A Growing Healthy Economy

MAN, I feel for you and would never disregard anything you say, much less what your going through!!!!

I am not, I repeat NOT always right, but I am ALWAYS open to other opinions and frequently change mine when enough proof is given to me.


I hope it gets better for you.

Semper

thanks Brother... I feel much better for simply having written it out in long form.

Ali Akbar!

Not a problem, you have given me much to consider.

I have been accused on here, of being a Moderate.

I guess that is possibly true if that means I have an open mind.

Semper

semper, how much were you paid to create this thread? I'd like to get in on the action. Making asinine threads like this is worth it as long as the price is right.

Just as a bit of economics 101, it really does go beyond the statistics. You have to look at people's individual spending habits to see if the economy really is as perfect as you construct it to be. Economcs is a social matter, not a mathematical one. I'll leave it at that, since the others have pretty much annihilated your previous claims.

BTW, you're no moderate, don't worry.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by sweatmonicaIdo]

Originally posted by semperfortis
Wrong analogy for me Marg.

Welfare, foodstamps etc, are an unnecessary drain on the resources of our nation and should be discontinued completely, with the exception of those unable physically to work.

What is the purpose of the government other than to support the people of that nation? If the government can not create conditions for gainful employment it MUST provide alternative means of keeping people above the bread line( at least).

Everyone else needs to get a job or go hungry.

Finding a job is real easy if you have no dignity and want to destroy your body mind and soul to almost earn enough to feed yourself and family. Plenty of hard working people in America are already going hungry so your measures would probably ensure virtual starvation ( malnutrition) for at least a few tens of millions.

I really don't care if they cut social programs, or any other MASSIVELY abused government experiments gone completely out of control.

Semper

I have no love of the welfare state ( just another way to steal your independence) but a state which refuses to create conditions for full national employment should at least be held responsible for that by forcing it to support whoever they chose to marginalise by unemployment. Has anyone bothered to check how the US prison population grew over the last few years? It's just another way you use to solve the 'problem' of the poor when you can't afford the outrage of just starving them to death in work camps...

To begin with, the prison system makes a direct contribution to regulating the lower segments of the labour market - and does so in infinitely more coercive fashion than any social charge or administrative rule. Its effect here is artificially to compress unemployment levels both by forcibly abstracting millions of males from the job-seeking population, and also by boosting employment in the prison goods and service sector. It is, for example, estimated that during the 1990s US prisons brought down US unemployment figures by two percentage points. According to Bruce Western and Katherine Beckett, taking into account the differences in levels of imprisonment in the two continents, and contrary to the idea commonly accepted and actively disseminated by the advocates of neoliberalism, for 18 of the past 20 years US unemployment rates have been higher than those of the European Union (12).

However, Western and Beckett show that the jump in the prison population is a two-edged weapon: while in the short term it makes the employment picture look rosier by cutting labour supply, in the longer term it will inevitably worsen the employment situation by making millions of people more or less unemployable. Although imprisonment has cut US unemployment levels, the prison system will have constantly to be abandoned to keep those levels down.

mondediplo.com...

www.abc.net.au...

Stellar

What is the purpose of the government other than to support the people of that nation? If the government can not create conditions for gainful employment it MUST provide alternative means of keeping people above the bread line( at least).

As a libertarian, I must disagree and say that nobody is entitled to gainful employment.

My problem with semper's statements, however, is that he is not approaching this from a libertarian standpoint. Judging from a lot of the things that he has said earlier, it does not seem like he is in any position to tell others to get a job, as I am guessing he probably hasn't tried to support a family by working at Subway. Neither have I, but I at the very least have some sort of idea of just how tough it could be and as I also watch my parents deal with financial issues here and there, I know that semper is either blind or lying when he says we have a "growing healthy economy."

That allows me not to say stupid things like "get a job."

It's not the money, it's the benefits.

Being a Blind Liar, I need all the help I can get,,



So I guess debate is out the window because someone has a different view point from someone else.

It was like that in 1932 as well wasn't it? Around Germany?

Semper

sweat, as a libertarian as well, I am a bit applaud to see the way you responded. I know semper isn't being "paid", and I can tell you he IS MOST DEFINATELY a moderate.

I do come into his threads and at the start im going "Semper! whats gotten into you!? it sounds like something straight out of fox news or CNN!!!" but then as I read on, other people comment, and like usual he starts to mellow out and open up.

