Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply US-PHARMACIES UGL OZ
Raptor Labs UGFREAK OxygenPharm
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplyUS-PHARMACIES UGL OZUGFREAKRaptor LabsOxygenPharm

America gets a wage cut.

WODIN

बुद्धकर&
Platinum
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimests/20050411/ts_latimes/wageslaggingbehindprices


For the first time in 14 years, the American workforce has in effect gotten an across-the-board pay cut.

The growth in wages in 2004 and the first two months of this year trailed inflation, compounding the squeeze from higher housing, energy and other costs.

The result is that people like Victor Romero are finding themselves falling behind.

The 49-year-old film-set laborer had to ditch his $1,100-a-month Hollywood apartment because his rent kept rising while his pay of $24.50 an hour stayed flat.

"There's no such thing as raises anymore," Romero said.

This is the first time that salaries have increased more slowly than prices since the 1990-91 recession. Though salary growth has been relatively sluggish since the 2001 downturn, inflation also had stayed relatively subdued until last year, when the consumer price index rose 2.7%. But wages rose only 2.5%.

The effective 0.2-percentage-point erosion in workers' living standards occurred while the economy expanded at a healthy 4%, better than the 3% historical average.

Meanwhile, corporate profits hit record highs as companies got more productivity out of workers while keeping pay increases down.

Some see climbing profits and stagnant wages as not only unfair but also ultimately unsustainable. "Those that are baking the larger pie ought to see their slices expanding," said Jared Bernstein, an economist with the liberal Economic Policy Institute in Washington.

But higher wages could hurt the economy by stoking inflation further. Employers might pass the costs on to consumers in higher prices, and that in turn might prompt the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates more aggressively, possibly slowing the recovery or even triggering a recession.

For now, workers' wallets are being pummeled by something of a perfect storm of economic forces: a weak job market, rising health insurance premiums and other inflationary pressures.

The biggest factor is the slack employment market, which means there is little pressure on businesses to boost pay. "They take advantage of you because there's no work and anyone will work for anything," Romero said.

Although the unemployment rate has dropped to a relatively low 5.2%, that figure doesn't count the hundreds of thousands of jobless people who've given up their searches and dropped out of the labor market at a greater rate than anytime since 1988. At the same time, the cost of health premiums has skyrocketed, eating into the pool of corporate cash set aside for raises. Although pay rose only about 2.4% last year, benefit costs jumped almost 7%.

With benefits factored in, workers' total compensation did outpace inflation in 2004, even if they didn't see it in their paychecks. But employers also are requiring workers to pay a greater share of their premiums.

"Healthcare has eroded the wage base," said Janemarie Mulvey, chief economist with the Employment Policy Foundation, a business-funded think tank in Washington.

"In the long run, we can't continue like this. If healthcare keeps crowding out wages forever, something's got to give."

The squeeze is especially intense on the 47% of the workforce whose employers don't directly provide their health insurance. For lower-income workers, who are more likely to be uninsured, the falling value of their wages is even more serious because they're more likely to live paycheck to paycheck. And rising food and energy prices take a proportionately higher toll on the poor than on the rich.

Historically, periods when wage growth is outpaced by inflation rarely last more than 18 months. That's partly because businesses don't want their employees' living standards to fall, as that injures morale, said Trewman Bewley, a Yale University economist who has studied wage activity during economic downturns.

Many economists figure it's only a matter of time until workers can pry more money out of their employers to catch up to inflation again. If economic growth remains robust, as many forecasters predict, workers may gain greater leverage to negotiate wage hikes.

"Chances are that those workers that have problems getting by because of higher fuel prices will probably tell their employers, 'I can't make it,' " said John Lonski, chief economist at Moody's Investors Service.

That hasn't played out for Brian Chartier. The 29-year-old Glendale resident handles inventory for a Los Angeles manufacturing company. No one there, he said, has gotten a raise in two years.

"They're able to do this and I haven't quit, because where am I going to go?" he said. "There are no jobs."

