Economy in Recession? More Liberal Lies?, page 5
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 12:50 AM by mybigunit
reply to post by jamie83



To bad your reading the chart wrong. The savings rate was as high as 9% in the Clinton regime and it was as high as what 3% in the bush regime. Its showing savings going DOWN. Look at the left side of the graph. In my post above to Jetnext I answered the growth question and wont retype it all.



reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 12:53 AM by mybigunit
reply to post by jamie83



No I mean like this
(click the image for full image)
I get mine from the census bureau and not the FED.

upload.wikimedia.org...

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mybigunit]


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 12:54 AM by wutone
Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to
post by wutone



This is a Republican thing. Now it didnt used to be this way. This is a new thing the Republicans do so they can stay popular.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mybigunit]


Can you point where I didn't blame the Republicans for borrowing to feed their spending?

BTW Clinton helped repeal Glass-Steagall. The budget surplus in the 90's was due to the people who approved the budgets and spending, the republican congress. There was also the help of a booming dot-com industry.

Don't blame the Republicans only. The democrats have controlled congress during the Reagan years, some Clinton years, and some Bush years.

In fact, Clinton had higher deficits, in percentage to the GDP, than this president, during the years when he had a democrat congress, and that was during years of peace. So the Democrats aren't smelling like roses in this whole mess.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 12:56 AM by mybigunit
reply to post by wutone



Nope not saying they are. Like ive said 1000% its ALL of them. Democrats and Republicans are ALL robbing us blind. Im just pointing out to the sheeple above who think that all is well out there and to trust the government and there is no story here. These are the people I am arguing with.



reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 12:58 AM by jamie83
Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to
post by jamie83



To bad your reading the chart wrong. The savings rate was as high as 9% in the Clinton regime and it was as high as what 3% in the bush regime. Its showing savings going DOWN. Look at the left side of the graph. In my post above to Jetnext I answered the growth question and wont retype it all.


No, I'm not reading the graph wrong at all. The savings RATE is going down, but it is still a positive number. This means people are still accumulating money in savings, but at a slower rate of increase.

This is one of those areas where the Democrats continually seem challenged. A slower RATE of increase is still an increase.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:00 AM by saturnine_sweet
Growth unadjusted for inflation is only growth for the banking system. Growth overcome by inflation (which we currently have) is, as i said, still growth for the banking system, but it brings the average citizen to poverty.

As for if the Fed says there is inflation or not on their website, browse Youtube a bit...wasn't but a couple months ago where I watched one video where Bernake both admitted that the use of inflation by the Fed is taxation (illegal taxation,) and also that inflation has gotten out of control and is responsible for the rise in commodity prices, by and large.

If you want an easy indicator of our money problems, compare exchange rates from 2000 to exchange rates today. Compare the % of loss vs the % rise (avg) in commodities. Draw some obvious conclusions. Compare % of loss to dollars "borrowed" from the Fed. Draw some more obvious conclusions.

Im not going to post it all here for you, because you obviously need to go through the steps yourself to truly understand what is happening. I don't care if you agree with my solution, but I do care that you be honest with yourself about the bare facts.

Learn some history, and you'll see that none of what we face right now is new. Reagan used the "war on terror" that Bush has resurrected. The 70's saw large environmental scams, like the man-made global warming scam of today, and also saw market manipulation to cause fuel shortages and price spikes, as well as the institution of insanely prohibitive standards to prohibit the construction of new refineries, which is part of the "energy crisis" today. The same techniques used in the past are being used again today. Learn, understand, and decide what matters most to you in life.

We don't need politicians who dictate morality based on their religions, be they Christian morals or Naturalist/Environmentalist morals. We don't need governments who try to run and regulate every market. We don't need a banking system that can steal from us at will. We need freedom; freedom to make our own decisions, and to suffer or prosper accordingly. Most of all, we need a solid currency, so the everyday man is not robbed his entire life by inflation. When you give an organization the power of inflation, it's like selling your labor to another, getting paid, and then having that person come to your home, beat you to the floor, beat your family to the floor, and take back your hard earned wages. Why should ANYONE want to allow that?