(personal note semper. When something may be bias, whether it be right or left leaning, just call it Bias Media instead of "liberal propaganda". Just a pointer. By simply saying liberal propaganda or conservative propaganda it tends to make you sound like you have you own agenda. Just telling you how it sounds. If its bias, simply say bias media source or something. Just a suggestion.)


Anyway, being libertarian, I think people have every right to fail miserably. Though this next part may be unlibertarian of me, I think every person deserves an Equal chance, but not an equal life. Everyone doesn't deserve equal health care and such. I think that the only people that can be free for health care is children under 18. Kids under 18 don't have the same privilages and such and should be carried by the government if the parents wont.
Its one thing if a parent choose to destroy his/her own life, its another when they destroy a childs life who has no choice. We shouldn't have welfare checks and such, but we should support the kids that need it. Give everyone an equal chance to succeed. When a child is born, they may not have any chance given to them because of what family they are born to.

Your right Grim,

I still tend towards to "old" battle of the two evils. But as you know, I still have faith in the system and still harbor hope for my Party.

But, you are correct in my wording and sometimes it is a "gut" reaction that I need to pay more attention to.

Thanks,

Semper

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
As a libertarian, I must disagree and say that nobody is entitled to gainful employment.

Why not? Why should each and every person not be able to find employment of some sort? Why is so many unskilled jobs going overseas if if can be done by 'uneducated' Americans?

My problem with semper's statements, however, is that he is not approaching this from a libertarian standpoint.

He claimed to be one?

Stellar

Semper...old boy....you been sniffing your pepper spray again? How can the economy be healthy when the average wages are stagnate or are lower relative to inflation than they were 10 years ago, even 5 years ago? Stock prices and productivity are false indicators of prosperity. Stock prices haven't been connected to reality for years now and most corporations have downsized to the point that the average cog in the machine is doing the work of 2 or 3, and would try and do more if asked because they are terrified of being out-sourced to India. No the economy is not doing good, the wealthy and corporations are doing good. The middle class is shrinking and that does not bode well for our country.

I'm a marketing professional in private practice. I work with large companies and have noticed a major downturn starting almost 2 years ago. Those of us in advertising/marketing always see a decline in business when companies get nervous. Most cut back their marketing efforrts to boost the bottom line. What I've seen from my clients is a drastic drop in 'large box items' and store traffic. A major home supply chain is seeing a 25% drop in store traffic compared to same time last year. Consumer debt is rising, interest rates are rising, home sales have tanked and foreclosures are up 56% in the northeast. As has been pointed out, some segments are doing well: energy, building trades in the south (LA, MS, FL), transportation. But the people in the middle are screwed by higher everything particularly energy.

Originally posted by grover
Semper...old boy....you been sniffing your pepper spray again?

How can the economy be healthy when the average wages are stagnate or are lower relative to inflation than they were 10 years ago, even 5 years ago? Stock prices and productivity are false indicators of prosperity. Stock prices haven't been connected to reality for years now and most corporations have downsized to the point that the average cog in the machine is doing the work of 2 or 3, and would try and do more if asked because they are terrified of being out-sourced to India. No the economy is not doing good, the wealthy and corporations are doing good. The middle class is shrinking and that does not bode well for our country.

Right on the money (or lack thereof), grover!

Perhaps Semper will do some research on the trade deficit and national debt. I was shocked when I looked what happened to our exports in the last 10 years. We used to manufacture and ship a lot of stuff around the world! This was the real source of American power. Now, we don't produce much but consume all the same... The money has to come from somewhere and it comes from borrowing, foreign and domestic, on a scale yet unknown to civilization.

Nobody cares to inform people about this. Few read data on economics. People in power don't care if middle class shrinks and country is flooded with cheap labor from Mexico. They don't care about our country and its people and its future.

Well ya know they convince people that things are good by tricking them into identifying with the wealthy. Its not how well Ritchie Rich the poor little rich boy is doing that is important. Its how Homer Simpson is doing that is the real indicator of economic health. But who wants to identify with Homer Simpson?

You don't believe the Government reports.
You don't believe the economic factors.
You don't believe the statistical information.

Thank the Lord, the country is not being run by your "gut" instinct or whatever it is your basing your "facts" on.

The Economy Remains Strong, And The Outlook Is Favorable

* Employment Increased In 48 States Over The Past 12 Months Ending In July.

* Over The First Half Of This Year, Our Economy Grew At A Strong 4.2 Percent Annual Rate – Faster Than Any Other Major Industrialized Country.