While his salary remained flat, rising healthcare premiums kept eating up more and more of Chartier's take-home pay, so he dropped out of his employer's insurance program. His rent is also climbing.

As Chartier loaded bags of groceries into his Honda Civic last week, he boasted that they were full of bargains. "I don't get a single thing that's not on sale," Chartier said. "I can't afford to anymore."

Despite the failure of their wages to keep pace with inflation, American consumers have kept shopping. Consumer spending has continued to rise. Analysts say that's partly because some shoppers are thinking less about their paychecks and more about their biggest asset: their homes.

Home prices rose 21.1% in Southern California and 9% nationwide from February 2004 to February 2005, sheltering consumers, and the economy, from much of the pinch of higher prices.

"There's been a wealth effect afoot throughout much of the recession and the recovery," said Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute, "because no matter what people's incomes were doing, their wealth was improving — their biggest assets, their homes, were accruing."

As inflation sparks higher interest rates, most economists expect the housing market to cool, making shoppers more dependent on their paychecks. And even those who have seen their paper wealth rise phenomenally aren't happy about rising costs and stagnant pay.

Corina Swatz has seen the value of her Silver Lake home triple in about a decade. But neither she nor her husband has gotten a raise in more than a year. Meanwhile, gas prices have forced them to shell out $55 to fill the tank of their Chevy Tahoe.

"I used to spend $600 a month [on groceries]. Now I spend $800," Swatz, a mother of two, said as she made her weekly Costco run last week. The increased value of her home gives her only so much solace. "We're hanging in there."

The danger is that people like Swatz, despite their home equity cushion, may pull the rug out from under the economic expansion by reining in their spending.

That's what Gabriel Torres has done. The 56-year-old cook, who lives in Hollywood, hasn't gotten a raise in years but pays ever-higher prices to fill his Nissan Xterra. He and his wife have come up with a solution: Cut down on driving.

"We don't go out much," Torres said. "We used to. But now we only drive when we really have to."
 
I got a big raise.

Maybe they should have finished school
 
I got a rather nice raise myself.

But your raise is still less than it would have been given a normal pace of inflation vs. the current pace.
 
They're luck they got unions there in Hollywood.

There's a million $4/hr mexicans down the street ready to take over in a heartbeat.

Should be happy. It oculd be worse. A LOT worse.

-= nav =-
 
WODIN said:
I got a rather nice raise myself.

But your raise is still less than it would have been given a normal pace of inflation vs. the current pace.


Someone actually pays to have you around;)


Actually, the stats are slighted as most raises are tied to inflation, but arent calculated on a monthly basis. There is always a lag in times of rising inflation. Two months at the beginning of the year is hardly indicative of anything.
 
Razorguns said:
They're luck they got unions there in Hollywood.

There's a million $4/hr mexicans down the street ready to take over in a heartbeat.

Should be happy. It oculd be worse. A LOT worse.

-= nav =-
Yeah it could be exactly like South America.
 
My dad works at a very big paper factory in TN, and a cpl years ago, they had to take a 2 -3 dollar wage cut in order to keep thier jobs, He basically had no choice because he was 53 or 54 years of age and was too old to start working somewhere else. He has been working there since 77 and the wage cut helped the company and my dad is wanting to retire in a few years too. their home is paid for, and he can buy anything in the world that he wants.
I guess the paycut sucked because he worked hard for alot of years and earned that money and they just took it away from him and many others because they knew they had no choice but to take the pay cut
 
jerseyart said:
Someone actually pays to have you around;)


Actually, the stats are slighted as most raises are tied to inflation, but arent calculated on a monthly basis. There is always a lag in times of rising inflation. Two months at the beginning of the year is hardly indicative of anything.
I know I'm just as astonished that someone would pay you as you are that someone would pay me. Plus to your inflation comment....NUHUHN!!! Thats going to the title of my Doctoral Thesis by the way. NUHNUHN!!!

Sweet huh?
 
