Why does it seem that so many people here are working class?

[The Hammer2021]

On 12/21/2021 at 6:29 PM, khunPer said:

Most of upper middle class don't care about this forum, they have too much money they need to spend on all the fun in amazing Thailand and their hi-so life-style. So they are out there sitting in their luxury pool villas and enjoying the sea view with a cool drink. and they probably not mingle a lot - keeping themselves to their own class - just like many people use 5-star resorts for the extended privacy and won't risk to mingle with the mob...????

 

More seriously, there might be a larger number of lower income retirees in Thailand, mainly coming as kind of financial refugees, as their money lasts a little longer here, even that it's not a longer like living for pennies on the dollar. Those with enough money - the more wealthy higher middle class - will have plenty of excellent options around the World, which they might find more attractive than Thailand.

 

And exactly where are the borders between working class retirees and middle class retirees, $500,000 or $1 million in savings? And upper middle class retirees, what financial level are those presumed to be in? And is it only income and savings that makes the difference, or also education, and former, or even present, profession?

 

In the area of LOS where I live there are plenty of high end villas with foreigners, some are retired, and some are not. Those of the few from hi-end villas that I know don't head much out for the same places as the mob; however I know one exclusion. One preferred to sail in his small yacht - small compared to some of the yachts you see - and instead invited friends to join him (the boat had two en-suite guest rooms). Others play tennis or golf rather than visiting a pub, or ride on private jet-ski or smaller speed boats that can be towed up on a cart into their beachfront villas; others just don't go much out, and rather have food brought to their house. Noneof them seems to care much about social networks, they probably don't need them.

 

There must be a relative huge number in a class way above my life-style, judged from the number of high level villas and ditto cars that I see foreigners drive in; i.e. someone must live in the 70+ million baht villas, the most expensive private villa I've seen advertised for sale here was 475 million baht. Some also seems to be able to afford more than one child in international school, and the kids being picked up by cars that folks with a more modest life-style only can afford to dreams about. However it's pure qualified speculation based on what I see and hear, I have no statistics. I however noticed that a few arrived in private jets, which of course could have been be chartered, but one with a N-registration was parked on-and-off in the local airport for ages, but I presume that kind of people are in hi-so level...????

Could you please explain at further length with a more detailed answer?

[The Hammer2021]

https://mltranslations.org/Britain/Marxclass.htm

[The Cipher]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Yet with all that, even though the funds are managed "experts" with advanced degrees and all the information in the world at their fingertips, still half of them don't out perform index funds. How funny is that? It's still a monkey with a handful of darts, but now there are more monkeys and they're paid a lot more. 

I feel like I should clarify that my employer is a PE firm. We're generally not public markets investors.

 

Quote

Think about how much easier being a Wall Street investment analyst became when spreadsheets came into being,  and then again once everything went online.

Also, not sure what to say if you think that this is true. Information flow is stupid high and gets higher every year. Connectivity just means that you're on call 24/7 too. Don't believe me? Do my job for a month. If you put in genuine effort and survive 30 days, you can keep the salary (which might make you blush).

 

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Weak

Don't appreciate this characterization tho. Spent 30 minutes on a post that AseanNow zapped. Re-writing that post plus this post would be another 30 minutes. I do keep in mind that every minute I spend on AN is expected value negative (ie, I spend time to do sth, but have no expected return on time spent). 

 

I have a fairly demanding job, run a business, am doing a data science bootcamp, and also have to find time for life admin + leisure and personal life. Gotta guard time carefully.

[Yellowtail]

17 hours ago, The Cipher said:

I feel like I should clarify that my employer is a PE firm. We're generally not public markets investors.

I was talking about “Wall Street financial analysts in general, not you.  Sorry if that was not clear. I did not mean to hurt your feelings.  

 

Quote

Also, not sure what to say if you think that this is true. Information flow is stupid high and gets higher every year. Connectivity just means that you're on call 24/7 too.

I was on call 24/7 for twenty years, and it seems to me that connectivity did nothing but make it easier year after year. 

 

Quote

Don't believe me? Do my job for a month. If you put in genuine effort and survive 30 days, you can keep the salary (which might make you blush).

