Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My wife borrowed to go to law school, and we've not reached poverty quite yet.
That was a investment and not consuming produced good tho.Quite different really. That si also why the loans were at the rate they were;that it was a risk worth takig both on your part and the lender; especailly with teh specail provisions of student loans.
NEgirl - I'll bet the news is now owned by a myriad of corporate bureaucrats instead of individuals and families. The Union Leader newspaper in Manchester, NH is no longer a virulently right wing as during the regime of William Lobe. During that time any bad news was the blame of the few Democrats he could find. The man made millions deluding the people of NH but that was both expected and accepted. I found his tripe inedible and refused to play. I still refuse to bother reading his paper’s swill.
I also avoid most television news as well. I could care less is some kid is accidently shot by some gang thug or another broken space heater burns a place down. These tragedies may be devastating to the people directly involved but, IMHO, they are not news. This is not as important as telling me which government bureaucrat was asked to stop an investigation of some representative’s friend or how we are going to invade another country because they threaten international oil pricing.
This is exactly what I mean. I remember during the Vietnam War even years into it there was at least some coverage on the front page, even if most of it was continued on the back page. During the Iraq war my paper, which by the way serves a widely liberal community, had just about zero front-page spots (and the "war" in Afghanistan has absolute zero front page spots).
What did we get on our front pages (a supposedly serious "daily") in the prime central spot? A big photo of a kid eating an icecream cone on a hot day, or someone watering their lawn or some local event that could have at least gone to page 2.
What kind of coverage have both these "wars" gotten from the big papers, like the NYT? If I were younger I'd do a study and that would qualify me for a PHd and I'd go on to write a dissertation, a book, and tenured position.
And then of course we have the PBS specials with footage of the ground fighting that makes the whole thing seem even more weird, no comprehensive coverage of why we are really there.
My late 92 yr old mother who only graduated from h.s. always said "read between the lines" and "read between the lines some more." How she would have loved the internet!
Of course the US - and the rest of the world - will recover. Just not for many more years.
We all need to be reading up on what PEAK OIL means (no, this is not liberal spin, Sarah P.). We will not recover without alternative means of energy. You can expect in the future war after war after war. These will be Resource Wars. As they have been, and shall be, everafter.
One troubling aspect of this and other forums that deal with the more pressing issues of our day is the persistent posting of linked web/TV/newspaper articles that supposedly are to be discussed by those coming to the forum thread, very seldom do we see an original statement dealing with these issues from the posters own observations. This leads to more arguing about information source, and understandably so. In the age of information overload we've got to be vigilant in our attempts to be informed, blogs and other web based content can be especially tricky stuff to navigate around so it pays to read the more substantial observations of those more well known and experienced political observers.
While I see your point, many of us who went through the education system (high school, college, post-grad) learned not to make opinion statements without backing them up with a more knowledgeable source than ourselves. Who wants to just hear a bunch of never ending subjective opinions coming from people all over the planet we cannot see and know nothing about?
Of course we have to "consider the source" when we read the articles that are referenced. But everything, even from the experts, is subjective esp when it comes to the economy. The academics (professors of economics) are tied to their own lucrative interests, believe it. And so are everyone in politics. In the end, we believe what we want to believe, don't we? If someone thinks the sky is falling, s/he's not gonna get talked out of it. Same with those who think everything's cool and will rebalance soon.
I for one would rather see a link to an intelligently written article (when someone posits an opinion) than take the word of a chicken little or smiling Harry.
Even then I will consider the source. But being open minded and fairly analytical (even of things hard to understand) I might even learn something.
While I see your point, many of us who went through the education system (high school, college, post-grad) learned not to make opinion statements without backing them up with a more knowledgeable source than ourselves. Who wants to just hear a bunch of never ending subjective opinions coming from people all over the planet we cannot see and know nothing about?
Of course we have to "consider the source" when we read the articles that are referenced. But everything, even from the experts, is subjective esp when it comes to the economy. The academics (professors of economics) are tied to their own lucrative interests, believe it. And so are everyone in politics. In the end, we believe what we want to believe, don't we? If someone thinks the sky is falling, s/he's not gonna get talked out of it. Same with those who think everything's cool and will rebalance soon.
I for one would rather see a link to an intelligently written article (when someone posits an opinion) than take the word of a chicken little or smiling Harry.
Even then I will consider the source. But being open minded and fairly analytical (even of things hard to understand) I might even learn something.
I also can see your point, but, the fact remains that many people haven't formed any opinion, and instead want the respondents to their posts to be discussing the merit of said link, that of course ends up as stated opinions. I don't have any complaint with hearing the opinions of others as long as those opinions are the result of a variety of information and not a single source.
This is exactly what I mean. I remember during the Vietnam War even years into it there was at least some coverage on the front page, even if most of it was continued on the back page. During the Iraq war my paper, which by the way serves a widely liberal community, had just about zero front-page spots (and the "war" in Afghanistan has absolute zero front page spots).
What did we get on our front pages (a supposedly serious "daily") in the prime central spot? A big photo of a kid eating an icecream cone on a hot day, or someone watering their lawn or some local event that could have at least gone to page 2.
What kind of coverage have both these "wars" gotten from the big papers, like the NYT? If I were younger I'd do a study and that would qualify me for a PHd and I'd go on to write a dissertation, a book, and tenured position.
And then of course we have the PBS specials with footage of the ground fighting that makes the whole thing seem even more weird, no comprehensive coverage of why we are really there.
My late 92 yr old mother who only graduated from h.s. always said "read between the lines" and "read between the lines some more." How she would have loved the internet!
