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.
There was no coercion or force for anyone well versed in the financial scandal's that took place. The Bankers had their ducks in a row to benefit handsomely from the financial mortgage scandals. And they did, while the common American lost by loosing his home, or bailing out these financial terrorists.
People need to understand, anything offered by the government and their cronies though (Bankers, CEO's) is never done for the benefit of American's but to steal from the tax payers to fatten the greedy wallets at the top.
All House Democrats and Republicans sold the lie that every American needs a home, but they were doing it not out of the goodness of their black hearts, but to fatten the wallets on Wall Street and the Financial Sector.
Same goes with Food Stamps, which JP Morgan has profited off of handsomely.
Same goes with the College Loan racket and SLABS created from Wall Street which inflated the costs of tuition and puts people in debt so that the financial terrorists on Wall Street to rake in the dough.
The same also goes with any National Health Care plan, by Obama or Romney, which would again, be benefiting the parasites at the top.
Couldnt agree more.
JPMorgan and Barclays owns Congress.
America is not a democracy. It is a corporate plutocracy.
I need a million bucks. The tax rate is 40% so I pay myself $1.66 million and I have my million. You raise the tax rate to 50% so I pay myself $2 million. To get even with the rich you raise the tax rate to 90% and I pay myself $10 million. I raise prices and slash salaries across the company. You would have got that 10 cent raise but tough cookies now.
Uncle Sam takes the extra tax money and spends it studying the mating habits of a snail darter in a tributary of the Sierra Nevada. The grant money funds grad students from China. The American kids are too busy Occupying Starbucks to actually get an advanced degree.
Oh and by the way...
"
The ultimate irony here is that the authors of the article mentioned in your post are respectively senior vice president and chief economist, and senior economics writer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. The fact that they misinterpreted the data so badly is absolutely staggering, and so is the fact that they still work for the same employer. No wonder this country is on the verge of bankruptcy."
"From reading the posts, perhaps, the first thing to do, in order to come up with a solution, is identify exactly what "income inequity" is.
In 1960, the average income for semi-professional and non-professional jobs was $7060 a year. In 2010, the average income for those same jobs was $45,406. (source of information is athttp://msn.careerbuilder.com/Article...=JS_2146_home1) And, from another source,. the 2010 figure is about 25% too high. Unfortunately, I do not have the link to the other source.
According to another source, http://msn.careerbuilder.com/Article...=JS_2146_home1 executive income has gone up six times in just the last twenty years. Another words, an exec that is making $360,000 today, was only making $60,000 twenty years ago.
It says that executive pay went up an average of 30% each year for the last twenty years while middle-class America has only gotten an average of 12% each year for the last fifty years. And, we're not including bonuses or "Golden Parachutes".
One more area to look at, and this is from my own experience. In 1965 and 1966, I was making $8,000 a year. I was also paying 17 cents a gallon for gasoline. Just today, the current price of gasoline at the corner gas station at the corner is $3.599. To maintain the ratio between income and the cost of gasoline, today's average income should be about $170,000 a year.
In 1973, I was making $14,000 a year, and paying $51 every six months for car insurance. (And, supporting a wife and two kids, while buying a house for $10,000) The last premium I paid on car insurance came out to $147 a month. Back in 1973, the monthly cost was just $8.50. To maintain the ratio of income to car insurance premiums, today's average income should be about$240,000 a year. Want to check with IRS and see just how many "Average Americans" are actually making that much? And, the story is the same no matter what area of expense you look at, groceries, utilities, housing, etc.
That is what is "INCOME INEQUITY". What to do about it is the "$64,000 question". Solutions are sure to be as varied as the people that offer them, but now, you should be able to come up with a better informed opinion.
Now, with regard to the quote, by all means, give your kids every advantage you can. Stress education. Any kind of court record will hurt their chances for a successful career. But, keep in mind...
