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.
Can you elaborate how "they" would benefit from us being a third world country?
He must be thinking of income and wealth disparity. The top .01% has certainly made out like bandits over the last 40 years, to the detriment of the bottom 99%.
But median incomes have risen rapidly the last two years. As good as the 1932-1975 period. It will be interesting to see how long that continues.
He must be thinking of income and wealth disparity. The top .01% has certainly made out like bandits over the last 40 years, to the detriment of the bottom 99%.
But median incomes have risen rapidly the last two years. As good as the 1932-1975 period. It will be interesting to see how long that continues.
The top 5% has suffered at the hands of the 0.01%? In what way, their wealth has increased greatly. I'm not so sure the top 20% or even 40% has had much to complain about either.
I guess I'd like to know how firstly how people define a "good" economy?
Just going by the stats - the U.S. economy today is better than most past economies. Not the best - not as good as the early-mid 1950s, late 1960s, mid-to-late 1990s.
But an argument could be made that the mid-10s is about as good as all the other times & definitely better than anything pre-WWII. Also, even in those "good" economic time there were still problems.
Secondly, what could be done to make a "good" economy?
Half of our states have U6 unemployment rates above 10%. Our labor force participation rate has crashed, and wages are stagnant. Is is not a good economy.
Pre world war 2 nothing about our economy was calculated, so we don't know what the economy was like.
The top 5% has suffered at the hands of the 0.01%? In what way, their wealth has increased greatly. I'm not so sure the top 20% or even 40% has had much to complain about either.
Only the top 1% has kept up with the real per capita GDP gain over the last 40 years, which matched the long term trend of ~1.9%/yr.
You may think the 95%ile has done well, but that is only compared to a flat median.
Half of our states have U6 unemployment rates above 10%. Our labor force participation rate has crashed, and wages are stagnant. Is is not a good economy.
Pre world war 2 nothing about our economy was calculated, so we don't know what the economy was like.
It was basically a lot worse, we can glean that from the labor strife, etc...
Labor force participation was artificially high because of the huge influx of women into the workforce from the 70s to the 90s and also the glut of boomers. There is nowhere to go but down.
More and more I'm thinking that those "good" times in the mid 20th century were the exception, not the norm.
Half of our states have U6 unemployment rates above 10%. Our labor force participation rate has crashed, and wages are stagnant. Is is not a good economy.
Pre world war 2 nothing about our economy was calculated, so we don't know what the economy was like.
Nope.
U6 counts retired Boomers and college students. If you look at the 25 to 55 age bracket that doesn't include college students or retirees, there isn't a problem.
The problem we have is a glut of unskilled labor. That has pushed wages down for that class of employment. I don't know anyone with job skills who doesn't have a good job. That certainly wasn't the case 6 years ago. All the immigration we have had makes that problem worse. That's also where all our population growth is coming from. Without immigration, the US would have a birth rate below replacement rate. That has been dragging the median household income down. The middle class that has job skills has been seeing modest wage growth. It's unskilled labor that is getting slaughtered.
U6 counts retired Boomers and college students. If you look at the 25 to 55 age bracket that doesn't include college students or retirees, there isn't a problem.
The problem we have is a glut of unskilled labor. That has pushed wages down for that class of employment. I don't know anyone with job skills who doesn't have a good job. That certainly wasn't the case 6 years ago. All the immigration we have had makes that problem worse. That's also where all our population growth is coming from. Without immigration, the US would have a birth rate below replacement rate. That has been dragging the median household income down. The middle class that has job skills has been seeing modest wage growth. It's unskilled labor that is getting slaughtered.
Only the top 1% has kept up with the real per capita GDP gain over the last 40 years, which matched the long term trend of ~1.9%/yr.
You may think the 95%ile has done well, but that is only compared to a flat median.
I don't think many people look at how their income compares to real per capita GDP gain over the last 40 years. If someone is in the top 5% (or 20%) they've seen their real income and wealth increase, which is how we define doing well.
Can you provide some graphs that show what you are saying?
Woah there this is a commonly cited statistic, and it is from the government's BLS, and it uses data you say is faulty because younger people answer the phone more. How can this possibly be cited as data?
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.
