America takes notice of gap in incomes

Houston Chronicle) ^ | December 16, 2006 | MATTHEW BENJAMIN

[Fan of Fiat]

wise to your anti-American policies

Ok GGG, what exactly is your solution to the trade deficit.

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think he wants to shoot buyers of imports as traitors.

[Alia]

They don't include transfer payments either.

Bingo. Transfer payments (a social security benefit) are, effectively, negative taxes.

For the record: Transfer payments are called such because these are not made in exchange for a currently produced good or service. Transfer payments alter household income but do not get reflected as part of the economy's production. GDP measures income from, and expenditure on the production of goods and services.

Paying the salary of military is a "government purchase": spending on goods and services by local, state, and federal government.

[Fan of Fiat]

I think he wants to shoot buyers of imports as traitors

Unless you are importing gold.

[Alia]

The point is, American workers can't compete with Red China's slave labor pool

Major red herring alert, and you are incorrect. Many studies have shown, over and over, the higher productive gains made through incentive and motivation -- far surpassing any "slave labor".

Why do private schools outperform public ed schools? One can stretch the anology that in pub ed schools students are forced into these against their will, and that the labor pool markets to the lowest common demoninator, in order to preserve costs, to teach at public schools.

The free market will outperform the "slave" markets, every time over the span.

[GodGunsGuts]

Mase's deceptive charts don't prove whether Americans are better off now than they were back in the 1970s. First of all, Mase's charts compare FAMILY income. The problem with his charts are manifold. The biggest of which is the growing number of American families that have been forced to become two income families just to make ends meet. For instance, there are 11 times as many working married women with children under 6 years of age. If the goal of Mase's chart is to determine if American's are better off today than in previous generations, then this renders Mase's deceptive stats meaningless:

And btw, the median income of full-time, year round male workers has also been steadily falling during this same time period:

And let's not forget our personal savings rate:

If Mase is as economically literate as he keeps claiming to be, then he is deliberately misleading his fellow FReepers into believing that we are better off today than we were in previous decades. That might be the case for the money-changers at the top of the financial food chain, but that is certainly not the case for your average American.

And BTW, those Americans vote.

[Fan of Fiat]

And btw, the median income of full-time, year round male workers has also been steadily falling during this same time period:

The problem with charting. It all depends how you draw your pretty little lines.

[GodGunsGuts]

Correction: make that...6 times as many working married women with children under 6 years of age.

[mewzilla]

On a related note...

The top one-hundredth of one percent

[Toddsterpatriot]

Mase's deceptive charts don't prove whether Americans are better off now than they were back in the 1970s.

Hmmmm...in 1970, about 11% of families made more than $75,000 while about 68% made less than $50,000. I'll do the math for you, that means about 21% made between $50,000 and $75,000.

Now, about 26% make more than $75,000, an increase of 136%. I'd say that was a good thing. About 55% make less than $50,000, a drop of about 21%. About 19% make between $50,000 and $75,000. The total making $50,000 and above (that sounds middle class to me) is now 45%, up from 32% in 1970, about a 41% increase.

First of all, Mase's charts compare FAMILY income. The problem with his charts are manifold. The biggest of which is the growing number of American families that have been forced to become two income families just to make ends meet.

You need to show the number of workers per family in 1970 and compare it to number of workers per family now. Don't forget, more divorce and more never married single parents would tend to pull family incomes down, yet we still had impressive growth in family incomes.

For instance, there are 11 times as many working married women with children under 6 years of age.

No more recent numbers? 1970 maybe?

then this renders Mase's deceptive stats meaningless:

That's funny considering your goldbug charts.

And btw, the median income of full-time, year round male workers has also been steadily falling during this same time period

I'll bet if we excluded illegals from those stats, they would look a lot better.

And let's not forget our personal savings rate:

And let's not forget our household net worth.

he is deliberately misleading his fellow FReepers into believing that we are better off today than we were in previous decades.

Yeah, higher family income is a sign that we are worse off. If you keep stretching like that, you'll hurt your back again.

That might be the case for the money-changers at the top of the financial food chain,

Wow, money changers. That's like biblical or something. Unlike the honest and ethical.......what do you do again?

And BTW, those Americans vote.

Yes, as you've shown, you don't have to understand anything about economics to vote.

BTW, are you ever going to respond to my posts about your "professor"? Yes or no?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Look at that big increase since NAFTA!!!

[M. Dodge Thomas]

An economic schadenfreude, if you will.

No, it's more like watching the VP of Sales children go off to a top tier University (admission to which they deserve, based on their efforts and accomplishments) on their parents dime, while you own children (who deserve as good an education, and the doors it opens, based on their efforts and accomplishments) end up at a second tier state college, and tens of thousands of dollars in debt for the privilege, because that's all you can afford.

Or, having to decide if you want to lose your house and savings, or forgo radiation treatment and take a chance the the lumpectamy alone has cured your breast cancer - while the woman who used to sit next to you at work before the last layoff still has a PPO.

Americans will put you with a good deal of this sort of inequality, but for the majority this requires the conviction that there is a sort of rough logic and justice involved.

IMO it's that conviction that's being eroded, and that erosion is only going to accelerate as (for example) outsourcing moves up the economic and vocational ladder.

And IMO conservatives who want to elect candidates who will shape a future to their liking ignore this reality at their own risk.

[GodGunsGuts]

I have no problem with people getting rich. Nor do I want to tax them more...I want to tax every American LESS! I posted this article to demonstrate that your average American is becoming very aware of how unbalanced our economy has become. I believe this is largely due to our trade with the Chinese Communists, who will beat us every time when it comes to (slave) labor costs.

[GodGunsGuts]

Yes, I will. But it's more for me than for you. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to answer until I get some serious free time as I want to see if anyone has taken his work further and made a sound prediction re: hyperinflation/deflation.

[Fan of Fiat]

No, it's more like watching the VP of Sales children go off to a top tier University (admission to which they deserve, based on their efforts and accomplishments) on their parents dime, while you own children (who deserve as good an education, and the doors it opens, based on their efforts and accomplishments) end up at a second tier state college, and tens of thousands of dollars in debt for the privilege, because that's all you can afford.

Is your complaint that the VP of sales is paying for too good of school out of his/her own pocket, or that the school he/she is paying for out of his/her tax dollars for your children is not good enough?

There are other options out there:
Coast Guard Academy
Naval Academy
Air Force Academy
USMA
USMA

In fact, believe it or not, they all have great economics departments.

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, I will.

Thanks.

But it's more for me than for you.

When you realize what an idiot he is, you'll thank me by not posting his crap any more.

I'm not going to be able to answer until I get some serious free time

Take your time.

[Alia]

Yours, at the link you supplied in post, is a good article.

[GodGunsGuts]

Massive cut in taxes/government spending...cut off all trade with Communist countries--esp. Red China.

[GodGunsGuts]

I suggest you do a study of how many Chicom slaves you get for the price of one American worker.

[Fan of Fiat]

Massive cut in taxes/government spending

Great Idea!

off all trade with Communist countries--esp. Red China.

Ok, will we then have a trade surplus? If not, then what do you propose we do?