* Productivity Has Grown A Strong 2.4 Percent Over The Past Four Quarters, Well Ahead Of Average Productivity Growth In The Last Three Decades. Strong productivity growth helps lead to GDP growth, higher real wages, and stronger corporate profits.

* Per Capita Disposable Income Has Risen 9.2 Percent In Real Terms Since The Beginning Of 2001.

* Total Wage And Salary Income Increased In Real Terms At An Annual Rate Of 3.3 Percent In The Second Quarter. This follows an 11 percent surge in the previous three months.

* Manufacturing Production Has Risen 5.6 Percent Over The Past 12 Months. Manufacturing productivity has grown 3.8 percent over the past four quarters. www.whitehouse.gov...

Mr Eberstadt points out that while nutrition, adequate shelter and health care were big problems for the poor when America’s poverty measure was devised, the picture is different today. Obesity is now the chief nutritional woe facing America’s poor. And those under the poverty line now have nearly as much house space and amenities as the average family in 1980. This does not mean that the poor are leading lives of plenty but it does indicate that their lot is getting steadily better, an improvement not reflected in official figures.www.economist.com...

And Brian Westbury (WSJ) said:

During a quarter century of analyzing and forecasting the economy, I have never seen anything like this. No matter what happens, no matter what data are released, no matter which way markets move, a pall of pessimism hangs over the economy.

It is amazing. Everything is negative. When bond yields rise, it is considered bad for the housing market and the consumer. But if bond yields fall and the yield curve narrows toward inversion, that is bad too, because an inverted yield curve could signal a recession.
~~~~~~~
The latest employment numbers are hugely important as I mentioned this morning on CNBC's "Squawk Box." November's numbers from the Labor Department are a sure sign of strength here at home. Our optimistic economy is producing jobs, the stock market is rising and gasoline prices continue their downward trend. This is all very good news.
~~~~~~~~
As to your latter observations, there are many studies (the most noteable authored in 2004 by the Chief Economist at Bear Stearns and frequent LK guest) that clearly suggests just the opposite of what you contend--that higher paying white-collar professional and service jobs requiring higher levels of education (in accounting, finance, marketing, science, law, commerce, education, medicine) are replacing lower paying jobs requiring little education at the mill, factory, plant, mine and farm. This process is moving along at a glacial pace, but it is unstoppable. Just look at the 30 year ever declining trend in union membership for some solid clues.

And yes, some service jobs in retail and food is of the substandard ilk that you describe, but growth in the much higher paying end is offsetting.
lkmp.blogspot.com...

Though a waste of time, you wont believe this either. Maybe there may be some on here with open minds.

Semper

No I don't believe a word this administration says. You are right. The are chronic liars and have cooked the books repeatidly. All I can say is go talk to the homer simpsons and ask how well they are doing. Again Semper, how the little guy does is the true critira of how well an economy is doing.

Hey Semper, et al... (I always wanted to use et al. in a salutation)!

Just an update on my particular set of circumstance and some observation...

My last official day of full time employment was July 28, 2006. I have, since that time been actively engaged in seeking meaningful, reasonably well paying employment. To no avail.

Let me put a couple of facts here. In my state, Missouri, my unemployment rate is $270,two hundred seventy dollars per week. Out of that, I have the option to have them withhold tax, or not. In the case of "or not", I will have to make good on it at the end of the year when we all do the "Support our government" shuffle.

I can take any number of jobs that I find available. Most of these jobs pay somewhere in the vicinity, but not too many pay over that vicinity, of ten bucks an hour. Most of those jobs are part time, 37 hours a week, or less. Bein's as how most of those part time jobs are just that, there is no health benefit, or the health benefit will cost you a substantial part of your 10 bucks an hour.

At any rate, after all taxes are taken out and all other "standard" deductions, I am bringing home something on the order of $270 bucks a week. Then let us deduct the cost of gasoline, insurance, wear and tear on the automobile, clothing costs, and any other miscellaneous costs, hereafter known as "da cost o' doin' bidnezz). There actually isn't a lot left over after all dat.

Now... As to unemployment payout. The unemployment insurance, in this state, at least, is paid into by all the employers (government being exempted I believe). It is a vast pool of money that the state of Missouri safeguards with great alacrity.