And I bet you would not make it to lunch doing at least five of the jobs I’ve had, but that really does not have anything to do with what we are discussing.

 

Quote

Don't appreciate this characterization tho.

Yeah, I did not appreciate you claiming most of the AseanNow forum members were below average intelligence, but you did. Your post was weak, I called it weak, whatever. 

 

Quote

Spent 30 minutes on a post that AseanNow zapped.

Yes, the old “dog ate my homework”. I think this excuse may speak to your "strongly external locus of control". Hey, perhaps you can use “posting on a chat-board” as one of the things you find so challenging and stressful in this “new” world.

 

Quote

Re-writing that post plus this post would be another 30 minutes. I do keep in mind that every minute I spend on AN is expected value negative (ie, I spend time to do sth, but have no expected return on time spent). 

Indeed. I understand completely how much more valuable your time is than mine.

 

Quote

I have a fairly demanding job, run a business, am doing a data science bootcamp, and also have to find time for life admin + leisure and personal life. Gotta guard time carefully.

Again, I understand. People with your vastly superior intellect are in high demand and every moment you spend here is a moment the world is deprived of your vital contributions. But enough about you and how great you are, I am willing to bow to your greatness. Let’s just get back to what we were discussing before we got sidetracked.

 

I think in the post that got deleted, you had explained:

1. What is difficult about getting a college degree?

2. Why is life more stressful now than it was for previous generations?

3. What are a few of the many material things past generations enjoyed that your generation does not enjoy?

4. What are a few of the many political privilege's I have enjoyed that was not, or is not available to everyone?

5. What policies tend to be favorable to my demographic that do not favor everyone’s?

 

If you could just go back over those when you get a chance it would be great. 

 

Edited December 27, 2021 by Yellowtail

[The Cipher]

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Indeed. I understand completely how valuable your time is.

Actually I was thinking about this today, and not out of arrogance or a sense of superiority. I joined this forum because I was interested in learning more about the lives of the Western retirees I saw around Bangkok but never had a chance to interact with, and I feel like I've accomplished that goal.

 

I'm not sure what purpose I serve here anymore and so I think this may be my last post for some time. I realize nobody cares, I'm just musing.

 

Will probably continue to lurk occasionally tho, because I owe a dude a coffee and the only way he knows how to reach me is on AseanNow. I'll respond to some of your other points below, but if you'd like to continue the convo thereafter and are in Bangkok in the next three months, feel free to DM me and we can grab a beer or something (I'm around until end of March). Would at least be more fun to do that.

 

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

1. What is difficult about getting a college degree?

Nothing is difficult about getting a college degree-ish. In that the requirements of college (both admission and expectations) now are so low that it seems like almost anyone can attend university and graduate with a degree.

 

What I would suggest is pernicious about the college game, is that: (i) they essentially tack on a mandatory four extra years post high school, which carries an opportunity cost; (ii) the cost of a college education in America has (and continues to) increase at a significantly faster rate than wage growth, which causes a ton of young people to get enter adulthood with a monster pile of debt; (iii) information available to high school students and other prospective applicants tends to be unevenly distributed such that many of the people who make poor decisions about college are those who are most in need of what they believe is education's promise of upward-mobility; and (iv) the utility of a college degree is more questionable than ever (essentially rent-seeking gatekeepers to employment), particularly in an era where almost anything can be learned to an elite level online and with some willpower, but in this world the credential still matters.

 

TLDR: Implicit (opportunity) and explicit costs of college are high and getting higher. But university's increasingly dubious value prop continues to be upheld by cultural legacy.

 

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

2. Why is life more stressful now than it was for previous generations?

Pressure is higher, pace of innovation is faster, and sources of competition have increased. This is true at all tiers of society except the tippity top.

 

In the working classes we've seen a hollowing-out of traditional sources of employment, increased pressure due to competition from overseas workers (offshoring) and machines, wage suppression due to those same factors of globalization + technology, and an increasing number of people checking out and/or turning to unhealthy coping mechanisms.

 

In the professional classes we've seen the bar of expectations rise steadily. A ton of professionals place their kids on a competitive path towards an 'elite' profession from basically as soon as they enter high school and those kids walk that path with the single-minded goal of passing recruiting in college. And the reward for those kids that make it past the professional gates is...100 hour work weeks and the crucible of professional expectations. And competition is getting fiercer because at this tier, everyone is looking for an edge. As the competitive frontier pushes outwards and upwards (at increasingly velocity, I might add), everyone has to rise to meet it or be left behind. It's no fun.

 

Younger generations in general also tend not to be beneficiaries of (and thus are negatively affected by) the asset price boom relative to wage levels. Expanding on this could fill a book in itself and would also get pretty technical, but there's probably been plenty written about this on Google if topic is of interest.

 

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

3. What are a few of the many material things past generations enjoyed that your generation does not enjoy?

I don't remember saying this. If I did say this, I'm not sure the context it was in. I think that the older generations alive today (as a generalization) enjoyed a relatively easier path to wealth accumulation, but in terms of meaningful material day to day things I'm not sure there's too much of a difference. If anything younger generations would be the winners here because of wider diversity of available products and entertainment/experience options.

 

6 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

4. What are a few of the many political privilege's I have enjoyed that was not, or is not available to everyone?

5. What policies tend to be favorable to my demographic that do not favor everyone’s?

I mean, nobody is accusing Boomers of maliciously rigging the system here (at least I'm not). But as a large-in-number group, Boomers have enjoyed a ton of political power for most of their lives. Because they're such a large portion of the electorate, policies tend to be favorable to the demographic in general. Not sure if this would be best described as a feature or a bug of democracy.

 

Some quick examples would be: beneficiaries of generous social security that may not ultimately be available to other generations; simultaneously requiring relatively large societal burden of care due to aging en masse; NIMBYism that would benefit younger gens (for example densification of residential neighbourhoods in high cost cities); Brexit lol; Covid policies that disproportionately affected younger people to the benefit of older people, while simultaneously exacerbating intergenerational wealth inequality due to policies that preserved pension and home values at the expense of incomes; etc. 

 

I ascribe no maliciousness to these actions, it's just a group swaying the political calculus in their own interest due to happening, by chance, to be a massive voting bloc. But facts are that this resulted in a privileged political position not (yet) enjoyed by other gens.

---

Anyway, this post = probably my swan song as an AseanNow poster. I'll revert to lurking occasionally. Thanks for taking the time to chat with me!

[sharksy]

16 minutes ago, The Cipher said:

Actually I was thinking about this today, and not out of arrogance or a sense of superiority. I joined this forum because I was interested in learning more about the lives of the Western retirees I saw around Bangkok but never had a chance to interact with, and I feel like I've accomplished that goal.

 

I'm not sure what purpose I serve here anymore and so I think this may be my last post for some time. I realize nobody cares, I'm just musing.

 

Will probably continue to lurk occasionally tho, because I owe a dude a coffee and the only way he knows how to reach me is on AseanNow. I'll respond to some of your other points below, but if you'd like to continue the convo thereafter and are in Bangkok in the next three months, feel free to DM me and we can grab a beer or something (I'm around until end of March). Would at least be more fun to do that.

 

Nothing is difficult about getting a college degree-ish. In that the requirements of college (both admission and expectations) now are so low that it seems like almost anyone can attend university and graduate with a degree.

 

What I would suggest is pernicious about the college game, is that: (i) they essentially tack on a mandatory four extra years post high school, which carries an opportunity cost; (ii) the cost of a college education in America has (and continues to) increase at a significantly faster rate than wage growth, which causes a ton of young people to get enter adulthood with a monster pile of debt; (iii) information available to high school students and other prospective applicants tends to be unevenly distributed such that many of the people who make poor decisions about college are those who are most in need of what they believe is education's promise of upward-mobility; and (iv) the utility of a college degree is more questionable than ever (essentially rent-seeking gatekeepers to employment), particularly in an era where almost anything can be learned to an elite level online and with some willpower, but in this world the credential still matters.

 

TLDR: Implicit (opportunity) and explicit costs of college are high and getting higher. But university's increasingly dubious value prop continues to be upheld by cultural legacy.

