Pretty bleak assessment. I'm no economist but I have to ask if the writer is ignoring a fundamental difference between 2007 and 1937 a la a world economy that did not then exist.
1 posted on
12/26/2006 7:31:01 AM PST by
pabianice
To: pabianice
2 posted on
12/26/2006 7:31:59 AM PST by
Hydroshock
( (Proverbs 22:7). The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.)
To: pabianice
I believe the similarities between now and 1937 are much more related to the rise of deadly enemies adversaries (Militant Islam and Red China) similar to the fanatic impiralists and fascists of that era more than anything else.
3 posted on
12/26/2006 7:37:29 AM PST by
Jeff Head
(Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
To: pabianice
You mean at the end of the depression...?
Let's see - the average working joe in 1937 had NOTHING and was happy to feed his family that week. The average working joe in 2006 has a car, house, computer, TV, phone, internet, lives 20 years longer...(getting the point?)
4 posted on
12/26/2006 7:40:45 AM PST by
2banana
(My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
To: pabianice
After reading this I have more work to do. If I'm not in the top 1% there is still room for improvement.
All kidding aside, it's not what you make, it's what you end up with. If I make $1,000,000 per year and spent $1,500,000 a year (as some celebrities seem to do) you will be worse off than making $50,000 per year and spending $40,000.
5 posted on
12/26/2006 7:43:48 AM PST by
Dutch Boy
To: pabianice
6 posted on
12/26/2006 7:44:06 AM PST by
rellimpank
(-don't believe anything the MSM states about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
To: pabianice
Kinda worthless comparison of the 'average' masses in 1937 and today. I'm quite certain that the 'average' family of today has much more than that of 1937. In home ownership, clothing, food, medical, vehicles, and luxury discretionary spending.
This is a typical headline quote that strikes a chord until you examine the substance.
By the way, everyone knows that the situation of those 'in poverty' (western world) is far above that of the past.
7 posted on
12/26/2006 7:46:33 AM PST by
nctexan
(O)
To: pabianice
Not since 1937 have the richest 1% of Americans been so far above the average citizen in assets and earning power as today.It's portrayed as though 99% of us are poor and destitute.
I'd much rather be considered poor nowadays than considered being rich in '37.
8 posted on
12/26/2006 7:52:09 AM PST by
EGPWS
To: pabianice
There are a lot of differences - we are not seven years into a great depression, for example.
I think what he is pointing out though are the similarities. The really should not be ignored.
12 posted on
12/26/2006 8:10:41 AM PST by
RobRoy
To: pabianice
The people of 1937 weren't victims of income disparity. They were victims of insane Federal Reserve policy.
19 posted on
12/26/2006 8:35:47 AM PST by
DManA
To: pabianice
"1937 to 2007,could not seem more familiar or dooming."
Meet Debbie Downer's love child.
21 posted on
12/26/2006 10:03:01 AM PST by
gcruse
(http://garycruse.blogspot.com/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson