What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[Busybody]

Curry, when I asked you for Obama's plan, you said it was on his website

I went there

There is still BULLSHIT about GREEN ENERGY and other failed shit

IS THAT HIS PLAN?

MORE FAILURE?

 

[richard_daily]

Newsflash for busybody... nobody pays attention to you.

 

[islandman]

How about, well paying domestic jobs?

Hmm... There's a concept, and one that cutting taxes to the wealthy won't get us.

Cart before horse. No one in their right mind is going to hire ahead of demand appearing.

Unless you're going to pay someone to sit on their hands for a bit. Demand leads to jobs, and an increase in discretionary income for the masses creates that demand.

 

[richard_daily]

Cart before horse. No one in their right mind is going to hire ahead of demand appearing.

Unless you're going to pay someone to sit on their hands for a bit. Demand leads to jobs, and an increase in discretionary income for the masses creates that demand.

That IS the cart AND the horse... With deflating real wages (which has been happening for the better part of a century) there is less and less consumer confidence, and less and less discretionary income for workers to buy the things that drive the better part of the economy.

As lower paying and lower skilled jobs become the norm, the economy is going to have a harder time recovering.

The top-heavy economic model is great for a rich few, but it's bad for long-term sustainability, and it's bad for this country.

 

[Sean Renaud]

That IS the cart AND the horse... With deflating real wages (which has been happening for the better part of a century) there is less and less consumer confidence, and less and less discretionary income for workers to buy the things that drive the better part of the economy.

As lower paying and lower skilled jobs become the norm, the economy is going to have a harder time recovering.

The top-heavy economic model is great for a rich few, but it's bad for long-term sustainability, and it's bad for this country.

Only fix I see is making workers more scarce somehow and I don't see Americans in general going in for a "more sloth is good for the economy" plan and I definitely don't see Republicans helping in a push in that direction. Do you?

I say we just ride out the crap and say we told you so on the other side.

 

[jeninflorida]

How about, well paying domestic jobs?

Hmm... There's a concept, and one that cutting taxes to the wealthy won't get us.

oh yeah, like Obama has helped create of those jobs? Sure Obama added thousands to the government head count but these people are a liability and a tax burden to the American people

 

[koalabear]

How about, well paying domestic jobs?

Hmm... There's a concept, and one that cutting taxes to the wealthy won't get us.

Move to Korea, Russia or China. Government Motors is building new plants there.

 

[richard_daily]

Only fix I see is making workers more scarce somehow and I don't see Americans in general going in for a "more sloth is good for the economy" plan and I definitely don't see Republicans helping in a push in that direction. Do you?

I say we just ride out the crap and say we told you so on the other side.

I think the solution is to bring back the concept of workers having a right to a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

There is a direct link to the decline in union membership, to the decline in real wages in this country.

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/real_earnings.gif

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/8076/693/1600/private-sector-union-trends.jpg

Look at what happened starting in 1979.


There has to be a fundamental shift in the values that people in this country hold if we're going to get back to a strong middle class. Shopping at walmart isn't going to do it. All that does is drive the economic growth at the top, and does the opposite to the rest of us.

I try to support small and local businesses whenever it's feasible, and sometimes even when it's not. I'll pay a little more for a quality piece of durable good, and will always choose a US or union made product over a cheap Chinese counterpart, even if it costs me twice as much.

The only vote that truly matters is where you spend your money.

 

[koalabear]

Stocks slide on weak earnings

 

[Disgustipated]

JesusFuckingChrist.

Today, 01:41 AM
Remove user from ignore list
TurnerLeaf
This message is hidden because TurnerLeaf is on your ignore list.

Old Today, 02:55 AM #23480
4est_4est_Gump
Run Forrest! RUN!

What the fuck do you idiots do, wake up (or not sleep) and come to Lit first thing after reading the morning's memes?

Even if your EST, that shit is pathetic.

