by lawnchair » Fri 20 Feb 2009, 12:12:11
Getting back to the original post, things are structured to be largely impossible for standards of living to go down, at least in a graceful manner.
Here in rural Kansas, and large swathes of the country, you will have a line out the door of reliable, English-speaking, literate workers for pretty much any job at $7 an hour. A couple, working 60 hours a week between them, can function okay out here on that (considering that there are lots of not-so-bad houses for $30-35k).
But, the Chinese, et al, will work for much, much cheaper than that. So there aren't even enough $7 an hour jobs.
This makes the gradual slide in the standard of living a discontinuous dropoff. Once $7 is too much, everyone is just unemployed.
I understand the philosophy behind something like the minimum wage. Hell, I'll support it applied to all our products. But, having one, then free-trading out from below it, is cruelly hypocritical against 90-IQ Joe trying to live the 'low standard of living' they're touting.
At 1% annual growth, human bodies will incorporate every gram in the observable universe in approximately 10,170 years.