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.
People are working harder and getting less from it so an a miniscule elite can invest it in casinos to embezzle the value of labor. This leads to breakdowns in infrastructure and decreased quality of life for everyone regardless of how hard they work or how competent they are when all the money is controlled by a small elite group.
I was thinking more of American prison slave labor rather than 3rd world sweatshops (which, do actually destroy their local markets rather than helping).
Honestly, we have the same goals but you've been swindled by a bunch of hucksters who don't care what their accumulation and methods do to the rest of society.
EDIT:
Jeez man, you're an example of this in action
Is the average worker worse off now than in 1948? The standard of living has raised so much, that is hard point to argue.
- 2+ car households
- a TV in multiple rooms getting 100s of channels
- computers, phones, cameras, music playing devices that fit in your hand
- air conditioning
- GPS devices
- Internet chatrooms
- A cornacopia of fruits and veggies available at every grocery store regardless of "season."
That chart is neat and all, but it doesn't reflect how the average person lives. How people live is what really matters, not % on a chart, or currency in pocket/bank.
And I am example of "this" in action. I didn't swallow the class-warfare pill. I don't believe that charts and lines showing distribution of "weath" are as important as the physical standard of living we experience living in 21st century America, and I DO know enough about history to know that those "great" jobs our grandparents had didn't allow them to live in obesity, information saturation, and comfort like we do today.
The "good old days" weren't really so good. Like I said, if you want to go back there, feel free. More money for Joe Sixpack, much less to spend it on. Maybe you could swim in your extra money piles like Scrooge McDuck did on Duck Tails? He seemed to enjoy it.
Is the average worker worse off now than in 1948? The standard of living has raised so much, that is hard point to argue.
That chart is neat and all, but it doesn't reflect how the average person lives. How people live is what really matters, not % on a chart, or currency in pocket/bank.
Are you saying this is something unquantifiable?
Access to slave labor goods doesn't wipe these issues away. This isn't even touching on how massive wealth baring so much of the population from the political process (money is speech) is destructive to democracy.
Screw the old days, this stuff is just sliding down to feudalism.
Feel free to argue on things besides gut instinct though.
Access to slave labor goods doesn't wipe these issues away. This isn't even touching on how massive wealth baring so much of the population from the political process (money is speech) is destructive to democracy.
Screw the old days, this stuff is just sliding down to feudalism.
Feel free to argue on things besides gut instinct though.
It isn't "gut instinct" it is real world reality. All your charts show is that people will overpay for housing (when they stop overpaying prices drop ) and people will put themselves in debt rather than make good financial decisions. Sounds like personal problems to me.
I didn't overpay for my house, I made sure of it. I have a great saving to debt ratio, even with a modest job, because I prioritize what I purchase and don't waste money.
How either of those variables has anything to do with "slave labor goods" (I call them technological innovation behind 1948's wildest imagination) and a global wealthy elite dragging the rest of down to feudalism is beyond me. Everything you are saying is so over the top, it sounds ridicilous.
When I finally read through the *******s in that quote you posted, I see the RACIAL aspect of your thinking too. I am not surprised.
There has to be a villian. Things can't really be as they seem. Someone, somewhere must be to blame for the problems of others. I guess the boogieman to you is the rich and people like me that reject your false narrative of a population sliding down the economic ladder because of the neferious decisions of global wealthy elite. Do you call them the New World Order in public or just among friends
As for politics, don't lecture me about political power when only about 1/2 the population bothers to vote. The poor, including Appalachian whites, are guilty of this. Voting is power, when an individual chooses not to vote, they disenfrancise themselves, make themselves marginal. Again, not my fault, not the fault of the rich. Election day is pretty well advertised, it is an individual CHOICE to partcipate or not.
"We" working class Appalachian folks often vote against "our own interests" because of having an actual political philosophy that extends further than "What's in it for me?" If everyone voted for what advanced their own interests the most, the common good would be destroyed.
There are truths, issues, realities that transcend the "what's in it for me" mentality.
I will admit, I have a "what's in it for me mentality". History has taught me that not even my neighbor will always look out for me, so I have to look out for me. Yes, it is sad, but when the common good hurts my interests, I have to look out for me. I know it is selfish, yes. But I tend to see myself as an individual living within a larger society. If we all lived in small little tight-knit societies, then the "what's in it for me" mentality wouldn't exist. Unfortunately, that isn't the case for much of the population. I don't believe in that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" stuff. History has shown that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.
