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.
yes, that is the book. It has a good discussion about the pitfalls of the retirement system...or lack of one....which might play into an oncoming wave of geriatric destitution (in other words: you aint seen nothing yet).
You mention Chris Hedges. Maybe. The book I find is a good companion to Smiths is Someplace Like America by Dale Maharidge and Michael S. Williamson, as it is a tour of "the bottom", so to speak. Where downward mobility leads (in a worst case scenario).
@@@
The suicide situation, based on the remarks in the NYT article, seems to be more than just economics? Perhaps there is an issue of social isolation, too? Which would be a geriatic mental health issue anyway, perhaps?
I'll get that book too. Altho' I don't want to depress the H out of myself. The daily news in the morning does a pretty good job as it is.
Social isolation? We've been dealing with that for decades. And for all our tech toys that allow us to instantly connect, we're still pretty lonely.
I would think it would be a geriatric issue if it were 65 and above.
No, I think it's very much tied to the economy, at least in that age group (35-64) and most of the suicides being men.
As for geriatric destitution -- it's a good thing I'm not afraid of dying.
I'm beginning to think that going communist is the only way out of this mess. Sure, we'd have a stagnant economy with a relatively low standard of living (perhaps 1970's levels), BUT at least everyone would have a job, everyone would have a roof over their head, and most importantly, everyone would have dignity and a sense of belonging. Really, nothing else matters. Is it such a big deal that the rich people go away for good for us to have these things, that we ALL have the right to have?
I know I'll get flamed badly for this, but hey, when people are dying, I really don't care.
I am not going to "flame" you, but I think you are wrong about communism being the answer to anything. If you delve into standards of living under Soviet communism, you will see that your estimate of standards of living at "perhaps 1970's levels" is wildly optimistic. People in general did not really have "dignity and a sense of belonging". If they had that, why were levels of alcoholism so high? And why was there such a genuine popular groundswell of anti-communist sentiment as the screws loosened under Gorbachev? This genuine popular groundswell occurred not only in the Soviet Union but also in the eastern European countries which were under communist systems of governance.
The fact that a certain amount of temporary chaos and suffering following the collapse of all those communist regimes does not prove anything except the extreme difficulty of moving away from such a draconian and entrenched system to something better.
I am not going to "flame" you, but I think you are wrong about communism being the answer to anything. If you delve into standards of living under Soviet communism, you will see that your estimate of standards of living at "perhaps 1970's levels" is wildly optimistic. People in general did not really have "dignity and a sense of belonging". If they had that, why were levels of alcoholism so high? And why was there such a genuine popular groundswell of anti-communist sentiment as the screws loosened under Gorbachev? This genuine popular groundswell occurred not only in the Soviet Union but also in the eastern European countries which were under communist systems of governance.
The fact that a certain amount of temporary chaos and suffering following the collapse of all those communist regimes does not prove anything except the extreme difficulty of moving away from such a draconian and entrenched system to something better.
I agree. And you put it so nicely -- yes, obviously, he/she cares.
I don't know what the answer is. And even if there were a sure answer, I'm not sure we could implement it. I think it's too late. Corporations seem to be ruling the world. (Truthfully, I think they are ruling the world.) How do you fight against that?
I am not going to "flame" you, but I think you are wrong about communism being the answer to anything. If you delve into standards of living under Soviet communism, you will see that your estimate of standards of living at "perhaps 1970's levels" is wildly optimistic. People in general did not really have "dignity and a sense of belonging". If they had that, why were levels of alcoholism so high? And why was there such a genuine popular groundswell of anti-communist sentiment as the screws loosened under Gorbachev? This genuine popular groundswell occurred not only in the Soviet Union but also in the eastern European countries which were under communist systems of governance.
The fact that a certain amount of temporary chaos and suffering following the collapse of all those communist regimes does not prove anything except the extreme difficulty of moving away from such a draconian and entrenched system to something better.
How about we invent a new system that's somewhat based on communism, but has a different name, say "redistributed economics"? The problem with Soviet "communism" was that it wasn't so terribly different than the system we have now - namely a few plutocrats at the top running the show for their benefit, while the rest of the people are thrown into the gutter. The people had no ownership of the "corporations" they worked for, so they had no say-so in how thing were done. Also, the worst thing about the Soviet Union that it had no elected govenment, and this is really what led that country to its eventual doom, in addition to being out-spent in a massive arms race with the US.
But what's wrong with our system today is that it's geared towards the enrichment of the few at the very top, it concentrates undue power into the government, leading to a top-down system of control, i.e. "the very best government money can buy," and worst of all, this country seems to have this mentality that money is more important than people. We've become a sociey of throwaway people - if they're not "competitive" and able to make someone else big bucks, then they're pretty much worthless in our economy. Is this what people want? I sure hope not, as this is no place I want to be.