 

[Sean Renaud]

oh yeah, like Obama has helped create of those jobs? Sure Obama added thousands to the government head count but these people are a liability and a tax burden to the American people

No, like the idiot centrist he is Obama has cut government jobs by tens of thousands. We'd be out of this mess if he'd done what you suggested and increased the government head count. But unfortunatly he wants you to like him.

I think the solution is to bring back the concept of workers having a right to a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

There is a direct link to the decline in union membership, to the decline in real wages in this country.

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/real_earnings.gif

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/8076/693/1600/private-sector-union-trends.jpg

Look at what happened starting in 1979.


There has to be a fundamental shift in the values that people in this country hold if we're going to get back to a strong middle class. Shopping at walmart isn't going to do it. All that does is drive the economic growth at the top, and does the opposite to the rest of us.

I try to support small and local businesses whenever it's feasible, and sometimes even when it's not. I'll pay a little more for a quality piece of durable good, and will always choose a US or union made product over a cheap Chinese counterpart, even if it costs me twice as much.

The only vote that truly matters is where you spend your money.

You're half right. The fall of unions is a major problem and shopping at walmart is. . .at best not a solution. But the idea that China and it's products are evil is simply false. Ideally we shouldn't be fighting the upper class. There is no good reason why the upper class and middle class can't share the same goals.

 

[richard_daily]

No, like the idiot centrist he is Obama has cut government jobs by tens of thousands. We'd be out of this mess if he'd done what you suggested and increased the government head count. But unfortunatly he wants you to like him.

jen and all the other wingnuts don't understand that countries can't cut spending to get out of a recession quickly. I mean, at least if you look at history.

You're half right. The fall of unions is a major problem and shopping at walmart is. . .at best not a solution. But the idea that China and it's products are evil is simply false. Ideally we shouldn't be fighting the upper class. There is no good reason why the upper class and middle class can't share the same goals.

I'm not saying that China is evil. I'm saying that workers in China are being exploited, just like they're being exploited here. They're being used to drive real wages down, so that a greater profit can be made, which in turn is detrimental to long term growth in this country, and it's bad for long term chinese growth as well. It's a scorched earth economic model, and it only benefits a select few.

I can think of a lot of reasons why the upper class and the middle class can't share the same goals, but let me hear your thoughts on the subject first.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I'm not saying that China is evil. I'm saying that workers in China are being exploited, just like they're being exploited here. They're being used to drive real wages down, so that a greater profit can be made, which in turn is detrimental to long term growth in this country, and it's bad for long term chinese growth as well. It's a scorched earth economic model, and it only benefits a select few.

I can think of a lot of reasons why the upper class and the middle class can't share the same goals, but let me hear your thoughts on the subject first.

I don't disagree with you. But I think as long as we live in a culture that values work more than results and that your job is an important part of your status that's not gonna change.

I can't think of any common sense reason why the upper, middle and lower class can't share the same goals. I think they don't because everybody is short sighted. I'd be willing to bet that assuming you factor in gas prices, car prices and factory prices we could ship MORE jobs over seas have the already rich be even richer, tax them at a higher rate and since they aren't paying us to work, they're paying us not to bitch about jobs being shipped over seas and then we have more disposable income and thus generate more jobs that it would work. Or that we could lower full time from 40 hours a week to 30 or 25 or 20 that the spare time would end up getting spent on luxury items which again raises demand by decreasing the supply of workers. Albeit artificially but no less artificially than the 40 hour work week does in the first place.

I just don't see such a fundamental change taking place until things get considerably worse. The Republicans might have been right about we should have let it crash because people don't rethink their lives until they hit rock bottom.

 

[islandman]

That IS the cart AND the horse... With deflating real wages (which has been happening for the better part of a century) there is less and less consumer confidence, and less and less discretionary income for workers to buy the things that drive the better part of the economy.

As lower paying and lower skilled jobs become the norm, the economy is going to have a harder time recovering.

The top-heavy economic model is great for a rich few, but it's bad for long-term sustainability, and it's bad for this country.