McKeldin was a moderate Republican, which is now somewhat a historical curiosity, influential in getting the Republican presidential nomination for Eisenhower in 1952. If I remember correctly, he was a great supporter of civil rights for Blacks, and a darn good Mayor and Governor. Present-day Baltimore could do a lot worse than elect a reincarnation of Theodore R. McKeldin.
The old Maryland moderate Republican a dying (or dead) breed. Here in Central-Western Maryland I've heard them called 'Mac Mathias Republicans' and to be fair we also had moderate Democrats (Beverly Byron might have been the last one to be elected). I wish we could get back to where we had more moderates of both parties but both have become so much more extreme I have a problem liking any of them. I'm not sure my grandfather ( a retired Bethelem steel worker) who I don't think ever voted for a Republican would like the Democrats these days.
It isn't "gut instinct" it is real world reality. All your charts show is that people will overpay for housing (when they stop overpaying prices drop ) and people will put themselves in debt rather than make good financial decisions. Sounds like personal problems to me.
I didn't overpay for my house, I made sure of it. I have a great saving to debt ratio, even with a modest job, because I prioritize what I purchase and don't waste money.
How either of those variables has anything to do with "slave labor goods" (I call them technological innovation behind 1948's wildest imagination) and a global wealthy elite dragging the rest of down to feudalism is beyond me. Everything you are saying is so over the top, it sounds ridicilous.
When I finally read through the *******s in that quote you posted, I see the RACIAL aspect of your thinking too. I am not surprised.
There has to be a villian. Things can't really be as they seem. Someone, somewhere must be to blame for the problems of others. I guess the boogieman to you is the rich and people like me that reject your false narrative of a population sliding down the economic ladder because of the neferious decisions of global wealthy elite. Do you call them the New World Order in public or just among friends
As for politics, don't lecture me about political power when only about 1/2 the population bothers to vote. The poor, including Appalachian whites, are guilty of this. Voting is power, when an individual chooses not to vote, they disenfrancise themselves, make themselves marginal. Again, not my fault, not the fault of the rich. Election day is pretty well advertised, it is an individual CHOICE to partcipate or not.
That chart just says housing costs have outpaced wage growth. Do you think unemployment rates measure laziness or something?
US prisons produce a number of economic goods through slave labor, various doodads, acrylics. Though theres the hellish conditions in 3rd world factories used to produce our precious electronic goods. Paying people a living wage in a first world country would compromise the profits of the wealthy so that had to go.
So, no manufacturing jobs, and the part of the population that has all the money has lobbied over decades to reduce the top bracket tax rates to such a degree that it sits in coffers doing nothing instead of building or using anything while the average workers stagnant wages lose purchasing power. People need their shiny stuff, and the economy needs that stuff bought, so the credit market opened up for that, hence the average savings to debt ratio.
As for villain, I don't know if making it about morality is the proper way to phrase it, but the ultra-wealthy embezzling the country's labor is pretty villainous I suppose.
No offence, but it doesn't matter if I can't convince you. Anyone without a made up mind reading this will probably notice I've backed up various points while you folksy wisdom doesn't have the merit to stand up to any scrutiny.
See the "Longines Chronoscope with Theodore R. McKeldin" interview on Youtube, filmed circa 1952, for a first-hand view of the man's mannerisms and speech. Ah, the good old days . . .
Not in My Neighborhood quotes the son of Mayor Broening, who launched McKeldin's career, as saying that McK practised oratory with pebbles in his mouth to overcome a childhood speech impediment!
The money of the über-wealthy does not sit in coffers doing nothing. It is invested, but not in the US.
Quote:
Anyone without a made up mind ...
Minds can only be changed through information, and information in this country is both costly and time-consuming. My yearly subscription for home delivery of the NY Times costs $860; not many folks can afford that. Also I am retired and have the time and interest to read the NYT and other periodicals; not many working people, especially those with children, have the time and energy to do so.
I fault the newspaper and TV industries for their failure to analyze and discuss current events. In a misguided effort towards "fairness," they give equal weight to both sides of every story, and seldom if ever do they do any fact checking. Politics is all nuance and shades of gray. That does not come across in a 30-second TV news clip.