 

Pressure is higher, pace of innovation is faster, and sources of competition have increased. This is true at all tiers of society except the tippity top.

 

In the working classes we've seen a hollowing-out of traditional sources of employment, increased pressure due to competition from overseas workers (offshoring) and machines, wage suppression due to those same factors of globalization + technology, and an increasing number of people checking out and/or turning to unhealthy coping mechanisms.

 

In the professional classes we've seen the bar of expectations rise steadily. A ton of professionals place their kids on a competitive path towards an 'elite' profession from basically as soon as they enter high school and those kids walk that path with the single-minded goal of passing recruiting in college. And the reward for those kids that make it past the professional gates is...100 hour work weeks and the crucible of professional expectations. And competition is getting fiercer because at this tier, everyone is looking for an edge. As the competitive frontier pushes outwards and upwards (at increasingly velocity, I might add), everyone has to rise to meet it or be left behind. It's no fun.

 

Younger generations in general also tend not to be beneficiaries of (and thus are negatively affected by) the asset price boom relative to wage levels. Expanding on this could fill a book in itself and would also get pretty technical, but there's probably been plenty written about this on Google if topic is of interest.

 

I don't remember saying this. If I did say this, I'm not sure the context it was in. I think that the older generations alive today (as a generalization) enjoyed a relatively easier path to wealth accumulation, but in terms of meaningful material day to day things I'm not sure there's too much of a difference. If anything younger generations would be the winners here because of wider diversity of available products and entertainment/experience options.

 

I mean, nobody is accusing Boomers of maliciously rigging the system here (at least I'm not). But as a large-in-number group, Boomers have enjoyed a ton of political power for most of their lives. Because they're such a large portion of the electorate, policies tend to be favorable to the demographic in general. Not sure if this would be best described as a feature or a bug of democracy.

 

Some quick examples would be: beneficiaries of generous social security that may not ultimately be available to other generations; simultaneously requiring relatively large societal burden of care due to aging en masse; NIMBYism that would benefit younger gens (for example densification of residential neighbourhoods in high cost cities); Brexit lol; Covid policies that disproportionately affected younger people to the benefit of older people, while simultaneously exacerbating intergenerational wealth inequality due to policies that preserved pension and home values at the expense of incomes; etc. 

 

I ascribe no maliciousness to these actions, it's just a group swaying the political calculus in their own interest due to happening, by chance, to be a massive voting bloc. But facts are that this resulted in a privileged political position not (yet) enjoyed by other gens.

---

Anyway, this post = probably my swan song as an AseanNow poster. I'll revert to lurking occasionally. Thanks for taking the time to chat with me!

I sincerely hope this is not your last post.  I for one, enjoy reading your long and well thought out pieces and generally agree with much of what you state.  I do sense that you are often trolled somewhat, and are way too polite to call them out!

[Yellowtail]

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

Actually I was thinking about this today, and not out of arrogance or a sense of superiority. I joined this forum because I was interested in learning more about the lives of the Western retirees I saw around Bangkok but never had a chance to interact with, and I feel like I've accomplished that goal.

 

I'm not sure what purpose I serve here anymore and so I think this may be my last post for some time. I realize nobody cares, I'm just musing.

 

Will probably continue to lurk occasionally tho, because I owe a dude a coffee and the only way he knows how to reach me is on AseanNow. I'll respond to some of your other points below, but if you'd like to continue the convo thereafter and are in Bangkok in the next three months, feel free to DM me and we can grab a beer or something (I'm around until end of March). Would at least be more fun to do that.

I’ll be here until June anyway, then (hopefully) in and out after that. 

 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

Nothing is difficult about getting a college degree-ish. In that the requirements of college (both admission and expectations) now are so low that it seems like almost anyone can attend university and graduate with a degree.

 

What I would suggest is pernicious about the college game, is that: (i) they essentially tack on a mandatory four extra years post high school, which carries an opportunity cost; (ii) the cost of a college education in America has (and continues to) increase at a significantly faster rate than wage growth, which causes a ton of young people to get enter adulthood with a monster pile of debt; (iii) information available to high school students and other prospective applicants tends to be unevenly distributed such that many of the people who make poor decisions about college are those who are most in need of what they believe is education's promise of upward-mobility; and (iv) the utility of a college degree is more questionable than ever (essentially rent-seeking gatekeepers to employment), particularly in an era where almost anything can be learned to an elite level online and with some willpower, but in this world the credential still matters.

 

TLDR: Implicit (opportunity) and explicit costs of college are high and getting higher. But university's increasingly dubious value prop continues to be upheld by cultural legacy.

I agree with most all of this and commend you on stating it so clearly and completely. In my opinion, if the government got out of student loan business this would turn around quickly, but that another topic altogether.

To be clears, no one is compelled to get a degree, and there is no shortage of kids that can and do enter the workplace without a degree and do fine. Yes, at some point they may hit a ceiling, but this has always been the case. Smart, hardworking, reliable people continue to do fine in the workforce.

 

It has also always been the case that there are fewer great jobs than there are good jobs. You need more people pushing than steering, and when 60% of the workforce are looking for jobs steering, many are going to be disappointed.

That said, there are degrees one can get from lower tier universities that virtually guarantee the degree holder any number of good paying jobs to select from, correct?

 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

Pressure is higher, pace of innovation is faster, and sources of competition have increased. This is true at all tiers of society except the tippity top.

Again, I’m haven’t been seeing this. Generally, people I have seen entering the workforce seem to be less concerned about the quality of their work and its impact on the company and their customers than ever before. The attitude of many seems to border on indifference. 
Of course, you still occasionally see or meet a fresh-faced kid that seems on the ball and has a dozen things going at once, and you know they’re on their way up. They’ve gotten a job steering and they’re not sitting down and letting anyone else grab the wheel for a moment. Yeah, they are stressed, but they seem to be the exception, not the rule. 
 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

In the working classes we've seen a hollowing-out of traditional sources of employment, increased pressure due to competition from overseas workers (offshoring) and machines, wage suppression due to those same factors of globalization + technology, and an increasing number of people checking out and/or turning to unhealthy coping mechanisms.

Perhaps it’s different in Canada, but in the US most everyone works, so I am not clear whether you are referring to the middle class or the working poor.
I would be very interested in what percentage of jobs pay minimum wage now, compared to fifty years ago, but I would bet it is smaller. There are companies that have doubled the starting pay in less than a year and still can’t get people to show up. But going from eight to sixteen dollars an hour does not generate a lot of interest from recent graduates, nor does it move median income much. But it does make life easier for the working poor. 
 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

In the professional classes we've seen the bar of expectations rise steadily. A ton of professionals place their kids on a competitive path towards an 'elite' profession from basically as soon as they enter high school and those kids walk that path with the single-minded goal of passing recruiting in college. And the reward for those kids that make it past the professional gates is...100 hour work weeks and the crucible of professional expectations. And competition is getting fiercer because at this tier, everyone is looking for an edge. As the competitive frontier pushes outwards and upwards (at increasingly velocity, I might add), everyone has to rise to meet it or be left behind. It's no fun.

This reads well, but is it your position that historically doctors, layers and engineers did not want their children to be doctors, lawyers, and engineers?

This goes back to my previous point, that there are not enough positions to satisfy the people wanting to fill them. I would much rather have retired a rock-and-roll star, and I felt qualified, but they weren’t hiring . 

Was it easier to get into medical school fifty years ago than it is now? Perhaps, but it certainly was not easy back then. But even if it is, these are top ten-percenters, and it’s not fair to say generations have it tougher by siting difficulties the top-ten had getting there. 
 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

Younger generations in general also tend not to be beneficiaries of (and thus are negatively affected by) the asset price boom relative to wage levels. Expanding on this could fill a book in itself and would also get pretty technical, but there's probably been plenty written about this on Google if topic is of interest.

Well, I Googled and found that (as I understand it) median home values in the US are about $300K. With 20% down and a 30-year fixed @ 3.8%, the payment should be at about $1,400, including about $200 in tax and $80 in insurance, yes?

 

I further understand that median household incomes in the US are at about $70K, or about $5,833 per month, correct?

 

That makes the house payment about 24% of monthly income. Add $500 a month for utilities and incidentals and you’re still under 33%. A third of income has been rule of thumb for housing cost for as long as I can remember.
 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

I don't remember saying this. If I did say this, I'm not sure the context it was in. I think that the older generations alive today (as a generalization) enjoyed a relatively easier path to wealth accumulation, but in terms of meaningful material day to day things I'm not sure there's too much of a difference. If anything younger generations would be the winners here because of wider diversity of available products and entertainment/experience options.

You did not say this. What I am saying is that younger generations seem to enjoy all the material things previous generations enjoyed and more. If true, it’s difficult to claim they are so much worse off financially, as material goods are about all finances are good for, which makes them a good measure. 

Yes, you believe it was easier for previous generations to accumulate wealth. I disagree. I think if you looked at what people in different age groups have as savings, then project the younger group’s median out to the older group’s, you’ll see they are doing well compared to boomers.  

Then, when you consider how much cheaper and easier investing has become, and how much easier it is to research investment vehicles, I think it fair to say that accounting wealth is likely easier for younger generations. 
I would bet a significantly higher percentage of kids have active brokerage accounts now than did fifty years ago. 
 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

I mean, nobody is accusing Boomers of maliciously rigging the system here (at least I'm not). But as a large-in-number group, Boomers have enjoyed a ton of political power for most of their lives. Because they're such a large portion of the electorate, policies tend to be favorable to the demographic in general. Not sure if this would be best described as a feature or a bug of democracy.

 

Some quick examples would be: beneficiaries of generous social security that may not ultimately be available to other generations; simultaneously requiring relatively large societal burden of care due to aging en masse; NIMBYism that would benefit younger gens (for example densification of residential neighbourhoods in high cost cities); Brexit lol; Covid policies that disproportionately affected younger people to the benefit of older people, while simultaneously exacerbating intergenerational wealth inequality due to policies that preserved pension and home values at the expense of incomes; etc. 

 

I ascribe no maliciousness to these actions, it's just a group swaying the political calculus in their own interest due to happening, by chance, to be a massive voting bloc. But facts are that this resulted in a privileged political position not (yet) enjoyed by other gens.

About 25% of voting age people are over sixty, yet you blame them for current political policies, that seems weak to me.

Social Security was put in place long before the first boomer was born, and I do not remember ever getting to vote on anything associated with it. To be clear, I would vote to eliminate it 100% today if a few other programs went with it.

 

On 12/27/2021 at 11:52 PM, The Cipher said:

---

Anyway, this post = probably my swan song as an AseanNow poster. I'll revert to lurking occasionally. Thanks for taking the time to chat with me!

To be clear, I feel sorry for kids today, but not because I think they are more stressed, or have fewer opportunities, but because so many aspects of civil society are deteriorating. In fifty years, no one will know what a great world it was. 

 

It was refreshing, thanks! 
 

[Thunglom]

the expression "working class" is  purely subjective 

here ae the formal classes in UK

Group	Description	NRS equivalent
1	Higher professional and managerial occupations	A
2	Lower managerial and professional occupations	B
3	Intermediate occupations	C1 and C2
4	Small employers and own account workers	C1 and C2
5	Lower supervisory and technical occupations	C1 and C2
6	Semi-routine occupations	D
7	Routine occupations	D
8	Never worked and long-term unemployed	E

 

 

or try this

Results

• Elite.
• Established middle class.
• Technical middle class.
• New affluent workers.
• Traditional working class.
• Emergent service sector.
• Precariat.

 

however, if you mean overweight, uneducated with expectations limited to beer, fried food and sex.........

Edited January 2, 2022 by Thunglom

[Odysseus123]

On 12/23/2021 at 6:51 PM, DJ54 said:

OP the topic could of caused firey fingers.., but as the thread grows yourself and others have interesting feedback. 

Yes indeed.

A most interesting topic and one conducted with a great deal of civility.

The entire thread is a pleasure to read.

As for the parade of the generations they all seem to have developed their own versions of "millenarianism" as they shovel the old folks into their graves whilst preparing to detest the  new oncoming brood.

And detestable they are????!

 

[thaitom]

Damn, I'm not even in the working class.  Haven't had a job in two years this month.