U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2013, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,751,603 times
Reputation: 35909

Advertisements

Capitalism is a system that provides insufficient golden rings and punishes those who do not grab one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2013, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Illinois
827 posts, read 912,224 times
Reputation: 1266
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Capitalism is a system that provides insufficient golden rings and punishes those who do not grab one.
You're right. We should have a system where everyone gets everything equally, regardless of whether or not you work hard. Like "everyone gets a trophy" day in Little League, or "make sure you have enough candy for everyone".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 11:31 AM
 
48,519 posts, read 81,227,998 times
Reputation: 17979
Capiayalism is the system that even the chinese have grabbed on to to provide more than one bowl of rice and we see the difference it has made. Socialism has shown that its a world of the elite by political power and control by the most powerful leaving little reason for people to produce because they will not by it.That someone else is going to produce so that others can consume for free is a false basis of thought. Its evident by looking that education which is basis for learning skills is often not valued as much in this coutnry anymore with entitlement growth since the mid 60's.Growth represented by GDP has become a real problem even in the most advanced industrial counteis in the world.People are fooling themselves if they beleive that too many can be dependent on too few for very long in any country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 12:20 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,677 posts, read 16,479,951 times
Reputation: 7274
Quote:
Originally Posted by proverbs23and7 View Post
That is a dangerous mindset that is being fed to our youth daily. We make more excuses and reasons as to why we cant succeed than anytime in history. We continue to buy into this hysteria of how bad things are, and yet their is some truth to it. But there are still a lot of people that are thriving because they choose to educate and build value within themselves to excel.Not denying that our job climate is different than say 30 years ago, but to survive you must adapt.
We make the error of looking back at the 50s, 60s, and early 70s as natural when it as not.

It took decades for Europe & Japan to have real industry again after WWII. They were in ruins, we were unscathed.

That era of no competition made us lazy. Now we either truly compete on a more level field, or we pay the price.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 12:33 PM
 
9,856 posts, read 13,043,343 times
Reputation: 5443
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Capiayalism is the system that even the chinese have grabbed on to to provide more than one bowl of rice and we see the difference it has made. Socialism has shown that its a world of the elite by political power and control by the most powerful leaving little reason for people to produce because they will not by it.That someone else is going to produce so that others can consume for free is a false basis of thought. Its evident by looking that education which is basis for learning skills is often not valued as much in this coutnry anymore with entitlement growth since the mid 60's.Growth represented by GDP has become a real problem even in the most advanced industrial counteis in the world.People are fooling themselves if they beleive that too many can be dependent on too few for very long in any country.
Exactly. Imagine where China would be today if the government did not embrace a freer market in the early 1970's. They certainly would not be in a position to compete with us today.

Artificially high wages provided both through the manufacturing boom in America caused by WWII coupled with aggressive FED policies created a situation where today's baby boomers earned wages and could live lifestyles far beyond what a stable market could support. We are in a process of stabilizing back to a point where a mediocre worker can support a mediocre lifestyle. Adjusting back to a sustainable lifestyle from what we have been used to over the last half a century or so is not fun, but is something that inevitably has to happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,412 posts, read 8,303,831 times
Reputation: 6352
Yes, in the increased competition of a global economy, mediocre U.S. workers will suffer, or at least not be able to live so much above their means on credit as they have in the past.

As the world has gotten smaller with improved travel/communication/trade, the above average worker (the educated, elite worker) often has more in common with elite workers from other countries, than with mediocre workers from their own town.

I have seen this time and time again working in intl. business. The highly skilled Americans, Europeans, Asians, Indians, etc. are often working together towards a common "global dream," which leaves out mediocre workers from around the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 01:16 PM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
26,928 posts, read 58,162,405 times
Reputation: 29431
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq View Post
Artificially high wages provided both through the manufacturing boom in America caused by WWII coupled with aggressive FED policies created a situation where today's baby boomers earned wages and could live lifestyles far beyond what a stable market could support.
BS.
These people were paid competitively and fairly relative to the market they were in (then).
That market (production and labor) has changed since then.

The only fault directly attributable to boomers... (and even that is incidental)
was continuing to (over) produce in the subsequent wave.

Too many of them made too many of you at the same time that manufacturing was to decline.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 01:38 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,751,603 times
Reputation: 35909
Quote:
Originally Posted by wargamer6 View Post
You're right. We should have a system where everyone gets everything equally, regardless of whether or not you work hard. Like "everyone gets a trophy" day in Little League, or "make sure you have enough candy for everyone".
No, not equally. Nothing that has been said by anybody that even remotely hinted at that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Illinois
827 posts, read 912,224 times
Reputation: 1266
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
No, not equally. Nothing that has been said by anybody that even remotely hinted at that.
That's what you're implying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2013, 03:16 PM
 
9,856 posts, read 13,043,343 times
Reputation: 5443
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
BS.
These people were paid competitively and fairly relative to the market they were in (then).
That market (production and labor) has changed since then.

The only fault directly attributable to boomers... (and even that is incidental)
was continuing to (over) produce in the subsequent wave.

Too many of them made too many of you at the same time that manufacturing was to decline.
I never placed fault with boomers. I said boomers enjoyed the fruits of artificially good economies. Are you really saying that WWII did not artificially boost manufacturing in the US?

And are you suggesting that the Fed's aggressive employment lowering policies under Burns and Miller did not boost employment and wages to the point where it was unsustainable in the long term?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top