I also fault the American people for being so obsessively concerned with sports and inane TV shows. (Jersey Shore immediately comes to mind.) So I guess I am not too surprised when half the US public can be persuaded and cajoled into voting against their own best interests.
That chart just says housing costs have outpaced wage growth. Do you think unemployment rates measure laziness or something?
US prisons produce a number of economic goods through slave labor, various doodads, acrylics. Though theres the hellish conditions in 3rd world factories used to produce our precious electronic goods. Paying people a living wage in a first world country would compromise the profits of the wealthy so that had to go.
So, no manufacturing jobs, and the part of the population that has all the money has lobbied over decades to reduce the top bracket tax rates to such a degree that it sits in coffers doing nothing instead of building or using anything while the average workers stagnant wages lose purchasing power. People need their shiny stuff, and the economy needs that stuff bought, so the credit market opened up for that, hence the average savings to debt ratio.
As for villain, I don't know if making it about morality is the proper way to phrase it, but the ultra-wealthy embezzling the country's labor is pretty villainous I suppose.
No offence, but it doesn't matter if I can't convince you. Anyone without a made up mind reading this will probably notice I've backed up various points while you folksy wisdom doesn't have the merit to stand up to any scrutiny.
Ok, we can play hardball. Let's think back to your productivity vs. worker compensation chart. As worker productivity goes up, the worker's hourly compensation doesn't rise at the same rate? Why would this be? It isn't villinious wealth horders, it is simple economics.
As productivity rises, a company needs less workers to produce products that meet the demands of the market. As less workers are needed, their supply greatly exceeds demand. Employeers no longer need to keep 1,000 workers in the factory employed, they only need 400. They can find 400 that will work for a decent wage, even if it means undercutting the other 600.
So, now you may argue that it is a company's responsibility to employ as many people as possible at a high wage. In this case the business could keep all 1,000 workers and produce 2.5X the amount of goods, regardless of market demands. This has been tried. It is called the "command economy" where government determines who works where, and how much is produced. It is a form of Communism, practiced most famously by the USSR................it failed miserably as the market couldn't absorb the unnecessary excess production.
Business's exist instead to provide products for a market at a price that reward the stakeholders. Most businesses ownership isn't Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, it is the small guy and his corner shop, it is average people, like you and me that purchase stock in companies. "Owning" a business, or parts of many businesses is accessable to any and all Americans at entry level prices. It is not the domain of the rich.
Ok, so let's examine what your chart would look like back in the time period you say we are slipping towards, the middle ages. Worker productivity would be abysmally low. Everyone would be employed though! Even better, they would be doing very meaningful work.....attempting to grow enough food to stay alive. Their "hourly compensation" would right in line with their work productivity. Do a good job, eat dinner.
This society also had almost no class structure based on wealth. Quiet frankly there wasn't any wealth to be had. Now power, sure, the upper classes had a great deal of power and authority over the peasants, but in the end was limited by the same lack of producivity. There were very few material goods to be had. Some black pepper and a purple tunic passed for luxury. No McMansions to buy, just larger squalid castles covered in refuse as opposed to squalid hovels. No healthcare for anyone. To paraphrase Monty Python, the only way you could pick out the king was that there was less s**t on him.
So, this discussion isn't about "folksy wisdom" versus hard fact. It is about your fundamental misunderstanding about what stats like worker productivity and compensation really mean when applied to the real economic world, and your failure to acknowledge that "wealth" is relative. The amount of currency in your bank account doesn't account for squat when there is nothing of value to buy with it. Maybe worker compensation hasn't kept up with productivity (as free market economics predict) but the money we do have allows us to live at a standard well beyond 1948, or any other time in history. We have it so good, and folks like you don't even realize it.
In the end, you say your opinion won't change? Well that is narrowminded. My opinion can change. If you can convince me that your Communist ideas about capital and labor will work in the real world, I will listen. So far, all you have done is regurgitate the far-left's talking points, posted some charts (all of which I have seen before,) and belly-ached about how the squiggly lines show bad things. Those charts don't show bad things. They show capitialist economic reality, poor choices by individuals who took credit willingly and drove up prices for housing, and how high tax rates on the rich (as exists from 1940 until Reagan) take money away from the top earners and how lowering tax rates gives it back......not really rocket science.
Last edited by westsideboy; 07-17-2012 at 07:46 AM..
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.
) and people will put themselves in debt rather than make good financial decisions. Sounds like personal problems to me. 