Not being one to schlep out when I can avoid it, as you recall on my previous postings, I left one job that was going to be moved, before it actually moved. I then went to another job that, unbeknownst to me, was fraught, and rife with political danger. I then succumbed to that political danger. So as to not have to go to that unemployment money, I then, in the heat of 115+ degree heat indices, took an outside day laborer type of job that paid that infamous 10 dollar an hour rate. Almost killed myself doing something that I was a) Too old to just be starting out. b) Not in any kind of physical condition to do. c)Too freakin' crazy for having even begun to think about!

When that final bit of employment didn't pan out, I finally broke down and filed for unemployment. I had to do the initial file. After that, each week, for three weeks, instead of receiving any financial relief from my state government, I received a series of papers full of questions about my apparent behavior and performance levels, or lack thereof, that caused me to "be let go" from my various jobs. The original job, the one where I worked for IBM, caused them to question me twice with the same set of questions.

After all, who in their right mind, would ever screw up a job for such a great company? :rofl: ... I finally hand wrote on the form, in big letters
I didn't get let go! The job was moved out from under me!!!!

I also asked for a phone number and name of someone to facilitate a little ease in the clearing up of the repeated questions... No joy! NO response. Just more paper of an accusatory nature.

Then the successive jobs garnered the same forms and the same demeaning questions full of implication ... Why was I a lout and an oaf who could not keep continual employment?

Finally however, a break in the clouds and some good new! Last Friday, they decided that I was a part and parcel member of the great, unwashed masses and not just a bum seeking to rip off the state. They not only allowed that I might have a reason for not being employed at the moment, they also allowed for the back three weeks of unemployment insurance. Which I have to have e-deposited, as the state does not pay with paper checks any longer. (Herein is a different set of issues for people who have no means of transportation, little to no financial saavy, or the ability to control spending in a non-material method, but that is another post on a different day)...

I received the amount of money for three weeks that I used to earn in less than a week. Now... I'm not complaining about that... It is, after all, a bit of a dole out and not meant to substitute for gainful employment. However, there aren't any jobs available out there that will pay what I was used to making. That, too, is ok. I have my own capabilities to make up the difference, if needed.

I simply state that to say this ... I am to receive the unemployment insurance for up to 6 months. I will, if necessary, take that long to try and find a job commensurate with my skills, abilities, and physical state. I do that rather than just run out and take the first ten dollar an hour job that comes along. I am better than that. I am more capable than that. And I think I'm worth the effort in my own behalf.

I don't see in the long run that having a job, just to have a job is of any merit. You can not make such blanket statements, like I've read here, without filling in the human background and color that goes with the implications of such a statement.

Beside that, how many of you, making that statement are looking for work?

It's a whole different ball of wax. It's kind of like the chicken and the pig talking. The chicken says, "Everyone has to have breakfast of eggs and ham". The pig is probably wondering at the chicken's depth of commitment.

Edited to fix one "glaring" typographical error... And to add this:

If anyone knows of a job that I might could handle or is interested in finding out what I am capable of, please let me know... I'd be happy to forward a resumé. If it isn't bad form to post this request... If so, Mod's! Please feel free to edit this paragraph out. Except for the reason for the edit!

[edit on 5-9-2006 by sigung86]

Your struggle is a singular expression interacting with an economic value. As such it is not truly indicative of a global, or nationwide economic outlook.

What you have done is convey the true American spirit. One of mixed hope and values, reaching for a goal you feel you deserve.

Great post.

Semper

You can add me and all my middle-class friends to the same situation, or close to it, as sigung86. Many of us are just barely making it in this "growing, healthy economy" of yours, and you can blame us for not "keeping up with the changing times" all you want. The fact of the matter remains, the manufacturing and skilled hourly job base is shrinking, and the tech sector is not taking up the slack. The Bush tax cuts are not targeted at the middle-class and real income for this sector is falling, while real expenses are rising.

You can paint whatever rosy picture you want to, but to people just one missed paycheck away from the poorhouse, it doesn't wash.

Again.

Reality is harsh, but "ALL" of your middle class friends are "Singular" and have no direct correlation of reference to a global or national economy.

We all have our stories of courage, poverty and heroism, they, however have no bearing on statistics of a grander scale.

It is a human function to relate our environment with our own personal struggle. Illogical, yet common.

A thousand, even a hundred thousand such struggles is of little comparative significance to the thread title and topic of a National Economy. The statistics are clear in that many others, in fact the VAST majority, are benefiting from this economy.

You can argue, you can postulate all that you want to. That will not change the facts.

Semper