This assumes that the price of bread stays the same in a deflationary world. Sure, there will be a lag, but as real world examples such as Japan have shown us, the price of inputs will go down. If it helps, change my answer to 'increase in real discretionary income'. Ergo, cart before horse once again.

 

[jeninflorida]

here is how to describe the vast magority of union members. they are lazy, weak, and lack the desire to work.

2ndly, just because some ignorant runt is a union member, does not make that person "worth" $30/hr - this is the false fatality of the union

union add zero value and only protect the lazy

I think the solution is to bring back the concept of workers having a right to a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

There is a direct link to the decline in union membership, to the decline in real wages in this country.

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/real_earnings.gif

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/8076/693/1600/private-sector-union-trends.jpg

Look at what happened starting in 1979.


There has to be a fundamental shift in the values that people in this country hold if we're going to get back to a strong middle class. Shopping at walmart isn't going to do it. All that does is drive the economic growth at the top, and does the opposite to the rest of us.

I try to support small and local businesses whenever it's feasible, and sometimes even when it's not. I'll pay a little more for a quality piece of durable good, and will always choose a US or union made product over a cheap Chinese counterpart, even if it costs me twice as much.

The only vote that truly matters is where you spend your money.

 

[jeninflorida]

That IS the cart AND the horse... With deflating real wages (which has been happening for the better part of a century) there is less and less consumer confidence, and less and less discretionary income for workers to buy the things that drive the better part of the economy.

As lower paying and lower skilled jobs become the norm, the economy is going to have a harder time recovering.

The top-heavy economic model is great for a rich few, but it's bad for long-term sustainability, and it's bad for this country.

wow, you are such a wimp and cry baby

totally out of touch with reality and since you are a quitter you need government/union to protect you

 

[koalabear]

ZZ

Ticker for: Sealy

HOG

Ticker for: Harley-Davidson


TAP

Ticker for: MolsonCoors

BID

Ticker for: Sotheby's

 

[richard_daily]

I don't disagree with you. But I think as long as we live in a culture that values work more than results and that your job is an important part of your status that's not gonna change.

I can't think of any common sense reason why the upper, middle and lower class can't share the same goals. I think they don't because everybody is short sighted. I'd be willing to bet that assuming you factor in gas prices, car prices and factory prices we could ship MORE jobs over seas have the already rich be even richer, tax them at a higher rate and since they aren't paying us to work, they're paying us not to bitch about jobs being shipped over seas and then we have more disposable income and thus generate more jobs that it would work. Or that we could lower full time from 40 hours a week to 30 or 25 or 20 that the spare time would end up getting spent on luxury items which again raises demand by decreasing the supply of workers. Albeit artificially but no less artificially than the 40 hour work week does in the first place.

Yes, but you stepped on the landmine issue for just about all wealthy; taxes. They think they're being taxed too much already, which is why they're heavily invested in offshore holding accounts, shell companies, and other dishonest tax shelters.

After 50 years of increasingly compounded increases, the wealthy aren't going to suddenly admit that they have enough. They are going to keep buying politicians to create laws that protect their interests.

I'm all for the 30 hour work week, and I agree with you in theory that what you say COULD happen... but it won't, because while it would be great for middle income earners, the upper income earners would earn slightly less, which would still be far more than they need... and as I'm sure you're aware, we don't live in an economic vacuum, so the greater share that they grab, the less that's less for everyone else.

I don't know the source of this joke:

A unionized employee, a member of the Tea Party and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across and takes 11 cookies, looks at the tea partier and says,"look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

I just don't see such a fundamental change taking place until things get considerably worse. The Republicans might have been right about we should have let it crash because people don't rethink their lives until they hit rock bottom.

Agreed. And I agree that we should have let it collapse as well... But the republicans are speaking out of both sides of their mouths, saying that TARP didn't prevent collapse. Clearly it did, but one of the only things I tend to agree with them on, is that we should have let it.