So what I propose is a total break from "traditional" economics and go with something else that puts people first, always. A society in which everyone has a role to play, everyone is made to feel valued, and everyone has security in life, namly having food, shelter and the means to carry out the basics of modern-day living. Some people call this socialism, or communism, or whatever "ism" that strikes their mind. I call it caring and having respect for ourselves as a human species. But one thing's for sure - if we keep going down our present path, we won't last long as a society. That you can bet on.
How about we invent a new system that's somewhat based on communism, but has a different name, say "redistributed economics"? The problem with Soviet "communism" was that it wasn't so terribly different than the system we have now - namely a few plutocrats at the top running the show for their benefit, while the rest of the people are thrown into the gutter. The people had no ownership of the "corporations" they worked for, so they had no say-so in how thing were done. Also, the worst thing about the Soviet Union that it had no elected govenment, and this is really what led that country to its eventual doom, in addition to being out-spent in a massive arms race with the US.
But what's wrong with our system today is that it's geared towards the enrichment of the few at the very top, it concentrates undue power into the government, leading to a top-down system of control, i.e. "the very best government money can buy," and worst of all, this country seems to have this mentality that money is more important than people. We've become a sociey of throwaway people - if they're not "competitive" and able to make someone else big bucks, then they're pretty much worthless in our economy. Is this what people want? I sure hope not, as this is no place I want to be.
So what I propose is a total break from "traditional" economics and go with something else that puts people first, always. A society in which everyone has a role to play, everyone is made to feel valued, and everyone has security in life, namly having food, shelter and the means to carry out the basics of modern-day living. Some people call this socialism, or communism, or whatever "ism" that strikes their mind. I call it caring and having respect for ourselves as a human species. But one thing's for sure - if we keep going down our present path, we won't last long as a society. That you can bet on.
People end their lives for a combination of reasons. When you are long term unemployed, you have financial problems which create marital problems, which leads to mental health issues. Some of these folks probably had mental health issues before, and they stress stacked up to the breaking point. When you are unemployed social isolation can set in quick. How often are you going to go out and spend money when you have little or none coming in?
My point is that it's a combo of factors not just one that causes someone to end their lives.
We live in an plutocracy at the moment in this country, it has been heading in this direction since the 1970's, when outsourcing led to greater profits, and now corporations are funneling all those profits upward into the highest tiers of their corporate structure. And the end result is company leaders rewarding themselves millions in "bonuses" before their company declares bankruptcy. For those remaining solvent, upper management make more in bonuses and stock options in one year than most of their employees can hope to make in their working life.
Much like Wall Street lenders awarded themselves bonuses after they asked taxpayers (you and me) to bail them out, we are being fleeced, real wages are being driven downward while corporate profits continue to rise (The DOW is at 15,000) and the rich continue to pay a smaller effective tax rate than the working poor.
Sometimes it is very hard to see a light at the end of the tunnel. There is a lot of desperation, depression and anger out there. When people see no way out suicide is sadly an option. I would think the age should be lower than 35 give nall the kids that are graduating from college with no prospects and saddled with debt in students loans. Many move back in with parents and some turn to drugs.
These recessions are cyclical and things will get better. It is just a matter of time and if the individual can hold on.
How long. Honest to God. I can see why people feel hopeless.
We live in an plutocracy at the moment in this country, it has been heading in this direction since the 1970's, when outsourcing led to greater profits, and now corporations are funneling all those profits upward into the highest tiers of their corporate structure. And the end result is company leaders rewarding themselves millions in "bonuses" before their company declares bankruptcy. For those remaining solvent, upper management make more in bonuses and stock options in one year than most of their employees can hope to make in their working life.
Much like Wall Street lenders awarded themselves bonuses after they asked taxpayers (you and me) to bail them out, we are being fleeced, real wages are being driven downward while corporate profits continue to rise (The DOW is at 15,000) and the rich continue to pay a smaller effective tax rate than the working poor.
Radix Omnium Malorum Avaritia
It will be the downfall of this country.
The elites want people to die anyhow...we are viewed as expendable. I am not making a political statement one way or another in this next sentence: when I learned Chelsea Clinton was to have PORCELAIN porta potties at her wedding...I thought WTF???? These people have no clue what working class America goes through. I am sure that is just the tip of the ice burg with extravagance and waste at working Joe or Josephine's expense. This next statement IS political, however, too bad people can not storm The Bastille so to speak.
Last edited by FlowerPower00; 05-06-2013 at 06:24 PM..
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.
