On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:18:50 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:
"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 21:02:52 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
On Jul 26, 10:55 am, Bruce in Bangkok
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:08:10 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:
without unions there will be no strong middle
class,http://www.unionworld.us
Must be a U.S. phenomena as there is a strong middle class in many
Asian countries with either no unions or Government controlled unions.
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)
You got figures on how many middle class there are as a percentage of
the population, versus the western world?? - must be a GREAT place to
work, why else would the western world offshore its manufacturing
there? - maybe, no unions to put a brake on the excesses of
capitalism.
Andrew VK3BFA.
The largest middle class in the world..is in India. By several orders
of magnitude
From _Business Week_, one year ago:
"The next two groups-seekers, earning between 200,000 and 500,000 rupees
($4,376- $10,941), and strivers, with incomes of between 500,000 and 1
million rupees ($10,941-$21,882)-will become India's huge new middle class.
While their incomes would place them below the poverty line in the United
States, things are much cheaper in India. When the local cost of living is
taken into account, the income of the seekers and strivers looks more like
$23,000 to $118,000, which is middle class by most developed-country
standards. Seekers range from young college graduates to mid-level
government officials, traders and business people...
"...The middle class currently numbers some 50 million people, but by 2025
will have expanded dramatically to 583 million people-some 41 percent of the
population. These households will see their incomes balloon to 51.5 trillion
rupees ($1.1 billion)-11 times the level of today and 58 percent of total
Indian income."
So India's middle class is growing rapidly, but it is still about half the
size of the US middle class. Definitions of middle class vary all over the
place but the median definition puts America's middle class at around 45% of
households -- well over 100 million people.
The original post stated, or implied, that the unions were responsible
for the develop of the middle class. I replied that it must be a U.S.
phenomena as in Asia a middle class was developing without a union.
I'm shore that developing countries have a smaller middle class then
developed countries. In Thailand, for example, approximately 60% of
the population still make their living by agriculture and to a great
extent by subsistence farming.
But still, since the early 60's a middle class has developed and
without the aid of a union.
Bruce-in-Bangkok
(correct Address is bpaige125atgmaildotcom)