SoKlueles said:
My dad works at a very big paper factory in TN, and a cpl years ago, they had to take a 2 -3 dollar wage cut in order to keep thier jobs, He basically had no choice because he was 53 or 54 years of age and was too old to start working somewhere else. He has been working there since 77 and the wage cut helped the company and my dad is wanting to retire in a few years too. their home is paid for, and he can buy anything in the world that he wants.
I guess the paycut sucked because he worked hard for alot of years and earned that money and they just took it away from him and many others because they knew they had no choice but to take the pay cut
Tell your dad he did his part to pay for some stock holders new ferrari.
 
WODIN said:
I know I'm just as astonished that someone would pay you as you are that someone would pay me. Plus to your inflation comment....NUHUHN!!! Thats going to the title of my Doctoral Thesis by the way. NUHNUHN!!!

Sweet huh?


I guess it makes as much sense as anything else you have ever writeen.

Also

Im better than you
 
WODIN said:
Tell your dad he did his part to pay for some stock holders new ferrari.
no shit:(
they have a union there that is supposed to be for "the people" but where were they when they had to take the paycut?
 
jerseyart said:
I guess it makes as much sense as anything else you have ever writeen.

Also

Im better than you
You're a fart smeller.
 
WODIN said:
Tell your dad he did his part to pay for some stock holders new ferrari.


LOL

All those evil stockholders expecting a return on their investment.



Lets kill them all, starting with the pension holders, like the teachers union. I hate those fuckers the most
 
jerseyart said:
LOL

All those evil stockholders expecting a return on their investment.



Lets kill them all, starting with the pension holders, like the teachers union. I hate those fuckers the most
LMAO!! I knew you would crack up at that one.
 
Let's see.

Every year, more and more non-income-producing people enter the country. All sharing in the same pool of money.

It's only simple economics that that same money must be stretched out for everyone. Money doesn't magically appear and generate itself. Money must get spread around. And money *leaving* the country only makes things worse.

Declining wages are expected.

In other news: 1.2 million people entered the country last year and started making money. Money that, if you follow the money trail, came from the paycuts of others.

Simple economics: If u got 2 kids and each eat like kings, and you pop out 3 more -- those same 2 now have to eat less to make up for the new 3.
 
I was going to invest in some trusts but turns out they are worthless.

:whatever:

shhhhhhh...dont tell china.*wink*
 
"Healthcare has eroded the wage base," said Janemarie Mulvey, chief economist with the Employment Policy Foundation, a business-funded think tank in Washington.

I guess as long as we continue to fund ilegal aliens and 90 year olds medical care they could never afford the rest of us have to accept it
 
Milo Hobgoblin said:
I guess as long as we continue to fund ilegal aliens and 90 year olds medical care they could never afford the rest of us have to accept it
is that what you realy think?
 
yup.. The direct cause for the spike in meical care in California is treating uninsured people. Mnay of our hospitals are going bankrupt because of all the illegal immigrants who get hurt, pregnant, etc.. and go in for care. They never pay.. they have no social security number and they use fake names.. so you cant ruin their credit.

Then we have the seniors.. and all the reduced cost medical care, prescriptions, you name it.

I have always felt medical care is not a right other than the most basic of emergency services to CITIZENS ONLY. I dont think some 8 year old guy should have 10 dollar prescriptions for a 300 dollar bottle of pills.. either get insurance or you dont get the best care. period.

Society should NOT Have to pay for the bad life choices of others. I pay 400 dollars a month for insurance.. I have the best PPO our company offers.. I deserve the best it buys.. but I PAY for it.. I dont expect taxpayers to foot the bill.

All the seniors dont realize its the taxpayer being fucked because the demand cheap care.. the best care in the world does NOT equal cheap.

Until this problem is fixed.. insurance comoanies will pass the cost onto corporations, who will pass it onto their employees in the form of huigher premiums and ferwer raises.
 
Razorguns said:
Let's see.

Every year, more and more non-income-producing people enter the country. All sharing in the same pool of money.

