It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Our economy stinks

page: 18
17
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 01:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Yes, you'd have average purchasing power but you wouldn't have average incomes.

You can blame the home purchasing power change on 30 year mortgages. Face it, people don't buy a house because they can pay it off in 10 years, they buy it because they can afford the payments. You'll see another bump up in prices when 40 year loans become popular.




posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

You can do the same comparison for every product not just houses.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
"One person time is not worth the same as anothers."

That is not what they are saying. They are referencing the buying power of the dollar on average.

That is not what they dais. They said, and I quote:

"The only way to measure it is in terms of minutes of work to buy products."

I don't see the word 'average' anywhere, do you?



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: tanstaafl

Ok but you can measure time to buy products for people performing well paying and low paying jobs and clearly see that the people with low and average paying jobs are losing purchasing power.

If they are working jobs that don't provide pay increases to at least cover inflation/COL increases, then they need to get new jobs.

The good news is, in this killer Trump economy, there are far more and better jobs available than there are people to fill them, and real/actual wages have risen dramatically over the last 2 1/2 years.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 12:37 PM
link   
More people are working than ever before in the US. Wages are also rising, particularly for low-income workers. Fewer people dependent on government handouts = bad news for Democrats.

When your party needs people to fail, your party sucks.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Obviously.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: tanstaafl

Ok but you can measure time to buy products for people performing well paying and low paying jobs and clearly see that the people with low and average paying jobs are losing purchasing power.

If they are working jobs that don't provide pay increases to at least cover inflation/COL increases, then they need to get new jobs.

The good news is, in this killer Trump economy, there are far more and better jobs available than there are people to fill them, and real/actual wages have risen dramatically over the last 2 1/2 years.


The vast majority of jobs out there provide less than CPI based inflation raises annually. Almost all jobs provide less than if it's based on other metrics like purchasing power.

At most places in the US the only way to get a raise is to get a promotion where you can then renegotiate salary. Problem is, promotions are a pyramid scheme, and not every person can get a promotion.
edit on 2-8-2019 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
"One person time is not worth the same as anothers."

That is not what they are saying. They are referencing the buying power of the dollar on average.

That is not what they dais. They said, and I quote:

"The only way to measure it is in terms of minutes of work to buy products."

I don't see the word 'average' anywhere, do you?


The whole time to work vs purchase power calculation is based on average wages.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 03:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
"The good news is, in this killer Trump economy, there are far more and better jobs available than there are people to fill them, and real/actual wages have risen dramatically over the last 2 1/2 years."

The vast majority of jobs out there provide less than CPI based inflation raises annually. Almost all jobs provide less than if it's based on other metrics like purchasing power.

Don't believe you...


At most places in the US the only way to get a raise is to get a promotion where you can then renegotiate salary. Problem is, promotions are a pyramid scheme, and not every person can get a promotion.

Every person can get a promotion - but it may have to be a lateral move (to another company even)...



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: KnoxMSP

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
"One person time is not worth the same as anothers."

That is not what they are saying. They are referencing the buying power of the dollar on average.

That is not what they dais. They said, and I quote:

"The only way to measure it is in terms of minutes of work to buy products."

I don't see the word 'average' anywhere, do you?


The whole time to work vs purchase power calculation is based on average wages.



You can base it on wages at any level, from average to by percentile. A few posts earlier I posted the measurement by income quintile to show that people who make in the bottom half of wages have a lot less ability to purchase a home these days than years ago.

For the poor, it takes almost twice as much work to buy a house (and likely pay rent) as it did when the people complaining about people being lazy and not working enough were kids.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
The whole time to work vs purchase power calculation is based on average wages.

Google doesn't provide anything, so you'll have to...



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
The whole time to work vs purchase power calculation is based on average wages.

Google doesn't provide anything, so you'll have to...


Dude you're wasting your time. You'd have more success trying to explain economics to a goldfish.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Every person can get a promotion - but it may have to be a lateral move (to another company even)...


Lateral moves are not promotions.



posted on Aug, 2 2019 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: KnoxMSP
The whole time to work vs purchase power calculation is based on average wages.

Google doesn't provide anything, so you'll have to...


Dude you're wasting your time. You'd have more success trying to explain economics to a goldfish.


I did my final project on just this is college. I based on hours worked, based on average wage, to buy an ounce of gold over 30 yrs. This was back in th early aughts.

I have some charts and calcs hidden away at home somewhere, but I am on my mobile at the moment.



posted on Aug, 3 2019 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Every person can get a promotion - but it may have to be a lateral move (to another company even)...


Lateral moves are not promotions.


Lateral moves that result in a raise show that you don't have to get a promotion to get a raise. Thanks for playing.



posted on Aug, 3 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Unless that position becomes worth relatively more to the company, it doesn’t increase your earning power by much and can really only be used a finite number of times in your career.



posted on Aug, 5 2019 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
"Every person can get a promotion - but it may have to be a lateral move (to another company even)..."

Lateral moves are not promotions.

Maybe, by the purely technical definitions of the word. But I define it more loosely, as something better, in terms of both money earned per hour worked, and maybe better working conditions, etc.



posted on Aug, 5 2019 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

So you reject the definition of a promotion so that you can redefine it as something obtainable rather than face the reality that it isn’t.



posted on Aug, 5 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: tanstaafl

So you reject the definition of a promotion so that you can redefine it as something obtainable rather than face the reality that it isn’t.

Definition of 'Promotion'

Sounds pretty much like what I'm describing.



posted on Aug, 6 2019 @ 07:11 AM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

Promotions mean more responsibility, better pay grades, and so on. Lateral moves generally come with moving to a similar pay band and doing the same job duties, they don't actually advance your career. You don't get from a mid level employee to a CEO by taking lateral moves, only by taking promotions.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join