Let's say that 99% of the next generation gets a master's degree. (No, I don't think that's realistic) It's also not realistic to think that every one of them will get jobs where they will use that degree. There will be a number of them serving at Pizza Hut. A good education and a clean record does not give them a guarantee, but it does improve their chances at a comfortable life." (end quote)
Congratulations the_windwalker, you've earned a spot on my anecdotes collection that's meant to show in a very concrete way the wage stagflation or really deflation experienced for the bottom 80-90 percent of workers the last 30-40 years. I submit only the top 1- 20% percent of wage earners has kept up with cost inflation. That's 2 in 10 workers, certainly NOT middle class, and I think 20% is pushing it. More like the top 10%.
Keep in mind when you read these anecdotes and watch Dr. Warren's lecture think RATIOS. That's exactly my point. For example: "In 1973, I was making $14,000 a year, and paying $51 every six months for car insurance. (And, supporting a wife and two kids, while buying a house for $10,000). How many people now make 40% more IN ONE YEAR than the value of their HOME!!!!: cool::thi nk: GuyNTexas' anecdote illustrates this point very well also.
just because SALARIES havent kept up with INFLATION doesnt mean we should still CLASSIFY based on 1955/1965 numbers.......average salary in 1966..6900...median house price 14k....about 50% right...use those numbers compared to the meadin house....the median salary SHOULD be 130k...not 50k
sorry but this is not 1955 , when 250k was rich...please get with the times...its 2010"(end quote)
"The "inequity" comes in where the expenses have out-paced the income for the average American. While EVERYTHING ELSE has gone up, income for the "middle-class" has stagnated over the last fifty years. That is the problem with the economy today. The "middle-class", the MAJORITY of Americans do not have enough money to keep the economy flowing. Inequity = DIS-PROPORTIONATE".
Show me just one exec whose decisions are actually worth a million dollars a day. Even just a thousand dollars a day. Think about it. As great as he was, even Steve Jobs is now replaced. And, as great as he was for the company, he was not that great for America. Look where your Apple product is made. American jobs?
Ever hear of "The Law of Diminishing Returns"? Keep raising your prices, and eventually, you'll price yourself out of business. That is what Corporate America has done. They have priced the economy out of business.
Take a look at the cost of a kit to put a motor on a bicycle. A 50 CC kit has gone up nearly $100 because of the demand. They're replacing cars with motorized bicycles and scooters. And, the auto industry isn't doing as well as they were ten years ago.
If a cashier is being paid exactly what they are worth, then we're paying far more for everything than it's worth. Gasoline isn't worth $3.599 a gallon. Why are we paying that much? Car insurance is not worth what we're paying. Why are we paying it?"(end quote)
Withou further ado here's the rest of the collection. In my opinion no one who is honest, can think critically and do math can deny what's contained herein:
Pay close attention to the years in the following posts of people who lived in the mid 70's-early 80's:
"Sad. I made $9 an hour during the Summer break in the mid 1980s running telephone lines in office buildings. It was a horrible low paying job then. You know what $9 is worth today adjusted for inflation since 1985. $4.42 cents. That same job today would be need to pay $18.50 per hour. If you have no perspective on how things suck..you'll settle for anything. The USA will look like these ghettos in Brazil before people wake up to this right wing propaganda they've been spoon fed for 30 years."(end quote)
"You know what $9 is worth today adjusted for inflation since 1985. $4.42 cents."
"Just because things were better, doesn't mean they were great. I don't deny that there were folks like yourself. Nevertheless, more opportunity (on average) did exist back then.
During college I worked part time at a warehouse. One of my co workers was a Guyanese who came into the US illegally in '77 or '78 (he later received amnesty under Reagan). He used to tell me how his first job, as an illegal, paid $10.50/hour. In 2006, after he was laid off from a warehouse making 33/hour, we were working for $12/hr. $10.50 in '78 or 12 in 2006. Inflation much?"(end quote)
"Also the wages aren't there and if you compare that with inflation it just doesn't work.