It's only simple economics that that same money must be stretched out for everyone. Money doesn't magically appear and generate itself. Money must get spread around. And money *leaving* the country only makes things worse.

Declining wages are expected.

In other news: 1.2 million people entered the country last year and started making money. Money that, if you follow the money trail, came from the paycuts of others.

Simple economics: If u got 2 kids and each eat like kings, and you pop out 3 more -- those same 2 now have to eat less to make up for the new 3.
JUST SHUT UP ABOUT ECONOMICS..

Go take Money and banking 101 and if you don't get at least a 89 avg in the class you can not post on my threads. Got that.
 
we need to do tho things, put up a wall between us and mexico like the isreali's put up to keep the palestinians out and tell china to fuck off. yes it might hurt us right off without their shit but if the asain companies wanted to make any money, they would put their factories in the us. It would take awhile to show any effect... like three seconds, but i'd like to see it done.

Oh, and I recieved a pay raise. I have one coming for the next five years... unless the union gets every back to full pay rate this contract. "railroad"

Whiskey
 
WODIN said:
JUST SHUT UP ABOUT ECONOMICS..

Go take Money and banking 101 and if you don't get at least a 89 avg in the class you can not post on my threads. Got that.

and your explanation is?

Oh yeah..weak-minded fools don't have any.
 
Milo Hobgoblin said:
yup.. The direct cause for the spike in meical care in California is treating uninsured people. Mnay of our hospitals are going bankrupt because of all the illegal immigrants who get hurt, pregnant, etc.. and go in for care. They never pay.. they have no social security number and they use fake names.. so you cant ruin their credit.

Then we have the seniors.. and all the reduced cost medical care, prescriptions, you name it.

I have always felt medical care is not a right other than the most basic of emergency services to CITIZENS ONLY. I dont think some 8 year old guy should have 10 dollar prescriptions for a 300 dollar bottle of pills.. either get insurance or you dont get the best care. period.

Society should NOT Have to pay for the bad life choices of others. I pay 400 dollars a month for insurance.. I have the best PPO our company offers.. I deserve the best it buys.. but I PAY for it.. I dont expect taxpayers to foot the bill.

All the seniors dont realize its the taxpayer being fucked because the demand cheap care.. the best care in the world does NOT equal cheap.

Until this problem is fixed.. insurance comoanies will pass the cost onto corporations, who will pass it onto their employees in the form of huigher premiums and ferwer raises.

The government's financial budgeting problems and economics of the private sector's economics are not related.

Though inadequancies in government programs on a grander-scale (eg: social security) can have an affect on stocks as well as investor confidence in the economy -- it's not something the common worker needs to worry about in relation to their job.

Outsourcing, cheaper labour, lowering wages, breaking of unions, supply vs demand of labour -- are more real-life issues your everyday worker needs to be concerned about.

Factors which can have a direct impact on their employment and/or renumeration.

btw: The market is full of million-dollar salary people who claim to know everything business-wise. But if they're so smart -- why are their companies LOSING money?

One of the reasons why i don't invest in companies i know are led by overpaid knuckleheads who talk more than they walk.
 
Geeezz....... and I thought health care costs were attributed to the $12 per Advil and $4 cotton balls they charge you while in the hospital....stupid me.
 
Razorguns said:
They're luck they got unions there in Hollywood.

There's a million $4/hr mexicans down the street ready to take over in a heartbeat.

Should be happy. It oculd be worse. A LOT worse.

-= nav =-

While this statement is relatively factual...

Originally Posted by Razorguns
Let's see.

Every year, more and more non-income-producing people enter the country. All sharing in the same pool of money.

It's only simple economics that that same money must be stretched out for everyone. Money doesn't magically appear and generate itself. Money must get spread around. And money *leaving* the country only makes things worse.

Declining wages are expected.

In other news: 1.2 million people entered the country last year and started making money. Money that, if you follow the money trail, came from the paycuts of others.

Simple economics: If u got 2 kids and each eat like kings, and you pop out 3 more -- those same 2 now have to eat less to make up for the new 3.

