What is the squeezed middle?

Purple Re your post on 185,We will have to wait a few years to see who is correct on this one,You and I know Its takes a few years for something like this to happen,I was surprised to see the amount of highly qualified people who stayed behind when these companies went overseas,You come across as someone who underestimate a lot of people,
 
Purple said:
We just had a major recession. Everybody was hit. The middle was hit less than most. The middle was squeezed less than most.
Click to expand...

Only if you are very selective about what you define as the "middle" and what you mean by "hit". Which exactly what the media do when they give a unbalanced story weighted left or right, depending on what sells.

Things like the a rise of insurance have a different effect on,
Someone driving a 162 Merc, someone driving a 11yr old Focus, someone who has no car. You might consider the person "hit" the most was the person with the Merc.
 

In my experience it varies from one manager to another, private or public. Some people are ok with it, some aren't. You can always find a reason to block or allow it, depending on how you feel about it.
 
I Know a person who built a large house along with a 4000 sq ft games room,borrowing 300000 euro he put around 100000 euro of his own money ,Valued at 600000 euro before recession he had no problem paying 1600 Euro each month, he did not take a wage cut, house now worth around 200000 euro ,He stopped paying thinking bank was going to write off part of loan,Found out the hard way that is not how it works, Bank now charging him high interest on the money he did not pay,
Admit he had no problem paying 1600 Euro, Thinks he should only have to pay bank 100000 Euro along with the 100000 he put in himself,He is one of the top 20% tax payers in the country,He feels he got badly hit ,
 
He's also one of the people with negative net wealth and so one of the poor according to TASC.
 
I'm not underestimating people. I'm not underestimating the people in China and Mexico and Vietnam and other places like that. I'm not underestimating the size of the consumer markets in China and Brazil and Mexico. I'm not underestimating the changes in the world over the last 20 to 30 years and how wealth is more evenly distributed and so markets are also more evenly distributed.
Most of all I am not underestimating the great good that globalisation has achieved in lifting 4 billion people out of poverty and how, in my view, those people have just as much right to the opportunities and hopes and dreams we enjoy.
 
I think for some people the problem with the squeezed middle, or the idea of it. Is not simply that it gains traction that it could cause those above to pay more tax, or those below to pay less. But the pressure it puts on the wage bill if you have employees.

The high cost of living is putting huge pressure on wages, and any one who is squeezed. Of course if you ignore that, you can make the squeeze disappear. That's why you would focus only on tax and headline salary figures.
 
people who are paid the most are looking for more without creating more wealth in return pushing up the cost of living up, This has an knock on affect lower down the wealth creating Industry,Employees/employers may not be able to pass on the cost so they do not take a wage increase ,some industries will pullout of Ireland if they can,Resulting in the people who pushed up the cost in the first place without creating more wealth having to pay more tax,They become the squeezed middle ,The only thing keeping the show on the road are the foreign companys here for tax reasons paying high wages,They are creating wealth out of the tax system,When this comes to an end which it will we will have fun ,
 
In fairness people who are are wealthy are often the best people to create more wealth. They have the experience and the resources. But it has to be better distributed so that less wealthy people are motivated to participate.
 
jjm2016 said:
people who are paid the most are looking for more without creating more wealth in return pushing up the cost of living up,
Click to expand...

They're not the ones making most noise though.

jjm2016 said:
The only thing keeping the show on the road are the foreign companys here for tax reasons paying high wages,They are creating wealth out of the tax system
Click to expand...

You do know there are large multi-nationals here with employees numbering in the thousands who do not route any sales through Ireland?

And can you have another look for the full stop key???
 
I do I work in one, The day will come when the will get fed up shouldering more than there fair share ,All too often We hear these words,THE COMPANY HAS TAKEN A COMMERCIAL DECISION TO MOVE OUT OF IRELAND , There cost are being pushed up by wage inflation outside there control,
 

So they're not all here for tax purposes either, but only the ones who are here for tax purposes are 'keeping the show on the road'?

Regarding their fair share, no company of any scale bases any decision on such a criteria. The multi-nationals that are here came for commercial, competitive, talent or a mixture of such reasons. There should be no surprise if and when they leave as soon as those calculations point them to another country.
 
Regardless if its tax or wages. Its just becomes unsustainable, if its cheaper elsewhere.

Trumps protectionism I can't see working.
 
I don't think he is going down the Protectionism road ,There are people saying he is on the far right i don't think so,They have got it wrong again,What he is saying is he is going to use tax to bring jobs back to USA,Tax drove them out in the first place,
There should be no surprise if and when the leave as soon as those calculations point them to another country,We are helping them in there way,Up to now and I don't see any end in sight,The government policy is to squeeze as much as possible out of top 20% of tax payers,this tax ,In other words the are slowly killing the private sector golden goose ,
 
In my view an attractive policy would be to pursue the elimination of all these levies and costs. I think the societal impact is completely ignored when imposing these sorts of cost on people i.e. imposing bin charges and then dealing with the massive increase in dumping.

As an example, elimination the TV license:
Puts a flat amount of money back into peoples accounts. Greater impact on those with smaller disposable incomes.
Impacts those people who have been law abiding, no net benefit to those who avoid it.
And bonus impact for the state, who eliminate the costs of collection/inspection!

Surely there are creative solutions to lower the cost of living overall. Is there any political body who advocate for this policy approach?
 
Purple said:
Every misogynist voted for Trump.Evert racist voted for Trump.
Click to expand...

Pennsylvania voted for Trump - first time a Republican won that state since Reagan. Think about that for a minute.
Maybe it was the same misogynists who voted for Bill Clinton (twice) who voted for Trump, but I don't see how it could be the same racists who voted for Obama (twice).
That analysis doesn't begin to explain how Trump could won that state, in an environment where 90% of the media wanted, supported and predicted a Clinton victory.
I don't think that the Republicans should even have allowed someone to stand for Presidency who hadn't served at least one term in elected office as a Republican at state or national level. But it took much more than racism, misogyny and media backing for him to win their nomination , and the presidency.

The squeezed middle are the ones who flipped to vote for Nixon, who flipped to vote for Reagan & Thatcher, who flipped to vote for Trump, Brexit and the Conservatives... who flocked to the PDs in the 80s here, who speaks for them in Ireland today? Cos they are sure as hell ready to flip.
 
Last edited:
odyssey06 said:
Maybe it was the same misogynists who voted for Bill Clinton (twice) who voted for Trump, but I don't see how it could be the same racists who voted for Obama (twice).
Click to expand...

Agreed, the racist, xenophobic, misogynist labels are overdone ( I say that in knowledge that I could be labelled in the Katie Hopkins camp!).
But to highlight the point, I was accused recently of making a comment that could apparently have been construed as 'xenophobic' on the basis that I opposed profits being generated here for the benefit of foreigners!
There is a huge difference between making a racist or misogynist remark and actually being a racist or misogynist.
Trump is politically incorrect to the point of a being a buffoon, but he is not the tyrant that some would have you believe.
Political correctness has its place, but between having a job, paying the bills, planning for the future, and making dumb remarks, I think I know where my priorities would lay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register