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.
You look at socialist countries today Cuba / Venezuela for example and you have the 99% poor 1% rich model. And pure socialism is the ultimate goal of progressives.
Absolutely true. But most today don't even know what "progressivism" is. The hear "progress" and think "Oh, yeah, I'm for progress," ...science, you know. That's what they always say. "I believe in science." They have no idea what they're talking about, because they've never done any study. They would be surprised to learn that "progressivism" was imported into the USA from Europe through the University System. European socialist thought.
In the 1800s the British Aristocracy began losing ground.
They had absorbed all the wealth they could, spent it all, and the working classes began taking over. Fortunately for them, wealthy Americans wanted British Titles, and the British were happy to have the influx of cash frin the wealthy Americans. But in the end, that system FAILED.
The Same is true here now.
My father was fortunate to have lived in the boom years after WWII, and to have a job from a Fortune top 5 company. He could raise a family of four on his salary only. My mother was disabled, and could not work. He was able to save, invest in the corporate employee stock options program, invest in other opportunities and even had money to put down in a house, and to completely pay it off in a reasonable time. My aunt's all went to work to supplement those families who didn't have it quite so good, but had union husbands who did very well also. All were able to retire well afford a house and raise families and save to actually have a retirement life.
My OHs father did well to and MIL didn't have to work.
My OH and I are baby boomers to, I am the next to the last year, and my OH is 4 years older.
Our working lives started out well, with some college behind us, we both made decent money above minimum wage during the 80s. Until it began to fail under "Reganomics", and by the end of the 80s we'd be stuck at our wages until now. With or without finishing college, that is.
Companies began to see that they only had to minimum wage, or the minimum possible for a college required job. They could rake in profits and "write their own ticket" for executive positions. That began the exorbitant Pay plans for the CEO, CFO, CCO, and any other such abreviated titles of America's NEW "Aristocracy".
Companies like Walmart and McDonald's began as a "haven" for lower income families as well as the middle class who shopped there in order to save some money.
The Walton family is pulling wool over our eyes while they get richer and richer.
McDonald's tried to pull the wool over our eyes with a FAKE budget supposedly showing how one could live on a part time job with their minimum wage based jobs. It DID NOT include a line item for heat, necessary for the top half of the country, not A/C item for the southern half!! One is supposed to live WITHOUT some climate control for the extreme months?? McDonald's sees to it a "meal deal" cost one hour's wages for most of the people they serve. That FAILED, sales dropped and the wealthy got nervous, so they dreamed up the magic DOLLAR menu to try to fleece the population more, while continuing to rake in MORE money.
Walmart, the world's largest employer, got shamed, as did others like McDonald's, while had most of their employees getting government assistance due to the low wages they pay. ( Let's not go there on 'o doesn't take a brain to stock shelves for a minute because those who do use their brains with college education are in the same boat while living in the expensive col areas for jobs all the while paying for student loans for much of their beginning working careers as well as the middle, too, that's a whole different subject).
Ok let's DO go there. A college education costs so much and student debt is easy to amass along the way. Then to get paid what they should, they move from a college town where a house costs $75k to a $300-400 k housing market while trying to pay back student loans for the next 15 to 20 years, unless they take lesser paying public service jobs for ten years then get their loans forgiven.
My father had his top 5 job BEFORE finishing his college education, then the company PAID for him to finish, and allowed a sabatical to do so. So did my FIL. But no more. In the 80s I went back to college to finish while my company offered to supplement the costs. Then they came out with a mandate that if they paid at least 1/2 the cost of a degree, that you were 'indentured,' to them for at least 5 years. Not necessarily bad but I refused that condition... good thing to, as the economy collapsed in that regional company's region, and after being cut from 40 hours down to 10 and not being able to pay for heat let alone rent ( which in retrospect was the beginning of going through my savings which ended with severe medical issues caused me to drain all my savings and retirement and end up homeless); so I headed out for 'greener pastures', which never did materialize as the economy collapsed and never really regained ground from the end of the 80s.
I still make just over what I did in the late 80s, nothing gained in about 26 years. College degree? Same I might make more but would have spent more and the smartest thing I did was not saddle myself with gone of student loans.
My OH has two part time jobs, one of which is not ANY guaranteed hours! And the pay is minimum for what should be a premium paying job (health care field). The other is a smuck as a grocery store cashier, where OH excels but is given nothing in return.
I am now permanently a "working person with disabilities" as my SSDI check no longer pays much in Bills. I've worked on and off during the last 13 years, which is allowed, but now work in earnest, originally to add savings to our meager retirement, but now just to pay the bills. And Still I make just about the same as I did in 1989. 28 years have gone by and STILL no increase???