This one makes very little sense, -=nav=-

You really should just keep your illogical opinions to yourself.
 
XBiker said:
While this statement is relatively factual...



This one makes very little sense, -=nav=-

You really should just keep your illogical opinions to yourself.
The FED can actually "create" money using monetary policy via large buying and selling of government bonds to the banking system and manipulation of the Required Reserve Ratio of all private banking institutions. So really there isnt just a finite pie that gets diluted due to population increases, etc.
 
one thing i dont understand...how do the prices of homes/rent keep going higher and higher with everyone making less money?
our price median where i live for a home is now 775.000
Santa Barbara calif is at 1.2mil for their price median.
and the no.1 employer across the US is Wal-Mart????? @ 16,500 anual income avg.
Im not good at math or economics, but i cant get this one figured out....
Calif are going into the state of AZ at an alarming rate...this time last year MLS had over 30,000 listings for homes....right now, there are less than 5000 homes for the state of AZ on MLS....the homes are recording an unreal number of contracts biding for purchase...two homes as of last week had record highs of 30 -53 contracts on 1 home...a house that went into a biding war - sold for 100,000 more than the asking price in 1 day.....where/when will it stop?
 
PBR said:
one thing i dont understand...how do the prices of homes/rent keep going higher and higher with everyone making less money?
our price median where i live for a home is now 775.000
Santa Barbara calif is at 1.2mil for their price median.
and the no.1 employer across the US is Wal-Mart????? @ 16,500 anual income avg.
Im not good at math or economics, but i cant get this one figured out....
Calif are going into the state of AZ at an alarming rate...this time last year MLS had over 30,000 listings for homes....right now, there are less than 5000 homes for the state of AZ on MLS....the homes are recording an unreal number of contracts biding for purchase...two homes as of last week had record highs of 30 -53 contracts on 1 home...a house that went into a biding war - sold for 100,000 more than the asking price in 1 day.....where/when will it stop?
When the Broken take to the streets.

Or the Educated stand up for them
 
PBR said:
one thing i dont understand...how do the prices of homes/rent keep going higher and higher with everyone making less money?
our price median where i live for a home is now 775.000

1) These are mainly bought by the rich. Yes, even in today's climiate the rich get richer

2) Supply vs Demand. Many of the rich and middle-class are MOVING out of areas like LA, so major demand comes as a result of that. Increased demand, low supply == increased prices.

3) Increased debt. You'd be surprised how many dodos are buying houses they can barely afford.
 
XBiker said:
You really should just keep your illogical opinions to yourself.

Oh look, the dunce of the pack has spoketh:

Let's see. People come. Jobs not there. They either work for minimum wage, or they leave. Translation: Something's not right.

Turning Tail: Canada's Immigration Exodus

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...970599119419&DPL=IvsNDS/7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

(excerpt):

This is an entirely new thing we have to get a grip on," he warns. "We've always had immigrants who come here, work until they retire and then go back home to collect their pensions. A lot of Italians, for example, did that. But now we're seeing people come here, get educated and then go elsewhere to work in their prime. I've got a classroom full of people who speak Mandarin and most of them will leave to work in another country. This is a new type of immigrant and a new phenomenon."

A big reason for it, says DeVoretz, is that the latest wave of Chinese immigrants is increasingly disillusioned with life in Canada. In fact, his research is finding that despite their impressive credentials, these immigrants, particularly those from poorer Mainland China, are struggling financially. Often, they find their degrees aren't recognized and that they must take jobs below those they would find in their homeland.

"As a Canadian, I find it shameful that we seek out these people," says Milton K. Wong, a successful Vancouver-based financier, "and when they get here we don't really allow them to be utilized. Yes, we've built up an incredible talent pool of Chinese-Canadians. But we're squandering it."

But a Statistics Canada report, released a few weeks ago, reports Chinese immigrants who came to Canada in the 1990s had an employment rate of 61 per cent, far below the 80 per cent for eligible Canadian workers. Those who couldn't find jobs told demographers that the problem was they could not get their foreign education fully recognized.

