That's even more stunning..

Nearly 2 out 5 workers made LESS THAN $20K last year.

Have cars that are on the edge, if we are lucky. We take jobs that can crush your soul in a heart beat.

At least that's how I understand Soc Sec figures. It is not just limited to an employer's report of how much it is paying its employees.

We all know what the proposed solution from the other party is, more tax cuts for the billionaire class. I don't have much faith in the predetermined nominee for the Democratic party addressing this disparity in any substantial manner.

Peace

She is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the billionaires and tenth-percenters and has been for years if not decades.

She will faithfully advance their interests and the interests of the military-industrial-intelligence complex and NO ONE else's.

That and self-advancement are her only core convictions.

You might have noticed that we're starting to develop a REAL lack of those. I'm sure that was entirely accidental, though. Couldn't be helped! ¯\_(ツ )_/¯

I'm thinking of my sons.

They will not be satisfied until the masses are dead.



Fuck capitalism and the capitalists.

I'm with you: I have not seen this so-called recovery. The 1%, however, continues to prosper.

This is in large fault, the DC bubble crowd and their failure to understand 250k is NOT a middle class salary and that we are all NOT making 250k a year!!

Denial is dangerous to a healthy democracy.

Especially from Bill Clinton and the Repuke-lite DINOS, who all wanted to cash in on that glorious gravy train of sweet, sweet corporate money. And Obama has been just as bad:

First - he appointed Geithner and HRH before he was even inaugurated

Second - he made sure he appointed an AG who would and did cover for the banksters in every way possible, prosecuting no one and letting them keep every last dime they stole.

Third - he let Big Pharma and Big Insurance dictate all the most important terms of the ACA while inviting supporters of anything useful to get the fuck out of the room.

Fourth - TPP/TTIP, need I say more.

Fifth - soldiers staying in Afghanistan, apparently forever/drone war assuming unprecedented and very secret proportions. War Then, War Now, War Forever. Profits Trump Peace, to quote a Little Chimp.

Sixth - THIS unbelievably horrendous and corrupt pile of bankster-enabling horseshit:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027274291

Bubba and Obama pantsed REAL Democrats in front of everyone right in the middle of the schoolyard. They served their corporate masters very well indeed. Obama will be rewarded even more handsomely than Clinton was if he manages to ram through TPP/TTIP.

Never again will I vote for any corporatist. Ever.

We sold out solid middle class jobs like manufacturing for crappy retail and service jobs that pay jack squat. Not everyone can afford or are capable of being in college so there's no step up to get out of that low-tier level. Were screwed.

in the lowest earning bracket have only part time jobs.

Back in the 1970s there was a document called "National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.”

Promoted by noted War Criminal Henry Kissinger, the thrust of this document was that US security would be greatly enhanced by depopulating the third world. The Director of the CIA was designated as one of the principals to put it into action. That man's name was George H.W. Bush (surprise!).

This plan has been on the table for 40 years. That was just a trial run. Now they're gonna bring it on home.

This article appeared as part of a feature in the December 8, 1995 issue of Executive Intelligence Review, and was circulated extensively by the Schiller Institute Food for Peace Movement. It is reprinted here as part of the package: “Who Is Responsible for the World Food Shortage?”


Kissinger’s 1974 Plan for Food Control Genocide
by Joseph Brewda
Dec. 8, 1995

On Dec. 10, 1974, the U.S. National Security Council under Henry Kissinger completed a classified 200-page study, “National Security Study Memorandum 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” The study falsely claimed that population growth in the so-called Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) was a grave threat to U.S. national security. Adopted as official policy in November 1975 by President Gerald Ford, NSSM 200 outlined a covert plan to reduce population growth in those countries through birth control, and also, implicitly, war and famine. Brent Scowcroft, who had by then replaced Kissinger as national security adviser (the same post Scowcroft was to hold in the Bush administration), was put in charge of implementing the plan. CIA Director George Bush was ordered to assist Scowcroft, as were the secretaries of state, treasury, defense, and agriculture.

The bogus arguments that Kissinger advanced were not original. One of his major sources was the Royal Commission on Population, which King George VI had created in 1944 “to consider what measures should be taken in the national interest to influence the future trend of population.” The commission found that Britain was gravely threatened by population growth in its colonies, since “a populous country has decided advantages over a sparsely-populated one for industrial production.” The combined effects of increasing population and industrialization in its colonies, it warned, “might be decisive in its effects on the prestige and influence of the West,” especially effecting “military strength and security.”

