professional services, real estate, and financial services. American manufacturing output is at an all-time. There's huge job shortages in the industry, and American factories are desperate for workers. That should tell you that manufacturing jobs were never "replaced", rather Americans workers decided to move to other industries. Manufacturing jobs are good-paying, but dangerous, physically demanding and unpleasant. Most workers who left decided to either go to skilled construction trades or natural resource extraction, where pay is significantly better. Or they decided to become skilled professionals like nurses, teachers, or realtors, where pay is still good but working conditions are significantly better. [0] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cesan.nr0.htm [1] https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/ https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/ [2] https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf [3] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/job-gains-for-the-manufacturing-industry-are-the-most-since-1995.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/job-gains-for-the-manufactur... [4] https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/30044/manufacturing-worker-shortage https://www.reliableplant.com/Read/30044/manufacturing-worke... [5] https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/current-employment-statistics-survey-100-years-of-employment-hours-and-earnings.htm https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/current-employment...

badpun 7y ago

> It's great that I can buy a cheap jacket and keep some of my income, it sucks that my housing expanses went from 1/5 to 1/2 of my income (as an example). Maybe they went from 1/5 to 1/2 precisely because trade made everything else so affordable? In the world without international trade, housing, education and health care could still be expensive, but cheap jeans would be $100 and cheap jackets $200.