"If we look to the recent inflows of Chinese skilled immigrants from the People's Republic of China, we see that many of the highly skilled are living below the low income cutoff line, that is, in poverty," DeVoretz recently warned the House of Commons Standing Committee on Immigration. "In fact, Canada has become a less popular destination as Chinese immigrants return home or never leave China..."
 
What is it with us today...

"Oh my god that guy can't afford a house in Los Angeles it must be the economy bla bla"

Hey, here's a nutty idea= maybe, just maybe, not everybody can afford a nice pad in LA? People need to learn how to manage their budget a bit better. If you can't comfortably afford the house, don't buy it. Go live in a neighboring town, collect some money, and in a few years go ahead and buy that dream pad.
 
Razorguns said:
Let's see.

Every year, more and more non-income-producing people enter the country. All sharing in the same pool of money.

It's only simple economics that that same money must be stretched out for everyone. Money doesn't magically appear and generate itself. Money must get spread around. And money *leaving* the country only makes things worse.

Declining wages are expected.

In other news: 1.2 million people entered the country last year and started making money. Money that, if you follow the money trail, came from the paycuts of others.

Simple economics: If u got 2 kids and each eat like kings, and you pop out 3 more -- those same 2 now have to eat less to make up for the new 3.

wrong wrong and wrong across the board. It isnot the same pool of money; wealth is created and there is no theoretical limit to how much there can be.

Take an economics course.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
wrong wrong and wrong across the board. It isnot the same pool of money; wealth is created and there is no theoretical limit to how much there can be.

Take an economics course.
Thank bromagnum.
 
Razorguns said:
and your explanation is?

Oh yeah..weak-minded fools don't have any.
The explination is that the costs of goods is outpacing wages. Get it?

Cost Increase of Goods and Services > Increase in disposable Income = Decrease in Purchasing power.
 
2/3 of the US economy is driven by consumption.

If you do not feed the cow you don't get any milk.

meaning, if folks don't get the wages to spend, spending stops and the economy slows.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
wrong wrong and wrong across the board. It isnot the same pool of money; wealth is created and there is no theoretical limit to how much there can be.

Take an economics course.

I'm not talking wealth. The taking of monies of X, Y areas and putting into the hands of Z. Where Z obtains wealth as a result.

I'm talking currency. More specifically the *recycling* of that same currency across the board.

View the formula for the "trickle-down effect".
 
WODIN said:
The explination is that the costs of goods is outpacing wages. Get it? .

Which means little. Cost of goods increasing is due to someone down the line increasing costs. The concept of "passing down the costs to the next tier". Either way the same money gets spread down the chain and hopefully back up. "Recycling".

For all you know -- the cost of goods could be the direct correlation to rising salaries.

In fact, lowering wages (using of foreign labour) is ideal -- for it lowers costs, which in turn, can lower prices of goods and services.

WODIN said:
Cost Increase of Goods and Services > Increase in disposable Income = Decrease in Purchasing power.

You're talking inflation. Inflation is normal. It's continual. It's not the source of recessions by nature, unless it's accelerated beyond normal means due to abnormal reasons.
 
Inflation to the point that it outpaces the ENTIRE ECONOMY is not normal.
 
Razorguns said:
I'm not talking wealth. The taking of monies of X, Y areas and putting into the hands of Z. Where Z obtains wealth as a result.

I'm talking currency. More specifically the *recycling* of that same currency across the board.

View the formula for the "trickle-down effect".
The so-called trickle down effect was debunked in the late 80's. Where you been?

Money tends to stay in the same social circle in which it is earned.
 
WODIN said:
The so-called trickle down effect was debunked in the late 80's. Where you been?

Money tends to stay in the same social circle in which it is earned.

Never said TDE in the way it was proposed was perfect. What you're proclaiming seems like a liberal slant to me. Have the money spread around to everyone -- and everyone should be happy with a status quo. Rich can't be trusted with money, tax-cuts, etc.