That is because few people have any skin in the game ;so to speak. During during vietnam everyone either had a realtive ;knew a neighbor or faced the draft to go or knew someone who did. Even then if you rememeber the coverage was not like Korea or WWII. There was no results of battles either won or loss. By that time war had become a battle over policy and politics. Slowly sensorship of pasttimes have changed to spin. The souce of the media contols it by feeding reporters who are dependent on it in a more and more competitive field.That is where historians have a field day with past events as they are so spun. Even then you have to read many historians to decide on what most likely happened because they have their own bias.IMO the medai likes to report on now trust in government has demisnished today;but they really don;t report on how they don't trust or believe the media. Its no different with Obam 'iuts just that he thought he had sold the american public on another Camelot fable.
This is exactly what I mean. I remember during the Vietnam War even years into it there was at least some coverage on the front page, even if most of it was continued on the back page. During the Iraq war my paper, which by the way serves a widely liberal community, had just about zero front-page spots (and the "war" in Afghanistan has absolute zero front page spots).
What did we get on our front pages (a supposedly serious "daily") in the prime central spot? A big photo of a kid eating an icecream cone on a hot day, or someone watering their lawn or some local event that could have at least gone to page 2.
What kind of coverage have both these "wars" gotten from the big papers, like the NYT? If I were younger I'd do a study and that would qualify me for a PHd and I'd go on to write a dissertation, a book, and tenured position.
And then of course we have the PBS specials with footage of the ground fighting that makes the whole thing seem even more weird, no comprehensive coverage of why we are really there.
My late 92 yr old mother who only graduated from h.s. always said "read between the lines" and "read between the lines some more." How she would have loved the internet!
During the Vietnam war, the opening story on the tv news was the latest footage (often unedited) from the front line. It was a war people couldn't ignore and it showed. TPTB don't want Iraq and Afghanastain to be noticed. It's easier to spin that way. I have friends or family of friends there and when you hear about it you kinda wonder. Strange feeling...
I gave up on newspapers a while ago, largely because the print is hard to read, but appreciate the online articles. It's a differnt point of view.
We don't do comprehensive coverage of things today since it would be to taxing on our news blip stimulated minds. We're used to blurbs about something which take up 30 seconds. And for those who do want to read something comprehensive, its largely up to us to find it ourselves in peices. With all the agenda today, its usually pick the part that matches your agenda.
Your grandmother has it right. What should be remembered is everything you read has a point of view and that is just as important as the content. Mainstream news does too and that has to be considered in terms of what they report and how they say it. Just as it does with blogs and online media.
We also have to learn to look for sources. Find the data and see what you see. Look at the big picture. Employ critical thinking. Sadly this isnt' the way our world is encouraging and I fear too many are losing the skill. Thats the road to 1984.
During the Vietnam war, the opening story on the tv news was the latest footage (often unedited) from the front line. It was a war people couldn't ignore and it showed. TPTB don't want Iraq and Afghanastain to be noticed. It's easier to spin that way. I have friends or family of friends there and when you hear about it you kinda wonder. Strange feeling...
I gave up on newspapers a while ago, largely because the print is hard to read, but appreciate the online articles. It's a differnt point of view.
We don't do comprehensive coverage of things today since it would be to taxing on our news blip stimulated minds. We're used to blurbs about something which take up 30 seconds. And for those who do want to read something comprehensive, its largely up to us to find it ourselves in peices. With all the agenda today, its usually pick the part that matches your agenda.
Your grandmother has it right. What should be remembered is everything you read has a point of view and that is just as important as the content. Mainstream news does too and that has to be considered in terms of what they report and how they say it. Just as it does with blogs and online media.
We also have to learn to look for sources. Find the data and see what you see. Look at the big picture. Employ critical thinking. Sadly this isnt' the way our world is encouraging and I fear too many are losing the skill. Thats the road to 1984.
And sadly the kids being "educated" today are generally not learning critical thinking or comparative analysis in anything.
The texting generation is used to spinning off one-liners to each other, talking in their own speak. Great way to inherit their future.
In a certain way, the Standard of Living for all Americans is higher than it has ever been. I am a young 24 years old, but even I remember comparatively austere times: back when most people had to find a payphone to make calls from anywhere but home or work, back when the answer to any factual question was NOT on your fingertips, back when you actually had to develop film before you saw your pictures, etc. By most measures, the American middle class has it the best of all the world's middle classes: bigger houses, bigger yards, more luxurious cars, and more consumption opportunities (even a worker here can own his own boat, four-wheeler, RV, or horse - and many can own all of them). Try to live a relatively middle class life (3,000 square foot home on 1/2 acre with two SUVs, a boat, a Jetski, and an RV) anywhere else than the U.S. and a select few other countries and see how much it will cost you in local terms. You'll be shocked.
The dark side, however, is a lot of this prosperity is saddled in debt - debt that will stay with most of the middle class for a lifetime, barring any hyper-inflation (and certainly in that case, the almighty bankers will find plenty of counter-measures). To make matters worse, healthcare costs are ascending at an alarming rate, and because of our odd healthcare system which ties health insurance to a job, medical bankruptcy is always a possibility. This causes the majority to feel stress (anticipation of a negative event). I think on the macro level, the stress of having to face potential drastic decreases in one's standard of living (and the actions that follow from that sense of foreboding, e.g. not taking vacation because of fear of one's employer thinking they are lazy) is much more of an issue than an actual decrease in standards of living.
And sadly the kids being "educated" today are generally not learning critical thinking or comparative analysis in anything.
The texting generation is used to spinning off one-liners to each other, talking in their own speak. Great way to inherit their future.
Mines 19. He doesn't live with me but he strikes me as someone with a great many brick walls to run into before he figures it out. I don't envy him. I have a feeling some of these kids who are newly experiencing reality will realize there is a lot more to it than school every taught. I'm hoping that those who are intellegent like my kid will have that lightbulb turn on and see once he's got a reason to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