And on top of that the wealthy have Come up with new "must haves" for people to function... such as applying online for a Job requires a computer; my OH s job requires a smart phone to punch in and out in the field, and a table to file reports; and I have a work app, actually two on my smart phone for work, one of which I'm still not sure what to do with!; And so let's fleece the population more with things that WEREN'T needed just 20 years ago ( tablet and smart phone). Let's face it, a smart phone probably costs $10 to make, but is sold for $800.
Yes, those who are "preppers" are probably right, they learn how to support and survive as IF they were in the 1800s. The crap doesn't have to hit the fan for them to thrive...
A mature economy will collapse under it's own weight. Europe learned it over 500-1000 years, USA learning it over a century or so and Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong learned in 50 years and now China learning in 25.
Another war, in particular a world war... is always good for the economy may reset the world's economy.
We'll see what happens next, but I'm not optimistic about the future for the rest of my life.
Books upon books have been written on such subjects. Will we ( and the wealthy) NEVER learn? History is bound to repeat itself!!
The fall of the Western, Eastern, middle, upper and lower will fall to it's knees like the Aristocracy. AND I still wonder...who will actually clean the wealthy's toilets? Because they surely won't!
That seems a bit made up. But hey - look at Sweden or for that matter Germany. You can in fact have a healthy economy that serves the interests of the investors and the workers both.
Why don't you move there then?
Personally, I like Liberty. Why do you want to toss out the best thing that has happened in the history of man, Government by consent of the governed; i.e., Liberty and freedom?
The history of our Constitution is based on hundreds of years of English history. It didn't just happen with the Revolutionary War. The Founders and Framers of our Constitution knew their history. Sadly, today, we don't.
Even the terminology you use is socialist; "workers." You do realize that "investors" are people who work too, don't you? Why do you like separating people into classes? "Progressivism" is serfdom.
Interesting article about the unusual "choices" the working class are being forced to make in 2017 as the economy, cost of living, etc keeps getting worse and worse:
It seems we are going "backwards" in this country, it seems once most of the population is poor or has no money, it's all downhill on the slippery slope to 3rd world status. Once enough people are broke or poor, it seems the "engine" of capitalism sputters and stalls out (as spending is the "fuel"). And it's even worse this time around with the prospect of robots/automation on the horizon, on TOP of the much larger (and still growing) human population.
It's eerily/strangely reminiscent of the old crony-capitalist "robber-baron era" from pre-1900's times, are we going "full circle"?
Think about how things were back then:
- most of the population poor or servants of the rich
- kids having to work to help the household make ends meet (this one probably "coming back" soon)
- no future, no "upward" mobility, no hope to advance economically... you're born poor, you die poor
- most of the population "renting" from the rich, living in subpar housing, etc
- no unions, no safety/sanitation rules, no consumer protections, no regulation
- low/flat wages, crappy jobs, and no job security at all
- no safety nets at all, you work til' you die or hope your kids watch after you
- no healthcare, if you got hurt/sick you were out of work and thus SOL
- a tiny % of rich own it all, own everything, have all the power, etc
- previously "essential" items such as cars, hygiene products, medicine, food, etc increasingly becoming a "luxury" (as the article details )
- cronyism and corruption rule the day, "pay for play" shamelessly out in the open for all to see
Of course, Trump and his right-winger supporters don't have a problem with any of this, they in-fact favor the rich over their fellow working poor and middle-classers. They're so cold/uncaring they don't even want their fellow Americans to have a living wage (forcing those low-wage workers to subsidize their $8/hr jobs with welfare, rent vouchers, food stamps, etc). They are also anti-consumer, as evidenced by the likes of Betsy Davos and that Indian tech dude that Trump put in charge of the FCC. "Great again"?? Or is it more like "poor again"?
You have a very warped view of reality.
Define "working class." When you use that term, I envision a not to smart "Joe bag of doughnuts" who will never advance in anything, but will be tied to a factory job doing repetitive work day in and day out for Union wages (which pay far more than the job the guy is doing is worth).
Everybody works, do they not? Most people will start out in an entry level position, and if they are good, they will be promoted "up the ladder" to more responsibility and a higher salary.
The problem with people today is that they don't think they should have to go through those steps. They think they should be able to walk in and take an executive position without any experience, knowing nothing about business, and only "text book" knowledge. That isn't how it works, and believe me, I've run into people who had a couple of degrees that were hired, but didn't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and no one could stand them. They usually wound up getting fired.
