USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
- Status
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
So only 'rich' people own property and enjoyed the run up in value in the '95-2007 window? Really?
A lot of people, rich and poor, have lost value on homes and/or the home itself partially due to exotic mortgages, partly due to poor regulation of the industry, partly due to the economy, partly due to their own errors in judgment. There are also a lot of people who managed the period well, and they were/are rich and poor (by the government's income definition).
I strongly disagree that the casino game is setup as described and only the rich win but pain is shared. Makes a nice bumper sticker on a Prius but it isn't accurate.
There is enough churn between classes to substantiate this. We've been through this before but while the studies say the middle class is stagnant in terms of wages etc, they aren't the same people over those 30-40 year horizons...not everyone moves from one class to another but the idea that nobody in a lower class has any opportunity to succeed in the 'game' is just not accurate.
Remember, every recent college grad with a job is middle class, but the curve of their earnings is just beginning and they won't all be middle class 20 years later. Further, since most of the class data is based on households, many of those single middle class grads are going to be two income households until they divorce and their lawyers move up to another class.
Now, if the recent grad took out $80k in loans to study poetry then they are more than likely to migrate out of middle class and into lower class (economically). Nobody forced them to go down that path.
If your measuring stick is that they have to earn as much or enjoy the same percentage growth as the top 1% then the comparison is setup to fail from the start.
So only 'rich' people own property and enjoyed the run up in value in the '95-2007 window? Really?
A lot of people, rich and poor, have lost value on homes and/or the home itself partially due to exotic mortgages, partly due to poor regulation of the industry, partly due to the economy, partly due to their own errors in judgment. There are also a lot of people who managed the period well, and they were/are rich and poor (by the government's income definition).
I strongly disagree that the casino game is setup as described and only the rich win but pain is shared. Makes a nice bumper sticker on a Prius but it isn't accurate.
There is enough churn between classes to substantiate this. We've been through this before but while the studies say the middle class is stagnant in terms of wages etc, they aren't the same people over those 30-40 year horizons...not everyone moves from one class to another but the idea that nobody in a lower class has any opportunity to succeed in the 'game' is just not accurate.
Remember, every recent college grad with a job is middle class, but the curve of their earnings is just beginning and they won't all be middle class 20 years later. Further, since most of the class data is based on households, many of those single middle class grads are going to be two income households until they divorce and their lawyers move up to another class.
Now, if the recent grad took out $80k in loans to study poetry then they are more than likely to migrate out of middle class and into lower class (economically). Nobody forced them to go down that path.
If your measuring stick is that they have to earn as much or enjoy the same percentage growth as the top 1% then the comparison is setup to fail from the start.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
I'm also interested in the source of your argument that there is "enough" churn between classes. I doubt this is borne out by a rigorous statistical comparison with other developed countries. And, needless to say, anecdotes about your hardworking uncle who rose from poverty, or your lazy college roommate trust fund kid who fell into poverty, are no substitute for real numbers from real sources.
Source.
I don't think anybody really cares about recent college grads when talking about the overall economy of this country. I know that's going to be the focus of 20-somethings on a college hockey board, but in real terms they aren't even actual human beings with important responsibilities yet. I'm much more concerned about middle aged white collar workers and blue collar workers of all ages. Those are the people who are effed in this economy, and they have very much not been the beneficiaries of the wealth generated over the last few decades.
I'm also interested in the source of your argument that there is "enough" churn between classes. I doubt this is borne out by a rigorous statistical comparison with other developed countries. And, needless to say, anecdotes about your hardworking uncle who rose from poverty, or your lazy college roommate trust fund kid who fell into poverty, are no substitute for real numbers from real sources.
Source.
Last edited:
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
The median age for first child among US women is now 28, which is INSANELY high by historical standards (Italy is the only country in the world where it's ever been higher, BTW the unemployment rate for 20-somethings in Italy is over 60%). Now, I'm all for extended childhood as long as you can get away with it, and god bless the parents who finance it, but again the really critical people who are suffering right now are middle aged. After all, if you're 28 and unemployed, you still have a hot 24 year old girlfriend. There probably are middle aged men with hot 24 year old girlfriends, but I guarantee you they are not unemployed.
They're still kids, though -- they can even claim under their parents health insurance until they're 24.
The median age for first child among US women is now 28, which is INSANELY high by historical standards (Italy is the only country in the world where it's ever been higher, BTW the unemployment rate for 20-somethings in Italy is over 60%). Now, I'm all for extended childhood as long as you can get away with it, and god bless the parents who finance it, but again the really critical people who are suffering right now are middle aged. After all, if you're 28 and unemployed, you still have a hot 24 year old girlfriend. There probably are middle aged men with hot 24 year old girlfriends, but I guarantee you they are not unemployed.
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
This will set a few folks aflame: http://buchanan.org/blog/national-suicide-review-of-pat-buchanan’s-“suicide-of-a-superpower”-4891
This will set a few folks aflame: http://buchanan.org/blog/national-suicide-review-of-pat-buchanan’s-“suicide-of-a-superpower”-4891
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Foxton
Banned
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
It's not. which why the comparison is interesting. And then there is this column in today's Washington Post about race suicide, although it's not couched as that.
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
Presumably Cindy Sheehan is scouting out a ditch to occupy and Code Pink is mobilizing.
Presumably Cindy Sheehan is scouting out a ditch to occupy and Code Pink is mobilizing.
huskyfan
New member
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
They're a little slow off the mark there, I'll grant you. Probably just an oversight.
They're a little slow off the mark there, I'll grant you. Probably just an oversight.
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
While we bicker about nearly everything, let's take a moment to consider this report about our Horse Soldiers in Afghanistan. These incredibly brave, daring, resourceful men rode into battle. The first Americans to do so in a century. With men like these, our forces can never be defeated by an enemy. Only by our politicians. Thanks, guys. Well done.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/14/secret-mission-the-horse-soldiers-of-911/
While we bicker about nearly everything, let's take a moment to consider this report about our Horse Soldiers in Afghanistan. These incredibly brave, daring, resourceful men rode into battle. The first Americans to do so in a century. With men like these, our forces can never be defeated by an enemy. Only by our politicians. Thanks, guys. Well done.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/14/secret-mission-the-horse-soldiers-of-911/
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
"Will I be detained if I walk this way?"
"No"
"Thank you"
Guess what happens next.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7w44titOkKE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"Will I be detained if I walk this way?"
"No"
"Thank you"
Guess what happens next.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/7w44titOkKE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Re: Obama XXII: Occupy the White House
Wow. Great! All that's missing are the truncheons. Pathetic unoriginal parasite losers. It's funny listening to his "admiring crowd of sisters, cousins and aunts" (credit W. S. Gilbert) lose their place in the libretto after the punk is cuffed.
Wow. Great! All that's missing are the truncheons. Pathetic unoriginal parasite losers. It's funny listening to his "admiring crowd of sisters, cousins and aunts" (credit W. S. Gilbert) lose their place in the libretto after the punk is cuffed.
Last edited:
- Status