The problem now is automation, but that's because all of the jobs that couldn't be automated have already been shipped overseas. I argue that automation, globalization, and arguably illegal immigration are the three largest factors gutting the lower and middle classes in America. Also, you don't have to give better jobs to everyone, just a big chunk. There are ~10 million illegal immigrants in the US, which has a population of ~300 million. Right or wrong, shipping them out or giving some sort of work visa(to require at least minimum wage pay) would raise demand for lower class jobs to the point where lower and middle class wages may finally start rising again.

Edited to recognize the open debate on illegal immigration. I don't understand how illegal immigration could lead to a better job outlook for the lower class. If anyone has some info on that, I'd appreciate it.

Nope: you forget that immigrants (legal or otherwise) increase demand for goods in their local economy which creates demand for jobs to fulfill these goods. Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume".

> Research shows that this demand creates more jobs than the immigrants "consume".

This seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, could you point me to any research?

Jobs are made possible by consumption. Illegal immigrants are consumers too.

Without them, we'd have fewer workers competing for jobs, which seems like a good thing, but we'd also have fewer jobs to go around because of decreased consumption.

That's a fine theory but do you have any proof?

This episode of the "Science Vs" podcast goes over a lot of research on immigration including what I mentioned about job creation: https://gimletmedia.com/episode/immigration/

The first two are on point. The third is politically motivated. The question of whether illegal immigrants contribute more to everyone is still relatively open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_imm...

Read the NYT piece again: it cites evidence the trade deficit is a major problem. Of course, since accepting this means admitting that Trump is correct on trade, the authors immediately write-off the evidence by insisting that these jobs would eventually disappear anyway. So can we really blame China?

Unfortunately, the problem is not about keeping any particular job so much as keeping the American economy vibrant enough to create new jobs as the old ones disappear. This requires the economy to operate at full employment, which requires adequate aggregate demand, which requires... well... there's your problem with the massive trade deficit and Chinese protectionism. Put more simply, if the Chinese were purchasing as much from the United States as they were selling into it, there would be a lot more job opportunities in the industries selling to China. Those would drive up wages and create competition to hire those newly unemployed.

Incidentally, it is worth remarking on the fact that China is going through the same pattern of automation and labor dislocation as the United States. The country also has an endemic problem with rent-capture and corruption that works against an efficient private sector. Despite this, the economy is doing much better at job creation largely because of the country's mercantilism: its politically engineered trade surplus ensures adequate demand in the southern export-oriented parts of the economy, while state control of the financial sector serves to redistributes gains from trade to the SOE sector etc.