U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [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 11-23-2009, 02:21 AM
 
3 posts, read 3,770 times
Reputation: 13

Advertisements

Wow, I typed in Yakima on the search engine and came across this thread...interesting. I think I made it to page 5 or 6 before deciding to chime in my opinions (if anyone cares to read).
I do agree that our standards of living will decrease. Will people come out of denial? Let's hope so. And be aware--just because YOU might be doing well, have saved your money and whatnot--does not mean that you will come through this "recession" unscathed. People forget how we are all tied together.
The reason why we got ourselves in to this mess in the first place is because of greed and all of us--our government--enabling the business world to rule us all--shipping jobs overseas, making little kids make our shoes for 2 dollars a day or whatever. As the lower class grows--well, more importantly--as the gap between the rich and poor grows--we will ALL suffer. Research has shown this--compared more egalitarian cities (Seattle, St. Paul, etc) to less equal cities (New York City, etc) and have found that richer people living in the more egalitarian cities are healthier and happier than those that live in cities where the gap is great. This comparison holds true to countries as well.
So my point is: do not think that just because you are doing well and others aren't that you won't be affected. Maybe what we need to do is not be so complacent and let our country go this way--but to make changes ourselves. If we love this country so much, wouldn't it be worth it to try to do something about it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2009, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Nashville, TN
142 posts, read 171,064 times
Reputation: 68
My standard of living has been much less than a thousand a month for quite some time now. I have no ipods, flat-screen tvs, news cars, etc. I do however have this one running computer and a few peripherals, a cell phone, a 20-something year old tv (still analog of course), a small 7 year old car, and an inflatable bed to sleep on at night. Would I want to see everyone in America live like this? No way. I want to see achievement and wealth in this country. The problem I do have is with those who look at people like me as "not having enough therefore are worthless." Some of us just don't want all that excess and shouldn't be punished for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 11:33 AM
 
511 posts, read 1,908,963 times
Reputation: 737
I am ready for a lower standard of living. Seeing the economy in this state brings to my attention the things I really could live without. TV, for example. I am going to cancel the TV. What a waste of money! We don't buy things we don't need so much anymore... don't order pizza very often at all... so on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 03:08 PM
 
Location: 125 Years Too Late...
10,296 posts, read 9,975,609 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erehs059 View Post
Some of us just don't want all that excess and shouldn't be punished for it.
Amen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Houston/Heights
2,637 posts, read 3,879,052 times
Reputation: 961
I have learned to live within what I consider "Minimal needs" for so long, that when I do get extra money, I don't do anything differently. I guess I have just adjusted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 08:37 PM
 
24,714 posts, read 26,785,278 times
Reputation: 22704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omaha Rocks View Post
I bet most of us could cut our food bills in half, and do so with relative ease. Further, it'd probably be a really good and healthy thing to do.
Yeah, and if we actually ate healthier, we'd cut our health care costs in 1/2, too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 08:50 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
3,834 posts, read 2,899,591 times
Reputation: 6076
Given the current economic trends it's inevitable. I've always lived a frugal lifestyle and will continue in that mode.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 08:50 PM
 
24,714 posts, read 26,785,278 times
Reputation: 22704
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
It doesn't really bother me because we already live the "lower standard" of living anyway. We do not own a really big house- just a simple 2000 sq ft job with a garage. Do not have the latest gadgets, got converter boxes for DTV rather than buy new TV sets, got a Honda and a Toyota- 9 and 6 years old, don't have jewelry, furs, rims or bling. Don't miss it either. Don't need a monster house or a monster SUV.
A 2000 square foot house is actually quite large, especially when you refer to it as "just". The rest of the world, even in richer developed countries does not generally have this much square footage of living space.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2009, 09:11 PM
 
6,046 posts, read 9,732,500 times
Reputation: 2319
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
A 2000 square foot house is actually quite large, especially when you refer to it as "just". The rest of the world, even in richer developed countries does not generally have this much square footage of living space.
That's because the developed countries in Europe have a higher population density.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-24-2009, 02:40 AM
 
12,842 posts, read 24,473,188 times
Reputation: 18835
Define "lower standard of living?" People seem to think of it as having less stuff or smaller stuff.
There was a time when average working people did not travel to foreign countries (except if drafted), didn't fly anywhere, did not assume that each child should have its own bedroom (never mind bathroom). The average new house in 1970 was something like 1500 sq.ft., and we have a poster who talks of having "just" a 2,000 sq.ft. house.
To me, a lower standard of living would mean more like, no indoor plumbing or no clean water. No electricity, or maybe such things being too expensive for average working people to afford. No ability to buy or access primary basic health care. Having to pay fees for public school from the beginning, not just college.
My mother grew up with an outside latrine in a tenement in the city. For her, having an indoor bathroom with running water was a huge increase in standard of living, whereas, in my opinion, having two or three bathrooms isn't a real increase, it's just... more.
I see everything from a public health perspective. Can't get away from it.
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 > Great Debates
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