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/food_for_peace/kiss_nssm_jb_1995.html

Oh, might I point out that HRH is bestest of buddies with Kissinger?

Actually, on second thought, it's not unbelievable. It's completely believable. The people running this country, the establishment, are all complete sociopaths and I would put nothing past them.

Not by a whole lot, especially for a middle-aged Ivy League grad, but...

union workers were the back bone of the middle class.

And this is what happens.

Median FT is $803 or over 40k.

Since this site not only parrots the silly "94 million unemployed" lie but also adds the ludicrously false claim that they are all "of working age" (when in reality it's 16 and over with no max) I wouldn't trust it for much else either.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/wkyeng.nr0.htm

the bottom line is that half the people in this country exist on less than 27 grand a year. The facts on the ground don't lie. Of course those who live in bubbles are thoroughly ignorant of the facts on the ground for multiple millions of the struggling and poor.

But unless you think HS juniors and nonagenarians are the workforce, they are still lies.

and quite ironically... your post questioning the level of economic degradation and race to the bottom being inflicted by capitalist social relations is pure reactionary, status quo, horseshit. Reactionaries come in many flavors. Would you like me to make it clearer for you ?

How about making your case with evidence?

Work part-time to make "extra spending money."

jobs in this country have been part time jobs and low wage full time jobs.

Some teenager or homemaker who spends a few hours at the diner making extra spending money is not comparable to someone working full time, and this bullshit conflates them

There are a hell of a lot of them since 2008. You can try and sell a good economy if you want, but the people who are actually out there looking for work that isn't there know better. And by the way, with families struggling as much as they are teenagers and homemakers working to contribute to their family income is just as important as full time bread winners. That was a very condescending remark regarding teenagers and homemakers.

I'm a contractual worker in academics. I'm essentially "part-time." But it's how I make my living, because there is no alternative. Ugh.

making a pittance of their former salaries are merely "earning extra spending money".

And therein lies the destruction of your argument.

If you think only teenagers and "homemakers" work part-time.

they say that 62% make less than $40 and you say its 50%.

That's not that huge of a difference.

It is a good point to weed out the teenagers and maybe even college students, but at least some part time workers might like full time work. Myself, I applied for three full time jobs in the last couple of months. Not that I am desperate for full time work, but I have mostly been stuck in part time since 2002.

I think your post does the opposite of refuting the dismal reality.

of some social justice. If we all sink into poverty, there will be no social justice. A vote for the status quo is a vote against the 50 million Americans living in poverty.

29 percent of earners.

At the expense of our democracy, environment and lives. None of which matter a spit to them.

It has been most painful for those unaffiliated or born under it.

In any case, It is almost over now. Aside from the last few drowned out death rattles we can utter.

but how new is this?

Second, why do I keep seeing dumb arguments?

"The federal poverty level for a family of five is $28,410, and yet almost 40 percent of all American workers do not even bring in $20,000 a year."

Uh, yeah, most people do NOT come in 5-packs. Second if one is in a family of five unless they are either stupid or unlucky, there should be a 2nd adult in that family. And two people making $20,000 a year is $40,000 or 140% of the poverty line. Even two people making just $8 an hour is $32,000 or 112% of poverty.

But these stats should come in handy for all the people who think that somebody who makes $100,000 a year is part of the middle class - when actually they make twice as much as 71% of all workers - meaning they are NOT anywhere near the middle.

Which won't stop the politicians from fellating them anyway.

Quit bringing up non-approved of talking points! We have a great economy due to the last 7 years of Obama, we added a ton of new jobs, everything is good goddammmitt!!!!!!!!!!!

I know Bernie is.

will come to pass before she speaks to that. She will NEVER bite the hand of her masters on Wall Street.

He would not mind having her for president...I find that disturbing. What disturbs me more is that Hillary supporters don't find it disturbing.

according to common financial wisdom

Only it really isn't funny.

to that saved two million

This tells me 51% are working low or no skill positions. The assembly line worker is gone. The union coal miner is gone.

It's the days of banggood.com are at hand.

Banks and offices used to be full of employees. And it just keeps getting worse.

I was just at Olive Garden and they have computers on the tables so people can enter their own orders. Pretty soon all they will need will be servers to run food out to the tables. I'm sure not going to tip for that.

They all were pretty upset about us being there, and said once the project was finished the owner would fire all the belt operators. We tried to assure them that had never happened at any other quarry we'd worked at but some folks were reassigned other duties.

The first return trip to change programming and add a few features we found out he'd actually let 17 workers go. I felt pretty bad...