The rich getting richer is what spurs development, research, investments and jobs.
 
Razorguns said:
Never said TDE in the way it was proposed was perfect. What you're proclaiming seems like a liberal slant to me. Have the money spread around to everyone -- and everyone should be happy with a status quo. Rich can't be trusted with money, tax-cuts, etc.

The rich getting richer is what spurs development, research, investments and jobs.
I'm not saying anything like that. I'm simply saying that TDE does not exist. Never has and never will.
 
WODIN said:
The so-called trickle down effect was debunked in the late 80's. Where you been?

Money tends to stay in the same social circle in which it is earned.


Bor, the last thing you should be criticizing anyone on is economics, especially after starting a silly thread which sues a 2 month sample to determine that American income is not keeping pace with inflation. It's such a silly premise that to even post it as a serious charge is unflattering to your intellect.


And trickle down was never "debunked." In point of fact it created the largest economic expansion in the histroy of this country that lasted well through the Clinton Administrtion. Unlike Bush Jr, Clinton inherited a growing economy.

The only thing thats been debunked is the premise that liberals understand andything about economics
 
jerseyart said:
Bor, the last thing you should be criticizing anyone on is economics, especially after starting a silly thread which sues a 2 month sample to determine that American income is not keeping pace with inflation. It's such a silly premise that to even post it as a serious charge is unflattering to your intellect.


And trickle down was never "debunked." In point of fact it created the largest economic expansion in the histroy of this country that lasted well through the Clinton Administrtion. Unlike Bush Jr, Clinton inherited a growing economy.

The only thing thats been debunked is the premise that liberals understand andything about economics
These reports come out monthly. This is the first month in 14 years in which the economy has flipped on wages / inflation

TDE was about as valid as the laffer curve.

You're a total and complete idiot.
 
WODIN said:
These reports come out monthly. This is the first month in 14 years in which the economy has flipped on wages / inflation

TDE was about as valid as the laffer curve.

You're a total and complete idiot.


Yeah, and on your side of the discussion we have more liberal hyperbole. And on my side we have almost two decades of near uninterrupted economic growth,
'
We also have a doubling of tax revenues in under 8 years after the Reagan tax cuts to evidence the laffer curve, as well as a similar experience under the Kennedy administration.

But yeah, lets ignore all the troubling details like "evidence" and just say whatever nonsense we can pull out of our collectivist asses to justify our liberal policy idiocy.



And as I stated Mr. Friedman, a two month sample is irrelevant. It does not even account for those whose wages are tied to inflationary increase as they have not had the opportunity to adjust yet in that short a period of time.

Same logic as saying you work for free on monday and tuesday because payday doesnt come till driday and you havent received any money yet. But thats about what we've come to expect from liberals with respect to sound economic thinking
 
jerseyart said:
Yeah, and on your side of the discussion we have more liberal hyperbole. And on my side we have almost two decades of near uninterrupted economic growth,
'
We also have a doubling of tax revenues in under 8 years after the Reagan tax cuts to evidence the laffer curve, as well as a similar experience under the Kennedy administration.

But yeah, lets ignore all the troubling details like "evidence" and just say whatever nonsense we can pull out of our collectivist asses to justify our liberal policy idiocy.



And as I stated Mr. Friedman, a two month sample is irrelevant. It does not even account for those whose wages are tied to inflationary increase as they have not had the opportunity to adjust yet in that short a period of time.

Same logic as saying you work for free on monday and tuesday because payday doesnt come till driday and you havent received any money yet. But thats about what we've come to expect from liberals with respect to sound economic thinking
Just to note. I didn't say conservatives were idiots or that conservative thinking was idiotic. I said YOU are an idiot.
 
WODIN said:
Just to note. I didn't say conservatives were idiots or that conservative thinking was idiotic. I said YOU are an idiot.