In 1980, I had an entry level job as a sound engineer with a local independent TV station earning $5.00 per hour.One paycheck paid my rent and utilities and auto insurance and the other 3 paycheckseach month were disposable income.
An entry level job today pays $8.50 to $10 per hour and even at $10 per hour it takes 2 paychecks to cover the cost of rent, utilities and auto insurance (and don't forget in 1980 $10 -- or two hours of work -- paid for 2 tickets to the cinema show, a tank full of gasoline and something to eat after the movie -- the cost of two movie tickets now is over $20)."
(end quote)
"No. I'm really disagreeing with .. not missing your point. And those numbers don't tell a very accurate story, and the proof is demonstrated by the drop in net worth of middle income earners as their debt has increased significantly, while earnings have declined relative to inflation.
By most measurable data points, the middle income class has been dying a very slow, incremental death for 4 decades because the costs on high ticket items have increased more rapidly than the either the inflation rate or rates of increases in income. To further compound the problem, average income levels have failed to keep pace with the inflation rate itself. Much of this goes unnoticed because of it's slow incremental nature (like growing old). But if you are old enough, and still maintain your mental faculties, you can't be bull $hted into believing what you are trying to say here.
As just one example, in 1977, I bought a brand new Pontiac Trans Am for $5200. And since it was my first car purchase, I suspect I was clubbed like a baby seal (paid full MSRP), as I simply asked how much, and said OK (later I learned the error of this way to purchase automobiles )
Now today, that car is no longer available, but a comparable car "Chevy Camero SS" is. And a similarly configured model is around $35,000 MSRP. Which is almost double the adjusted for inflation number of $18,700 that Camero should cost relative to the $5200 Trans Am of 1977.
My income back then was 14,000 or just shy of 3 times what the car cost ... if you apply that same formula to the $35,000 Camero today, I'd have to earn roughly $100,000 per year to maintain the same standard (drive the same car) as my $14,000 income provided then. I was not wealthy then .. I was a 20 year oldworking in a warehouse driving a forklift. And I don't think there are many 6 figure forklift drivers around today ...I would say, the 40-50K range would be the upper limit ... or roughly the same as my $14,000 would be, adjusted for inflation.
This is one example, and almost any big item ... car, house, etc. works out to be the same. Some other items like Healthcare have dramatically exceeded those rates exponentially compared to 1977 where mine was absolutely free and first rate, including dental.
Now, add to this the higher taxes, social security withholding, and medicare ... all of which have exceeded the inflation rate (and don't let anyone BS you into believing it hasn't), means that the net spending power of your income has declined dramatically over the past 30+ years. (See video below she documents ALL this IN DETAIL)
Now around about that same time frame, my step father worked for one of the US Government agencies earning roughly in the 50-60K range, and at the time, that was very good money, but not even close to RICH & Wealthy .... but adjusted for inflation, that comes out to around $200+K now. The house he purchased then at $50,000 appraised for $480,000 in 2004-5 even though the adjusted for inflation value would have only dictated a $155,000 figure ... 3 times the inflation rate!! By the time he retired in the late 90's, his income may have doubled, yet his house increased by 6-8 fold. What does that tell you?
Now if you are following me here ... this is where it gets real hairy ... if you take a Quarter ... 25 cents ... from say 1964 (the last 90% silver Quarter) that 25 cents equates to $1.76 in 2010 value. But guess what? Today's melt value of that sliver quarter is about $3.70 which is again more than double the published inflation rate ....
So what does that all mean? It means very simply, that the value of your money is worth about half of what it's claimed to be worth, even after being adjusted for inflation .... and all it takes is to actually look at the historical costs of items like cars, and houses and health care costs from the late 60's to today, and also the median incomes. You see that the purchasing power has indeed declined. And this is a result of the devaluation of the currency (a hidden tax).
So when it comes to buying power, there has been a continuous decline that doubles the the inflation rates admitted .. which is why the middle class really doesn't exist for all practical purposes today.