This assumes that the price of bread stays the same in a deflationary world. Sure, there will be a lag, but as real world examples such as Japan have shown us, the price of inputs will go down. If it helps, change my answer to 'increase in real discretionary income'. Ergo, cart before horse once again.

I don't think we're talking about a lag. I think the fundamentals aren't there in the same way as we've been used to seeing historically.

I don't think essentials are going to drop anytime soon in relation to wages. I can't point to markers or indicators, as futures aren't my area of expertise in any way, so if you can convince me otherwise, go for it.

 

[jeninflorida]

moving money off shore is not dishonest, its called being fucking smart! this way, if Obama and thugs do something stupid a person can be protected!

there is a new breed of "worldly" people, that are not a citizen of any single country. Why? because when you get a fucking piece of shit POTUS like Obama well one has to move assets out of the country to protect oneself.

and yes the socialist Obama has started a classwar. The working class vs those who want to live off entitlements

there is nothing wrong with investing and holding money out of Obama's reach. its called being fucking smart

Yes, but you stepped on the landmine issue for just about all wealthy; taxes. They think they're being taxed too much already, which is why they're heavily invested in offshore holding accounts, shell companies, and other dishonest tax shelters.

After 50 years of increasingly compounded increases, the wealthy aren't going to suddenly admit that they have enough. They are going to keep buying politicians to create laws that protect their interests.

I'm all for the 30 hour work week, and I agree with you in theory that what you say COULD happen... but it won't, because while it would be great for middle income earners, the upper income earners would earn slightly less, which would still be far more than they need... and as I'm sure you're aware, we don't live in an economic vacuum, so the greater share that they grab, the less that's less for everyone else.

I don't know the source of this joke:






Agreed. And I agree that we should have let it collapse as well... But the republicans are speaking out of both sides of their mouths, saying that TARP didn't prevent collapse. Clearly it did, but one of the only things I tend to agree with them on, is that we should have let it.






I don't think we're talking about a lag. I think the fundamentals aren't there in the same way as we've been used to seeing historically.

I don't think essentials are going to drop anytime soon in relation to wages. I can't point to markers or indicators, as futures aren't my area of expertise in any way, so if you can convince me otherwise, go for it.

 

[islandman]

I don't think we're talking about a lag. I think the fundamentals aren't there in the same way as we've been used to seeing historically.

I don't think essentials are going to drop anytime soon in relation to wages. I can't point to markers or indicators, as futures aren't my area of expertise in any way, so if you can convince me otherwise, go for it.

Fundamentals change. That's the nature of a capitalistic society. It was different post-WWI and again after the Great Depression, and again after WWII and are changing once again now. To 'harken back to the olde days' is just an irrational attempt to say that people aren't comfortable with change. But change happens regardless...as history shows.

No one can say how long it will take for prices to drop, but what is certain is that they will in environment with persistent deflationary pressures...and in today's case, a global deflationary environment.

The issue at hand will not be solved by "a fair day's wage for a fair day's work" principally because people will never agree on what is "fair". Post-WWII, we had a strong middle class with unions as a foundation of that new-found economic power because the large corporations (headcount) were few and the worker was many, so power shifted to the worker. Today, it's the opposite. What's needed today is competition for that worker, which can only happen if there is a construct in place that will challenge the established corporations for that worker, i.e., an entrepreneurial base that can create the corporations of tomorrow. This isn't the government picking and choosing winners; this is about providing start-up funding for entrepreneurs, low interest business loans, an SBA that actually carries out its mandate. May take a generation or two, might happen even faster, but when it does, you'll have a strong middle class AND a healthy economy.

 

[Busybody]

as if we DIDNT know

FRAUD, ITS ALL FRAUD!


SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU: Surprise! CA Official Who Underreported Unemployment Figures is Big Obama Donor Of course, this is the merest coincidence.

 

[koalabear]

as if we DIDNT know

FRAUD, ITS ALL FRAUD!


SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU: Surprise! CA Official Who Underreported Unemployment Figures is Big Obama Donor Of course, this is the merest coincidence.

mere happenstance, king oblamer would never do anything bad.

 

[Busybody]

as if we DIDNT know

FRAUD, ITS ALL FRAUD!


SHOCKED, SHOCKED I TELL YOU: Surprise! CA Official Who Underreported Unemployment Figures is Big Obama Donor Of course, this is the merest coincidence.

Surprise! CA Official Who Underreported Unemployment Figures is Big Obama Donor



Well knock me over with a feather. Bogus unemployment figures reported and who’s behind it? Why, an Obama donor. There needs to be a criminal investigation here, but don’t hold your breath.


Marty Morgenstern, the secretary of the California agency that substantially under-reported unemployment claims last week, contributed to President Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential election campaign, The Daily Caller has learned.

On Oct. 11, the federal government reported that weekly jobless claims were down significantly, suggesting a dramatic national increase in economic growth and a steep decline in layoffs. Jobless claims, according to the Labor Department, had fallen by 30,000 to 339,000, their lowest level since February 2008.

The good news for the Obama administration spread quickly, with outlets like CNN and Bloomberg declaring, “Jobless claims fall to four-year low.”

Gee, hard to believe Obama is trying to manipulate voters with bogus data. Next thing you know they’ll be claiming we’re in boom times.


According to campaign disclosure records, Morgenstern donated $4,600 — the maximum amount allowed by law — to the 2008 Obama camapaign, beginning with a $1,000 contribution to Obama for America in February 2008. Morgenstern followed up that donation with a $1,300 contribution in June, and then a $2,300 payout in early September.


To no surprise, Morgenstern has longtime labor ties. I wonder if all the media that reported the bogus numbers last week will follow up with this obvious political manipulation?

 

[Busybody]

mere happenstance, king oblamer would never do anything bad.

Will CURRY say anything that is even closely resembling TRUTH?

 

[richard_daily]

Fundamentals change. That's the nature of a capitalistic society. It was different post-WWI and again after the Great Depression, and again after WWII and are changing once again now. To 'harken back to the olde days' is just an irrational attempt to say that people aren't comfortable with change. But change happens regardless...as history shows.

No one can say how long it will take for prices to drop, but what is certain is that they will in environment with persistent deflationary pressures...and in today's case, a global deflationary environment.

The issue at hand will not be solved by "a fair day's wage for a fair day's work" principally because people will never agree on what is "fair". Post-WWII, we had a strong middle class with unions as a foundation of that new-found economic power because the large corporations (headcount) were few and the worker was many, so power shifted to the worker. Today, it's the opposite. What's needed today is competition for that worker, which can only happen if there is a construct in place that will challenge the established corporations for that worker, i.e., an entrepreneurial base that can create the corporations of tomorrow. This isn't the government picking and choosing winners; this is about providing start-up funding for entrepreneurs, low interest business loans, an SBA that actually carries out its mandate. May take a generation or two, might happen even faster, but when it does, you'll have a strong middle class AND a healthy economy.

What I'm asking, is for markers indicating that essentials WILL drop. I'm not convinced that they will. Deflationary pressure isn't going to last forever, and there are lots of stop gaps in place to prevent middle income earners from taking advantage of these deflated rates... For example, you talk about loans; a huge problem is the extreme guidelines for underwriting loans right now. If you're a large company, you can get federally backed loans at just about no cost... However, if you're an individual, or a small business, good luck. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it's inordinately difficult right now.

I love the sentiment of the second part of your thread, but I guess I'm not as optimistic as you. I'm not seeing any realistic-to-happen government intervention as stemming the tide of wage disparity.

Corporations look to find ways to out-date workers that haven't even been trained for new positions yet. That's the inherent problem with the dance, the floor is increasingly slanted in one direction.

What's "fair" is becoming less and less so every year. The piece of the economic pie that the rest of us have to share is smaller and smaller.