Posted on 12/05/2005 6:56:18 AM PST by 1rudeboy
You sited the GAO. Where did you got the GAO figure from.
The sites I listed are reflective of the loss of real wages since 1973.
That was my take also. Maybe I could try a different tack.
Hey Hedge and John--
The article for this tread's topic is why some guy in Australia hates open trade. One of the reason he's mad is because the US has a huge corporate farm welfare program ("astronomical: 94 per cent on sugar to the US"). I hate it too. I hate high taxes for lazy farmers. What's wrong with my buying Australian food? They got soldiers helping us in Iraq. They're not commies. Why should you want me to pay high taxes to hurt the Australians?
I mean, how would you like it if I sent someone to your house with a gun to take your money to hurt say, Norwegians? Like those logheads can't even speak English for pity sake!
You are confused. I have never cited the GAO.
The sites I listed are reflective of the loss of real wages since 1973.
The site you listed did not show real wages declined 31% since 1973. Try again? Maybe you have a better site?
Where did the GAO 31% figure come from in your post #136?
You.
Decline in middle class real income since 1973, once again the GAO,31%.
18 posted on 03/27/2005 6:57:43 AM CST by em2vn
And you never provided a good source for your assertion then either.
I didn't think you'd answer.
Have a great day!
You first, prove this is true. And "everybody knows it" is not proof.
Now you can run away.
Yes it is.
However, my first comment on this thread was directed at HamiltonJay in #17 when he wrote, "Better wake up to reality... it takes 2 incomes per household just to match in real dollars what 1 did 30 years ago".
In my first post, #87 I responded with: "That little factoid is difficult to hide".
My initial comment seemed to spark some comments, and disagreement, none of which addressed my initial comment.
That is why I asked you and several others:
"Do you believe that most middle class families today can make it on just one income, like they did 40 or so years ago?"
A few seem to be demanding government numbers or sources to back this up. There is simply no need to. Everyone knows all about this. It's no secret.
And that is why I said the other day, that I felt a few were being disingenuous here, by refusing to simple answer the question, and instead asked for government sources etc. I found that ridiculous.
That being said, I think the answer to that is as obvious as those dodging my initial exchange on this thread.
This horse is dead.
The source is the US Department of Labor.. everyone emphatically knows the truth, but for those who are adament about sourcing are welcome to go look it up. I've stated my source many times... but folks that don't want to face reality, just ignore facts.
Another fact the free traders don't want to face:
Manufacturing creates 3.8 or so jobs for ever manufacturing job.. that means a manufacturing plant that employs 5k directly actually creates nearly 20k total jobs. Service jobs only create 1.3 jobs for every direct hire.. or a service industry employing 5k, will create about 11.5k jobs total.
To CREATE wealth, you must CREATE.... free traders just ignore fundamentals. You don't create wealth by consumption.
Thanks Jay. And again, I do agree with you here.
If this were true real wages would be down 50% (2 new wages equals 1 old wage). I guess that sort of information probably wouldn't be collected by the government. LOL!
There is simply no need to. Everyone knows all about this.
I have no need to prove the Earth is flat, everyone knows that it is. LOL!
This is true, whether you choose to believe it or not. If there is a flat earther around here, its clearly you. But I know, your mind is made up, don't confuse you with facts.
I suppose the Federal Reserve reports on Real Estate is all a grand conspiracy, and the US Dept of Labor has a vast conspiratorial reason to lie about real dollar houshold incomes.
Keep fighting those windmills.. who knows, you might actually beat one one day.
168 my first comment on this thread was ... "Do you believe that most middle class families today can make it on just one income, like they did 40 or so years ago?" A few seem to be demanding government numbers or sources to back this up. There is simply no need to. Everyone knows all about this. It's no secret.
Fine --you already know in your heart what incomes are so you have no need to actually find out what they are. Man, I wish my life could be that simple; but that still doesn't explain where the Australian in the article is talking about US wage levels. He wasn't. You're jumping threads when you come out with "I said the other day, that I felt a few were being disingenuous here, by refusing to simple answer the question..."
Let's all get back on topic and talk about these "astronomical" welfare taxes and not start going off to say, football, star trek, or anything else people want to wander off with.
We both caught that at the same time --man I love this "everyone knows" bit, I swear it's go to be the greatest time saving invention since indoor plumbing!
Because you say so? And you've got such a great track record. LOL!
But I know, your mind is made up, don't confuse you with facts.
The only fact you've provided is that one out of every 1,422 households was in some part of the Foreclosure process. Now why is this a disaster again?
I suppose the Federal Reserve reports on Real Estate is all a grand conspiracy, and the US Dept of Labor has a vast conspiratorial reason to lie about real dollar houshold incomes.
Did you post any reports from these sources?
I have posted them several times already. Household income in real dollars is straight from the Department of Labor, and the real estate report is from the Federal Reserve. Links to both can be found in previous posts from me here.
You keep claiming no citing of facts, yet I have cited them again and again.. and all you come back with is your oppinion and sarcasm... which while this might win you arguments in your little circle of like minded free traders, doesn't do squat but show how uninformed your position is.
What the hell, if nobody wants to get back to Aussie gripes about American taxes I can live with it.
Switching to "houshold incomes", let's first agree on how to measure them. If you accept Fed reports then you'll agree that family wealth is soaring. If you accept the Labor Dept., then we can be happy about Average Hourly Earnings +$0.03(p) in Nov 2005.
Are we still on the same page here?
You've posted links on this thread that show real incomes have dropped by 50% in the last 30 years?
and the real estate report is from the Federal Reserve
So, a Fed report that shows 0.07% in foreclosure means more than a Fed report that shows average home equity is 56%? Or that total home equity is $10.47 trillion, not "folks have no equity, because they have taken what they have had and spent it on crap usually" that you claimed in post #116.
Did you have a link for that, or did you make it up? But don't worry, you cite more facts than me. LOL!
Household savings rates are about -2% in america today, now how do you jive that with a 60% equity position? Where do you think that extra compounding 2% annually is coming from? Simple, DEBT.. largely debt on real estate.
You and folks like you are broken records. I had the exact same arguments in 1999 and 2000 about the tech stocks. They just kept ignoring fundamental realities, and told me I was wrong, didn't matter what the facts were, or who they came from they were wrong.
You have the exact same crap going on right now on a larger scale with Real Estate... and its already collapsing in some areas, and the national trend is downward. You cannot jive 60% equity with record forclosures... it doesn't pass the smell test. You can't jive ever increasing wealth with a savings rate of -2% per year per household.
There is no way to make the math work. Real incomes, in 1970, median household, which at the time was a 1 income household was about $37,000 Today, with the median household being a 2 income household the median household income is ~44,000. Now 2 folks working vs 1 folk working, equating to a 7k a year difference in 35 years, and you are going to sit there and argue that wages aren't declining in real dollars? Those are right from the Census Bureau, the Dept of Labor numbers are virtually identical.
You can continue to ignore the facts, you are certainly good at it, and have offered none of your own mysteriously... (well not mysteriously, because frankly they don't support your position).
Foreclosures are at record highs across the country, debt load per household is higher than its every been, not only in amount, but as a percentage of income... individually, american's are losing ground in terms of real wealth.
You keep believing that nothing can stop that juggernaught, and that the 51 trillion is real wealth and not mostly paper... sound just like those nasdaq junkies telling me when the Nasdaq hit 5k, no way it would drop in half.... What's it at today????
You cannot ignore fundamentals, and we collectively as a nation are living beyond our means... and all that easy credit is on a path to come back to bite us on the arse. 5 Trillion solicitations for debt are offered every year in america.... the most heavily marketed product EVER... and you really sit here and argue that we as a nation are building more wealth today than we did a generation ago?
You can't build wealth with a negative savings rate... you can't build lasting wealth by paper appreciation... eventually the fundamentals return. Just ask Westinghouse about paper value and real wealth... their real estate ventures 1/2'd the companies value overnight, and led to a 100+ year old company, disappearing from the blue board.
Your positions are naive and ill informed, and not backed up by anything other than your oppinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