There are the ultra wealthy, and the rest. The $250kers are just at the higher end of that rest of us, and they are the last of the upper middle class, and the next in line to fall ... apparently, much to delight of many who think that they are members of the Wealthy Club, and must fall for the sake of everyone.
I suppose this proves that indeed, misery loves company."(end quote)
Anything that costs hundreds of dollars is a luxury item. This is now getting down to a definition of "poor". But some of those who do have computers have second-hand ones, or donated ones.
It's 2012. "Hundreds" of dollars is nothing now, NOTHING. Look at the cost for a root canal, medical insurance, rent,mortgage/housing, gas, a car, etc...
Excellent Summation of posts there.
Anyone that cannot see that the parasite class at the top has sold out this country for their own gain is as blind as can be.
It's 2012. "Hundreds" of dollars is nothing now, NOTHING. Look at the cost for a root canal, medical insurance, rent,mortgage/housing, gas, a car, etc...
Hundreds of dollars is s**t!!!!!!!
Yep, but they want the focus to be on the "cheap" items from China rather than the things that really matter for most American's for day to day living. Like you said, medical, rent and housing, education are all sky high thanks to the rats on Wall Street and their bubble games.
Incidentally, we also always hear how much cheaper things are now thanks to Chinese imports etc, but this is not true.
Looking at a list of items made in the 1950's for example, the costs were initially high, for example, like a color tv, but dropped once demand took over and the initial research and production costs were recouped. The items were also of a higher quality back then, such as furniture, fridges etc and lasted a long time.
What we have today is low quality junk made of particle board, plastics and substandard electronics all for maximum profit, that your lucky if it lasts a year.
How cheap are these imports really by filling up landfills faster with useless junk, by outsourcing our jobs, by taking away the means of production from this country?
Yep, but they want the focus to be on the "cheap" items from China rather than the things that really matter for most American's for day to day living. Like you said, medical, rent and housing, education are all sky high thanks to the rats on Wall Street and their bubble games.
Incidentally, we also always hear high much cheaper things are now thanks to Chinese imports etc, but this is not true.
Looking at a list of items made in the 1950's for example, the costs were initially high, for example, like a color tv, but dropped once demand took over and the initial research and production costs were recouped. The items were also of a higher quality back then, such as furniture, fridges etc and lasted a long time.
What we have today is low quality junk made of particle board, plastics and substandard electronics all for maximum profit, that your lucky if it lasts a year.
How cheap are these imports really by filling up landfills faster with useless junk, by outsourcing our jobs, by taking away the means of production from this country?
Then speak with your wallet. Refuse to buy it and support American manufacturing.
Then speak with your wallet. Refuse to buy it and support American manufacturing.
It is a no brainer that people will buy whatever it is they can afford when taking into consideration cost, quality and price.
The decisions of where those items come from is not in the hands of the majority of American's but in the hands of the policy makers.
In the 50's and well before then, the majority of items bought in the US were made in the US. Thanks to the policy makers, that changed with Japan, then China being the main suppliers.
That is the common denominator involved. The economic and trade policies that are set and that is what needs to be attacked. The majority of American's do not sit in boardrooms together as a cohesive force like the ones that set policy do.
It is a no brainer that people will buy whatever it is they can afford when taking into consideration cost, quality and price.
The decisions of where those items come from is not in the hands of the majority of American's but in the hands of the policy makers.
In the 50's and well before then, the majority of items bought in the US were made in the US. Thanks to the policy makers, that changed with Japan, then China being the main suppliers.
That is the common denominator involved. The economic and trade policies that are set and that is what needs to be attacked. The majority of American's do not sit in boardrooms together as a cohesive force like the ones that set policy do.
So in other words you have no desire to do what needs to be done to change things.
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.
: cool:
$10.50 in '78 or 12 in 2006. Inflation much?"(end quote)
) 