You have to "pay your dues," so to speak.
I started out as a bench tech in a small TV and audio repair shop. From there I went to work as a technician at an oceanographic engineering company. I was promoted within a year to Field Service. That required customer contact, and lots of travel (I was a "frequent flyer" before the term was invented). In the mean time, I learned about job costing, material control, production planning, and even invoicing and export documentation. It was just part of the job, because I was require to keep track of costs on repairs, and get equipment shipped back out to the customer.
Later I was promoted into the Marketing/Sales Department as Sales Administration Supervisor. Along the way, I kept expanding my knowledge ...bookings vs. sales, and many other things.
That's how it's done. Too many people today are too lazy and want it all handed to them without any experience or knowledge.
So you're telling me the continuous rise of statism hasn't helped, and things are actually getting worse? I bet more state control will do the trick! /sarcasm
It's so frustrating for anyone who believes in individual liberty and laissez faire. You watch all this news about new regulations, new laws, new barriers for employers and employees, terrible economic and monetary policy, and all of these things (from both R's and D's) that are completely opposite of what we advocate, and then when things keep getting worse as predicted, the things we support take the blame and the same garbage continues. I'm just speechless when capitalism or free markets are blamed for anything these days.
My biggest annoyance the past few years...
"If you don't want big business, lobbyists, and politically connected cronies rigging things in their favor, don't let the government have that much power to give them in the first place"
*Ignores it* *Cronies continue to screw the general public*
"We need more regulations to stop them from doing that!"
"Except they're the ones writing and influencing the new regulations anyway! Get the government out of it and they have no special advantages!"
*Ignores it*
"See, this is what you get with unfettered capitalism..."
Except there are no real world examples of what you libertarians are preaching that actually improve the lives of the working classes. Why do you guys deny reality? Is libertarianism/"government is evil" some type of religion to you guys? It sure seems like it. The attitude seems to be that when reality doesnt fit the ideology, ignore the reality.
Define "working class." When you use that term, I envision a not to smart "Joe bag of doughnuts" who will never advance in anything, but will be tied to a factory job doing repetitive work day in and day out for Union wages (which pay far more than the job the guy is doing is worth).
Everybody works, do they not? Most people will start out in an entry level position, and if they are good, they will be promoted "up the ladder" to more responsibility and a higher salary.
The problem with people today is that they don't think they should have to go through those steps. They think they should be able to walk in and take an executive position without any experience, knowing nothing about business, and only "text book" knowledge. That isn't how it works, and believe me, I've run into people who had a couple of degrees that were hired, but didn't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and no one could stand them. They usually wound up getting fired.
You have to "pay your dues," so to speak.
I started out as a bench tech in a small TV and audio repair shop. From there I went to work as a technician at an oceanographic engineering company. I was promoted within a year to Field Service. That required customer contact, and lots of travel (I was a "frequent flyer" before the term was invented). In the mean time, I learned about job costing, material control, production planning, and even invoicing and export documentation. It was just part of the job, because I was require to keep track of costs on repairs, and get equipment shipped back out to the customer.
Later I was promoted into the Marketing/Sales Department as Sales Administration Supervisor. Along the way, I kept expanding my knowledge ...bookings vs. sales, and many other things.
That's how it's done. Too many people today are too lazy and want it all handed to them without any experience or knowledge.
So are you mister "sales administration supervisor" a member of the 0.1% ruling class that get regular calls from members of Congress to donate/bribe your way to influence and power? If not, you are just posturing. The ruling class is good at making ordinary members of the 99.9% and working stiffs feel they are special with some fancy titles.
Central Planning v Market Economy is a false dichotomy
Quote:
Originally Posted by UbbyJuice
You do realize that if people have no money (due to unreasonably high COL, high insurance bills, high student loans, high rents, etc), they don't spend any money, right?
It's just like i said, once a large enough % of the population has no money/is broke the whole "system" grinds to a snail's pace... as we are seeing now in America. Once everyone is poor or broke, the system just stops "working", it sputters and stalls out just like a car engine running on fumes
It's economics 101 common knowledge that capitalism heavily depends on people spending money, but we're reaching a point where most people are tapped out/squeezed "dry" by widespread poverty and have nothing left to take (much less spend on discretionary/non-rent stuff).
This so-called economy is moving slower than even the slowest snail or laziest sloth
I think I get the main gist of what you're saying, these are interesting times (uncertain if the sentiment expressed by the classic 'may you live in interesting times' was meant as a blessing or a curse? ).
The long story short version of what I'd like to add here is that Central Planning v Market Economy is a false dichotomy. To illustrate, consider the relatively recent conditions created by the Cold War between US & Russia. & what each Nation (not just US & USSR) did after the Cold War 'ended'.
One of the reasons why I've made the assertion (here on C-D forums) that 'China won the Cold War' is because of the way that China, post Cold War, began or continued its transition from a planned to a market economy. One of the reasons for its relatively smooth (& yet still ongoing) transition was the underlying 'philosophy' of retaining the 'Wall' in their financial sectors to avoid conflicts of interests destructive to the economy as a whole. Central planning along with the 'Wall' between banking investment functions v banking savings functions allowed for their previous growth model, based on exports & investments, to move towards a model based on services & consumption. The goal or objective being to maintain stable growth & employment while also promoting market forces in the allocation of capital. The institutional infrastructure was already there, so to speak, to move in that direction, slow & steady, also so to speak.
This metaphorical 'Chinese Wall' in the financial sectors was, imho, also significant when observing how China was not harmed as much in the recent global financial systems imbroglio. Their 'Wall' is comparable to the metaphorical 'US Wall' put in place after our Great Depression through enactment of the 'Glass-Steagall' type legislation & enforcement. Our 'Wall' was slowly dismantled, brick by brick, until 1999 when ...
Quote:
...After 12 attempts in 25 years, Congress finally repeals Glass-Steagall, rewarding financial companies for more than 20 years and $300 million worth of lobbying efforts. Supporters hail the change as the long-overdue demise of a Depression-era relic. ...
While Russia’s transition from central planning to a market economy was implemented differently & perhaps, in a more drastic fashion, there were & continue to be different results or outcomes.
In the long run, each Nation attempts to establish some sortof plan to accomplish what is in its own best interests, there is no ONE right way to do these things. Most times attempting to reach & maintain the right balance ends up being one of the biggest challenges. Also determining the focus &/or direction, where do we (as a Nation) want to go?
I'm quite fine with a socialist democracy as you are with yours.
You wouldn't know real "socialism: a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole" if it smacked you upside the head.
You're using as an example, a country ruined by successive dictators and despots that can ruin any country, even the U.S. That is not socialism, where the PEOPLE own the means of production and control the dispersal of wealth. That is anything BUT!
There are many social democracies operating quite nicely with a QOL rating even higher than the U.S.
You're clinging to an outdated definition of socialism. You need to educate yourself. "Progressivism" is Marxist-socialism.
You don't know what your talking about. Do some study. May I suggest a book to you, also: The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek
Personally, I like Liberty. Why do you want to toss out the best thing that has happened in the history of man, Government by consent of the governed; i.e., Liberty and freedom?
The history of our Constitution is based on hundreds of years of English history. It didn't just happen with the Revolutionary War. The Founders and Framers of our Constitution knew their history. Sadly, today, we don't.
Even the terminology you use is socialist; "workers." You do realize that "investors" are people who work too, don't you? Why do you like separating people into classes? "Progressivism" is serfdom.
U.S. score = 89 gone down three points in the last year alone.
U.K. " = 95
Germany = 95
Canada = 99
Sweden = 100
Finland = 100
Norway = 100
I guess, since you suggest attaining better "Liberty" and "Freedom" being your primary motivation for moving, you'll be getting calls from those willing to help you to pack?
You're clinging to an outdated definition of socialism. You need to educate yourself. "Progressivism" is Marxist-socialism.
You don't know what your talking about. Do some study. May I suggest a book to you, also: The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek
You and others don't get to make it up as you go along. The definitions remain the same regardless of whomever writes a later book about them.
"Study" is a word you use quite often.........without seemingly having the slightest idea of what that means...allow me to help once again:
Study:
1.the devotion of time and attention to acquiring knowledge on an academic subject, especially by means of books.
Lears, T. J. Jackson. Rebirth of a Nation: The Remaking of Modern America, 1877-1920 (2009)
McGerr, Michael. A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870–1920
Mowry, George E. Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Movement.
"Progressivism in the United States is a broadly based reform movement that reached its height early in the 20th century and is generally considered to be middle class and reformist in nature. It arose as a response to the vast changes brought by modernization, such as the growth of large corporations and railroads, and fears of corruption in American politics."
Once again; you have seized upon a word popularly used out of context and clung to it without having the slightest idea of it's actual definition.
Inigio Montoya was talking to you.
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.
)
Central Planning v Market Economy is a false dichotomy
).