See, Im much nicer than you. I didn't single you out individually. I just think all liberals are idiots
 
jerseyart said:
See, Im much nicer than you. I didn't single you out individually. I just think all liberals are idiots
I say just you because I'm not arrogant enought to assume that all conservatives are as dumb as you are. For instance I know that matt is somewhat intelligent and for sure that Code is a freakin' genius so there are at least two guys with conservative leanings that I respect.
 
WODIN said:
I say just you because I'm not arrogant enought to assume that all conservatives are as dumb as you are. For instance I know that matt is somewhat intelligent and for sure that Code is a freakin' genius so there are at least two guys with conservative leanings that I respect.


Heee hee


I dont know any intelligent liberals. I dont think they exist bor
 
Razorguns said:
They're luck they got unions there in Hollywood.

There's a million $4/hr mexicans down the street ready to take over in a heartbeat.

Should be happy. It oculd be worse. A LOT worse.

-= nav =-


where im at overseas, the U.S. government pays a shit load of philippinos $1.78 per hour. these are contracted workers.
 
CrazyRussian said:
What is it with us today...

"Oh my god that guy can't afford a house in Los Angeles it must be the economy bla bla"

Hey, here's a nutty idea= maybe, just maybe, not everybody can afford a nice pad in LA? People need to learn how to manage their budget a bit better. If you can't comfortably afford the house, don't buy it. Go live in a neighboring town, collect some money, and in a few years go ahead and buy that dream pad.
Yeah we are living in a neighboring town, our commutes are at least and hour one way with no traffic, but since everyone else is doing the same thing we have to commute 1 1/2 one way (traffic)...i paid 3.09 for gas on sunday...The people who live in 300,000 dollar homes are commuting almost 2 hours every day one way, and they live in the fucking desert-literally...Heres the problem with this statement....there are places that are cheaper to live in...ever try to find a job in Vermont? Wyoming? Minnisota?...yea housing is cheaper, you know why, cause there is no industry or job market...some of those states nearly shut down because of weather conditions alone...housing is not getting any cheaper any where except las vegas were real estate has back slid some....its not easy to pack up and move out of state or to just relocate- that takes money. here's another factor: neighborhoods are becoming more and more seperated socially....the "gap between the haves and the have nots" is becoming increasingly larger and more distant....you can go from a million dollar neighborhood to a low income rental district within a block or two in calif..,..im very fortunate, i live in a great city near the ocean and bought in at the bottom of the market, my home has increased well over 200,000 in 2 years...im lucky. but i pay out the A** to live here and do what i do. i have a real difficult time saving...
 
monkey arms said:
Geeezz....... and I thought health care costs were attributed to the $12 per Advil and $4 cotton balls they charge you while in the hospital....stupid me.
No, it's the billions and billions of dollars tie-up in medically-related lawsuits and people who shouldn't be recieving care and who have no ability to pay -- that's what makes for $12 Advil and $4 cotton balls. As of last year, 40% of all US hospitals were losing money... I'm pretty sure it's not the hospitals that are getting rich.
 
WODIN said:
The so-called trickle down effect was debunked in the late 80's. Where you been?

Money tends to stay in the same social circle in which it is earned.
Ok, Wodin -- that last statement was so wrong it made my head hurt. It's been shown time and time again that money spans "social circles". You now owe me 2 Tylenol please.

Wealth stays in "social circles"... because the wealth are really good at this thing called "wealth preservation". It's pretty tricky to do though... you have to save so as to accumulate money, then invest it wisely (and usually conservatively).

Money transcends social circles. When the wealthy buy things it puts people to work.
 
MattTheSkywalker said:
wrong wrong and wrong across the board. It isnot the same pool of money; wealth is created and there is no theoretical limit to how much there can be.

Take an economics course.

Thanks, MTSW.

I have tried to show -=NAV=- his own flawed logic, but he just doesn't get it.
 
LOL @ $1,100-a-month Hollywood apartment rent
and pay of $24.50 an hour


Poor baby..

Move to Florida and 24.50 an hour would buy him a small mansion.
 
Top Bottom