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:03 AM by jamie83
Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to
post by jamie83



No I mean like this
(click the image for full image)
I get mine from the census bureau and not the FED.

upload.wikimedia.org...

[edit on 1-9-2008 by mybigunit]


Sorry, I must be missing your point here. The graph shows household income increasing.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:04 AM by mybigunit
Originally posted by jamie83
Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to
post by jamie83



To bad your reading the chart wrong. The savings rate was as high as 9% in the Clinton regime and it was as high as what 3% in the bush regime. Its showing savings going DOWN. Look at the left side of the graph. In my post above to Jetnext I answered the growth question and wont retype it all.


No, I'm not reading the graph wrong at all. The savings RATE is going down, but it is still a positive number. This means people are still accumulating money in savings, but at a slower rate of increase.

This is one of those areas where the Democrats continually seem challenged. A slower RATE of increase is still an increase.


But its still going down. Its 2 here and Im off to bed but will continue this tomorrow. All charts aside and I have more and will post them when you have the FDIC, the banking industry, the auto industry, the airline industry, the housing industry, and a few others looking for bailouts and other forms of government welfare checks then that says something to me that any charts you or I can throw at eachother. In a non recessionary economy this wouldnt be the issue would it? If this was just a housing problem then all of the other sectors need not worry right? But yet they want me to pay to bail them out. This isnt a democrat or republican thing with me like it is you. I feel they ALL are robbing us blind. Its people like you who buy into the rhetoric that there is a difference between the 2. The fact is ALL of them put us in this crappy position.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:06 AM by mybigunit
reply to post by jamie83



From 2000 to 2005 income went down. 2006 and 2007 are not on that chart. I would expect a small bump for 06 and a continued decline in 07 and to current.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:28 AM by saturnine_sweet
reply to post by jamie83



Oh, come on now. You know very well that said increase is swallowed many times over by inflation. Adjust that for inflation, then see where it stands.


reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:41 AM by jamie83
Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to
post by jamie83



From 2000 to 2005 income went down. 2006 and 2007 are not on that chart. I would expect a small bump for 06 and a continued decline in 07 and to current.


First of all, the chart you posted is median income. Do you understand what median income means?

Median income is the income at which an equal number of people have incomes above and below the median. That is why this is data from the census bureau and not the Federal Reserve. Median income really doesn't tell much on it's own.

For example, people retiring will drop the median income. An influx of college grads will drop the median income.

In any case, it's really a lame effort on your part if you're trying to use a dip in median income to prove there's a recession, especially when you can't even provide the data after 2005.

Here is the chart of Real Disposable Income:



This chart shows the rate of change of disposable income.

Notice that disposable income is growing faster right now than it ever did during the Clinton administration, which Democrats hail as some sort of golden era of the economy.




reply posted on 1-9-2008 @ 01:54 AM by saturnine_sweet
reply to post by jamie83



But who's disposable income is growing, and what percentage of the population do they make up? There is a difference in what is good for the elite and the banks and what is good for the average citizen. Not that the Clinton years were good exactly, either. But that's my whole point.
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5    6    7    8  >>    ^^TOP^^



USDA Forces Whole Foods To Accept Monsanto
  Posted 12 days ago with 100 member flags
Greece wipes out Citizens Debt!! Tells Bankers to suck it
  Posted 13 days ago with 78 member flags
Obama on the verge of a deal with the banks
  Posted 18 days ago with 23 member flags
Bankers requesting that Greece become their debt slaves
  Posted 16 days ago with 15 member flags
We’re on the brink, warns Greece ahead of summit
  Posted 14 days ago with 15 member flags
Heard a rumor on a disreputable anarchist forum....
  Posted 16 days ago with 12 member flags
The Real Story Behind the Greece Debt Default
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags